Movie Forums (http://www.movieforums.com/community/index.php)
-   General Movie Discussion (http://www.movieforums.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit? (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=52495)

ironpony 12-30-17 12:17 AM

How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
I thought it was a really good movie, and I read it was the most critically acclaimed movie of 2006. But no one I know has heard of this movie, when I talk about it. I was wondering, was it not well liked or well received when it came out?

Siddon 12-30-17 12:21 AM

People didn't(and still don't) want to watch a 9/11 movie and it came out in April a week before MI-III.

ironpony 12-30-17 12:35 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
But why don't people want to watch a 9/11 movie, when they watch movies of other real life tragedies? I even recommended the movie to a friend and he said, what would be the point of making a 9/11 movie? But you can say that about any movie made about a real tragedies. You can say what's the point of making a movie like Titanic or Schindler's List or JFK. Those movies were hits, and are still a lot better known today, so why not United 93?

The Rodent 12-30-17 12:40 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
It was too soon tbh.


The pain of 9/11 is still fresh in the minds and hearts of the populous, so for a movie to be based on it and be a huge hit, they'll need to wait until like, the year 2050.

ironpony 12-30-17 12:41 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Perhaps back then, but even today, people haven't even heard of the movie, and still don't seem interested to seek it out, it seems.

The Rodent 12-30-17 12:50 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
That's what I mean though.


The thing with the movie being released so soon after the attack, has basically tainted the film.
There was a movie based on the firefighters and stuff too, which has also vanished into obscurity.


The problem with movies like these, is the particular subject is still going on today with all those I.S retards who are bombing shopping centres and stuff and killing children at music concerts.


With the subject of terrorism being so prominent in current society, the majority of people simply won't buy cinema tickets or DVDs for films based on it.


On a smaller subject, there's a movie being made about the Grenfell Tower Fire in London.
Because of negligence from the UK Government, the fire killed 71 people, including a stillbirth baby.


It only happened 6 months ago, and they're already making a movie about it... and pretty much all of the publicity about the movie has been a resounding "Why?".
It'll sell a couple tickets here and there no doubt, but will definitely bomb at the box office.

Siddon 12-30-17 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845749)
But why don't people want to watch a 9/11 movie, when they watch movies of other real life tragedies? I even recommended the movie to a friend and he said, what would be the point of making a 9/11 movie? But you can say that about any movie made about a real tragedies. You can say what's the point of making a movie like Titanic or Schindler's List or JFK. Those movies were hits, and are still a lot better known today, so why not United 93?
They didn't really do the graphic type Holocaust movies until the 1970's.

I'll say this, I was around that area and I saw the effect on people. I didn't know anyone who died but I knew a lot of people who lost people. It's very difficult to for me to watch a 9/11 movie especially a non-Hollywood style one like United 93.

mark f 12-30-17 01:12 AM

Many people have conspiracy theories about 9/11 so that's another thing, as well as the fact that the script had to fill in people's lives and make the terrorists seem human. I've never had a problem with fictionalized docudramas - I watched it the day it came out and I own the DVD. The level of realism and tension in the movie is great though, which would make it more difficult for numerous viewers.

ironpony 12-30-17 01:31 AM

Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 1845756)
They didn't really do the graphic type Holocaust movies until the 1970's.

I'll say this, I was around that area and I saw the effect on people. I didn't know anyone who died but I knew a lot of people who lost people. It's very difficult to for me to watch a 9/11 movie especially a non-Hollywood style one like United 93.
But I think the fact that it's non-Hollywood looking and feeling really adds to the movie. The firefighter one, World Trade Center, was much more Hollywood feeling, and I think that kind of hurt the movie in a way. I feel that United 93 has aged a lot better.

How did the movie make the terrorist seem human though? I mean the terrorists were stressed out of their minds, and sweating and all, but I think that's what terrorists would be like in real life. Does that bother viewers?

Dani8 12-30-17 01:35 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
I saw it. I dont recall seeing some huge display of audiences not liking it or it not being well received. It's not exactly a fun watch for obvious reasons, though. As said above, maybe it was just too soon for people to grab popcorn for such a terrible event.

Yoda 12-30-17 10:44 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Probably because it's a bummer. I've heard it's really good, and I've still avoided seeing it. I took a few years to see Schindler's List, too. Sometimes movies come out that you know are good, and well-made, but which you can be pretty much certain are going to leave you in a crappy mood, and it's kinda inconvenient to have to block your day out that way for an activity that's usually done for fun.

Camo 12-30-17 11:05 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
It being a bummer was most likely part of it. I think Rodent's "it was too soon" was probably the biggest thing though especially with the era it happened in. 2001 was a lot different from now but it was also very easy then to get the news and images of the events constantly especially for something that size. It's the biggest even that happened in my lifetime and i'm still not feeling like watching a movie of it. I will say though it would have been more likely United 93 was a hit IMO because that was the plane that went down in a field in Pennsylvania unlike the ones we watched going into the towers there's more of a sense of the unknown there.

films246+1 12-30-17 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by mark f (Post 1845760)
Many people have conspiracy theories about 9/11 so that's another thing
I agree with your statement.

Jon

Gideon58 12-30-17 11:43 AM

It was a really good movie, but it couldn't have been a comfortable viewing experience for people who lost loved ones on 9/11, especially people who lost loved ones on that particular flight. The movie was really well done but it just wasn't audience friendly subject matter. To a lot of people, 9/11 still feels like yesterday even though it was almost two decades ago.

HashtagBrownies 12-30-17 11:57 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Why wasn't (Insert movie her) a bigger hit? You could say that about every single movie.

Btw the film made back 3 times its budget so it was a hit.

cat_sidhe 12-30-17 12:29 PM

Depends where you are. It got some attention here...

Citizen Rules 12-30-17 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by Siddon (Post 1845747)
People didn't(and still don't) want to watch a 9/11 movie and it came out in April a week before MI-III.
Yup...that's how I feel, I just don't want to revisit that subject matter.

Mr Minio 12-30-17 01:38 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Probably the only 9/11 masterpiece is Basinski's Disintegration Loop.

Disintegration Loop 1.1 consists of one static shot of lower Manhattan billowing smoke during the last hour of daylight on September 11th, 2001, set to the decaying pastoral tape loop Basinski had recorded in August, 2001. Shot from Basinski's roof in Williamsburg Brooklyn, this is an actual documentary of how he and his neighbors witnessed the end of that fateful day. It is a tragically beautiful cinema verite elegy dedicated to those who perished in the atrocities of September 11th, 2001.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYOr8TlnqsY

christine 12-30-17 02:22 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Because some people don't want to see very sad events to close to home played out as entertainment. Events were too raw in people's memories and this film wasn't gung ho, it was considered, researched and pieced together as realistically as Paul Greengrass could've made it, so the end result was extremely uncomfortable watching.

ironpony 12-30-17 02:34 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Okay thanks, that makes sense, that people were uncomfortable watching it, cause it was close to home. But why not now? Or has not enough time went by? Do you think the movie would be a bigger hit, if it was made in the 2030s maybe or something then?

As for the conspiracy theories, if the movie was told from a more conspiracy theory point of view, would audiences be more interested in it then?


All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:50 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright, ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Movie Forums