Disaster films and the destruction of New York

[Patcat]

THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW was on Fox cable yesterday (this is the film where the melting of the Artic ice caps causes a violent and sudden return of the Ice Age). I was at a friend's house, and had to leave. I couldn't watch it (and not just because Fox used the film to promote itself). And I've found that in recent years I can't watch disaster films, especially ones where New York City is destroyed. I can't stand to see the Chrysler Building blown up, or the Statue of Liberty crumbled. ARMAGEDDON, INDEPENDENCE DAY, all of them. Can't watch them. Perhaps it's because I've visited New York City and feel a great affection for the place and the people. Perhaps it's 9/11. I don't know. Does anyone else have this problem?

Patcat

[Sirenna]

9/11 and the destruction of WTC towers? Well I'm not going to go there (as a poster I mean.) Everyone has their own feelings on that and it probably would affect how that person views movies triggering memories about it and it's probably why shooting scenes like that even today are somewhat controversial.

But for me nope, no feelings like that here and I love NYC. The movies you've mentioned all end with a sense of hope that things will be rebuilt.

[deathroe]

I don't blame you, Patcat. I can't watch those movies post-911 either. The trend for them in those days seems somewhat naive now. Kind of like watching *Dave* and its view of politics in the present-day word.

[DonnaJo]

Just the other day, I found a group of snapshots taken by our family in 2000 when we took some family friends into Manhattan. Many of them are of the Twin Towers, beautiful shots. Staring at them I felt such a conflict of emotions - pride, sorrow, disbelief to name a few. Because they were real photos taken at a place in time that I vividly remember.

Yet I can watch movies of NY destruction, no problem, because I know it's all digital, its not real. Just as I can watch horror movies & chuckle. I have the ability to seperate the real from the unreal, not everyone can.

[noc]

I'm not a big disaster film fan. I just saw Paris, Je t'aime and it's more my speed. Saw Heights with Glenn Close on DVD recently, too. Both are my speed. Boring, no cool effects, just people talking with a little bit of a message/mystery....

I have tons of personal photos of the Towers. I used to visit my grandfather in Brooklyn once I was old enough to go on my own (long story) and we always visited the Towers. I loved to see the people from all over the world and it was what I did with my grandpa every time I went there in addition to the Carnegie Deli, a Broadway show, etc. Not everyone liked going to the top of the Towers, but I did. It wasn't for the view: it was for people watching purposes. It is still shocking to me, and I can't imagine what it is like for New Yorkers not to see the Towers. It still jolts me when a movie or old tv show has a quick flash of the skyline with the Towers, but I think it's an important jolt for me. I know we all have different views of 9/11 so I don't mean to offend anyone.

[spits]

Yet I can watch movies of NY destruction, no problem, because I know it's all digital, its not real. Just as I can watch horror movies & chuckle. I have the ability to seperate the real from the unreal, not everyone can.

Well said.

I'm kinda a disaster film junkie, but that's only because most often a lot of them are accompanied by science that is, for the most part, laughable (er, the ones I tend to watch, at least). Watching disaster movies used to really bother me right after 9/11 - I remember trying to watch Independence Day not too long afterwards and while that doesn't deal with NYC exclusively, I couldn't make it all the way through. Now, however, I'm not affected by these movies but documentaries dealing with the real event still make me feel uneasy.

[noc]

Regarding laughable, my scientist brother pointed out how funny it was -in one of the asteroid movies -that all of humanity was cheering as they watched fragments of an asteroid blown apart by a nuclear warhead fly into the atmosphere. He said it would not be a cause for happiness. He loves disaster movies. Twister is his favorite, campy one since we lived in Kansas for years. Tornadoes are not funny. Twister is. Sorry, I digress again.

I agree - the Tsunami documentaries, the 9/11 footage is more affecting than a fake disaster movie.

[diablodeblanco]

The problem I have with the disaster movies is that they tend to be predictable. I prefer something that keeps me guessing.

[noc]

Well, I don't think I'll be watching any disaster movies soon. A little too close to home with the state's busiest bridge collapsing yesterday. I didn't realize what was going on, until soon after I posted, my brother -who I was just talking about online-called to tell me what had happened. He couldn't get through earlier and I didn't have the tv on. Very sad. Lots of miracles with people dropping 50 to 60 ft and walking away, but lots of sad stories, too. People waiting for a loved one who might be under the bridge. They can't do the recovery until things settle. Nothing like the major disasters -of course-but a sad set of circumstances.

[diablodeblanco]

As horrible as this bridge disaster is, there are stories coming out about the bravery of ordinary people running TO the accident scene to help in any way possible. People who narrowly missed being in the middle of the destruction setting aside their fear so they could assist the injured. This is a case of the worst bringing out the best.

[Patcat]

Today's NEW YORK TIMES has an article on the young counselors, most of them teenagers or barely out of their teens, who saved the kids in the school bus. A twenty-year old, who was working at this community center because he couldn't affort the tuition for auto mechanic school, had the presence of mind to scramble to the back of the bus, kick out the emergency exit, and start getting the kids out. No one on the bus was killed, and the few who were hurt are already out of the hospital. I hope someone gives this kid the tuition money (g).

Patcat

[prodigaltwit]

I like diaster films, only when I'm in the mood for it. Problem for me about these type of movies is that usually the special effects trumps over all the acting by excellent actors. In the end I'm more impressed with the SFX than the actors. To me they are just movies to be watched and enjoyed.

[Techguy]

I'm not a fan specifically of disaster films but I'm not turned off by them specifically either. As far as 9/11 is concerned, I was much more disturbed by the documentaries about the collapse of the World Trade towers than any fictional treatment of the terrorist attack.

[DonnaJo]

Techguy,

I don't know if you've seen it, but my husband had on his laptop last year a docudrama he downloaded which exposes the theory that the Towers (as well as another building right next to them) were deliberately rigged with explosives on certain floors and these explosives were detonated shortly after the initial planes hit. The explanation they give is so terribly logical and, backed up with the footage, looks horribly true when you watch it. It's also implied that our government knew what was to happen, and either aided it or ignored it so the current Admin. could be heroes to the people.

When you mentioned watching disturbing documentaries, that one immediately came to mind. I haven't though about it in awhile, because it's too disturbing to imagine.

The film also "explains" how the plane flying into the DC building had to be with the knowledge or intent of the US.

[Techguy]

DonnaJo, I remember seeing something like you described. One documentary in particular also suggested why the Bush administration was so intent on getting high level Saudis (most of the hijackers were Saudi) out of the country when no one else could fly anywhere.

There are also one or two other documentaries which theorize how design flaws in the WTC towers led to their collapse; the impact of the planes wasn't enough to bring them down. Very disturbing stuff.