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)

christine 12-30-17 03:09 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
I think it would always have limited appeal given the type of film it is. i.e. a docudrama played out in real time. I think it's one of those films that if you'd wanted to see it you'd have done so.
Not sure even if the word 'hit' applies to this kind of film if you know what I mean.

Camo 12-30-17 03:23 PM

The coverage and videos of 9/11 will always be available so i don't think it'll ever gain the same sort of curiousity for a fictional version as previous events like The Titanic or whatever, even when people are far removed from it. Major historical events that connect with the general public most are ones they aren't that aware of i believe. Why pay to go see a fictional film when you can easily access more videos and information than you'd ever be able to sift through?

ironpony 12-30-17 04:06 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Well I thought the movie did a really good job, of imagining the event on the actual flight, plus I inside the military building (can't remember what it's called), that was making decisions on whether or not to shoot the remaining planes down, after the WTC was hit. Things like that gave me new perspective, and those things were not filmed at all in real life, so I thought the re-imagining of them, was very effective.

I mean I guess that's like saying why see Schindler's List, when you can just watch some archive footage. And even if you watch Shoah (1985), having a dramatized re-imagining can still shed new perspective on the events.

Camo 12-30-17 04:13 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Shoah is 100% interviews with survivors not archival footage. And the holocaust had nowhere near the visual coverage 9/11 did because of obvious technological limitations, not to mention it being in the middle of a war and being covered up by one of the most powerful nations on the planet at the time.

It's not like saying that at all. Guess again.

Dani8 12-30-17 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845957)

I mean I guess that's like saying why see Schindler's List, when you can just watch some archive footage. And even if you watch Shoah (1985), having a dramatized re-imagining can still shed new perspective on the events.
You seem to think people dont. Ofcourse some people watch real footage. If they didnt, documentaries wouldnt contain them.

Camo 12-30-17 04:14 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Also Shoah wasn't a "hit" unless you mean critically in which case United 93 was too.

ironpony 12-30-17 04:15 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Yeah, okay that's a good point. But I felt like seeing re-imaginings of things was effective cause there was a lot of 9/11 not seen, such as the inside of the plane, the inside of the military buildings, making decisions, and the inside of the flight control building and how they dealt with it. There is no real footage of that, unless I didn't see it.

Camo 12-30-17 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845965)
Yeah, okay that's a good point. But I felt like seeing re-imaginings of things was effective cause there was a lot of 9/11 not seen, such as the inside of the plane, the inside of the military buildings, making decisions, and the inside of the flight control building and how they dealt with it. There is no real footage of that, unless I didn't see it.
That's all still unseen, Greengrass put a tonne of work into making it as authentic as possible like Christine said but it was still dramatized. Reading the reports is as close as you're going to get to understanding what it was like.

ironpony 12-30-17 04:21 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
That's what I mean is that we never saw it, and felt like it added new perspective for me. But I guess I just like the dramatization, and am more of a dramatist when it comes to historical drama movies I guess.

Camo 12-30-17 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845968)
That's what I mean is that we never saw it, and felt like it added new perspective for me. But I guess I just like the dramatization, and am more of a dramatist when it comes to historical drama movies I guess.
Yeah, i understand why you liked it. I thought this thread question was why the general public didn't take to it? That's what i was attempting to answer.

ironpony 12-30-17 04:29 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Yeah I felt they would like it too, since they like a lot of dramatizations of historical disasters. However, I can see now why they didn't take to this one. I just thought it would be more well received now that some more time has went by and all.

Dani8 12-30-17 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845974)
Yeah I felt they would like it too, since they like a lot of dramatizations of historical disasters. However, I can see now why they didn't take to this one. I just thought it would be more well received now that some more time has went by and all.
It was released on dvd, special box set and BR, then a second BR. How do you know people arent watching it? You seem to think that because a few friends of yours havent heard of it no one else has. Comes up a bit in your threads, IP.

ironpony 12-30-17 04:40 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Yeah I'm just going by people I know I guess, but I asked like 30 people since I saw it back in 2012 around and none of them even heard of it.

Camo 12-30-17 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845974)
I just thought it would be more well received now that some more time has went by and all.
Its reputation has definitely improved over the years. From what i remember initially it was "oh here we go a film to cash in on a disaster", now it's genuinely acclaimed in some places. Can't remember who it was from but there was some "best of the 21st century" video list posted from a critic here that had United 93 on it. So it's definitely well received but it's not the sort of film you'd ever expect to connect with the public enough to make it a notable box office success.

The biggest Box Office Hit about a real disaster is obviously Titanic and the main selling point for that was the (obviously fictional) love story and especially Leo. Maybe if they included some bs love story on the plane it would have worked but then everyone there died so they wouldn't have had old Rose left to manipulate the audience with.

ironpony 12-30-17 05:08 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Perhaps in 50 years from now, they will make a 9/11 with a fictionalized love story, but I think if they did that now, audiences would be dis-interested even more, unless I am wrong, and these forbidden romance stories, help make the hostorical drama movies, more popular.

Camo 12-30-17 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by ironpony (Post 1845994)
Perhaps in 50 years from now, they will make a 9/11 with a fictionalized love story, but I think if they did that now, audiences would be dis-interested even more, unless I am wrong, and these forbidden romance stories, help make the hostorical drama movies, more popular.
I was being facetious. I personally think the level of exposure to the event and availability to real information on it will hold some people back.

When i was younger i had a weird interest in completely fictional (although technically based on real people) mafia films. They were always terrible and often didn't make sense but at the time i didn't know anywhere else to find out more about that subject i was interested in. As soon as i did i haven't watched the dozens of similar films that have came out since. That's about a subject that is supposed to be secret and hidden from the public; 9/11 is a very public thing, it's understandable why it doesn't get the average person curious when they could easily access real life stuff about it.

Swan 12-30-17 05:28 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
I'm gonna make an awful mafia film that makes no sense when I grow up. Just for you, Camo.

ironpony 12-30-17 05:35 PM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Yeah that makes sense. I remember a few years ago, I thought it would be a great idea if Hollywood were to make a movie of the O.J. Simspson murder case, and people said to me, why bother when the whole trial can be found online. So I guess there's that, where there is already so much public information out there.

christine 12-31-17 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by Camo (Post 1845964)
Also Shoah wasn't a "hit" unless you mean critically in which case United 93 was too.
This is true

ironpony 12-08-19 04:16 AM

Re: How come United 93 (2006) wasn't a bigger hit?
 
Well after watching it again, I feel that the whole shaky cam, documentary style of the movie, perhaps gives it an exploitative feel to the material, cause it's a true tragedy, yet they are trying to be so stylistic with it. Do you think that's true, compared to fiction, where this shaky cam documentary style, may work better?


All times are GMT -3. The time now is 09:29 PM.

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