Flipside Movie Emporium

[beltmann]

What?s most surprising about World Trade Center is how Oliver Stone has relied on a tried-and-true Hollywood template to make a fairly square, apolitical movie. The story of what these two men experienced is surely inspiring, but for me Stone?s conventional approach finally limits the movie?s capacity to say something profound or important about what happened that day. Since 9/11 is merely the backdrop, we get the sense that this survival story has been set at Ground Zero for arbitrary reasons--even though it?s based on real-life facts, there?s not much space between World Trade Center and, say, Earthquake or The Towering Inferno. There?s certainly nothing wrong with celebrating bravery and patriotism, but when compared to the tougher, more exploratory United 93, Stone?s movie feels a bit cartoonish. Such controversial films can sensitively and intelligently deal with international trauma in ways that transcend re-enactment, and extend our understanding of the intricate human elements buried beneath the mere ?facts? of history. For me, the limitation of World Trade Center is that it doesn't quite live up to that promise: While it enlarged my emotional comprehension of what it might be like to be trapped and dying under rubble, it didn't say much about what it meant to be trapped and dying on September 11, 2001.

To the men trapped, that distinction obviously makes no difference. But to a viewer like myself, who had hoped that Stone would use this event to pinpoint the political or metaphorical meanings behind the experience, it makes a world of difference. An acquaintance argued, "Seems to me that's a theme that folks who weren't trapped beneath rubble on 9/11 would struggle with." Well, that's it precisely--I'm one of those folks, and so are most of those paying to see this movie.

By refusing to place this event in a larger political or metaphorical context, Stone gives us only a fairly routine rescue movie, one that might have been set anywhere, anytime. (There's not even much suspense, and the viewer never really shares their sense of exertion or claustrophobia.) The film doesn't feel much different from one of those flagwaving war movies from the Forties. While that's perfectly fine, when compared to movies that aim to do more, it ends up feeling a little less worthwhile, at least to my taste. I'm not questioning the validity of Stone's choices, only suggesting how this movie could have been more interesting to me.

Still, if the very existence of World Trade Center provokes conversations about the ethics of memorializing tragic events, then I would argue it has already performed a valuable service. And while the movie was a little too conventional for my tastes, I'm also open to the possibility that such traditional, uplifting storytelling might yield exactly the 9/11 movie that a lot of other people need right now.
_________________
"When I was in Barcelona they showed pornography on regular television. I'm assuming it's the same way in Mexico since they also speak Spanish." - IMDb user comment

[Danny Baldwin]

[beltmann]