 |
|
|
|
| | | |
| MatchFlick Member Reviews |
view all movie information
Directed By
Oliver Stone
Written By:
Andrea Berloff
Cast:
Nicolas Cage, Michael Peña, Maria Bello, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Jay Hernandez, Stephen Dorff, Nick Damici, Jude Ciccolella, Martin Pfefferkorn, Alexa Gerasimovich, Armando Riesco, Jon Bernthal, Connor Paolo, Connor Paolo, Anthony Piccininni, Morgan Flynn, William Jimeno, Nelson Peña
|
|
|
| |
World Trade Center (2006)
 email this review to a friend
Movie Review by Matthew 
August 15th, 2006
|  |
Stone Recreates The Horror
Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center" is a well-made but difficult to watch theatrical experience. Much like Paul Greengrass' "United 93", both films are very similar in many regards with Stone taking a different approach in one major aspect of the filmmaking process.
Stone goes the Big Budget Studio Route, recreating huge portions of the World Trade Center and parts of the destruction, shooting on the streets of New York, with a large cast of well-known actors. He attempts to recreate the real life dramatic story about the survival of two men, in the middle of a much larger event. It works, but a lot of the film's success could be derived from our knowledge of the event and the extent of our feelings still associated with the horror of that day.
Stone concentrates the story, focusing our attention on a small group of Port Authority Policemen, led by Sergeant John McLoughlin (Nicholas Cage) and including the team's rookie, Will Jimeno (Michael Pena, "Crash"). As these men, and their co-workers, start their day, they have no idea what horrors the day will bring. But as soon as the World Trade Center is hit, they move into action. McLoughlin was instrumental in coming up with a plan after the '93 attack on the World Trade Center, so he is naturally the choice to lead an evacuation team. He asks for volunteers and these men, including Jimeno, set out to Tower 1. As they make their way, they learn of some problems at Tower 2, but go about their mission because all information is sketchy at this point. After they have gathered equipment, they head to Tower 1 and suddenly watch as the courtyard, where people are being treated, is covered with flaming debris. Then the two towers collapse, burying McLoughlin's team under twenty feet of rubble. Later, McLoughlin wakes up and finds that Jimeno is still alive. They both realized they are buried under rubble but hold hope they will be found.
Stone and his team of technicians have done an amazing job of recreating the World Trade Center and the collapse, focusing on McLoughlin and his team, we experience this horrific event through their eyes. This is a believable, and not necessarily good thing. It makes the film very painful to watch. The majority of the film focuses on Cage and Pena buried under twenty feet of rubble, trying to keep each other alive, hoping for rescue. These scenes are interesting and powerful, but Stone cuts away from them to scenes involving their two wives, living through the horror. We see McLoughlin's wife, Donna (Maria Bello), dealing with the inaccurate information, the horror of the situation, the lack of knowledge as she has to try to calm their four kids. There are also scenes of Jimeno's pregnant wife (Maggie Gyllenhaal) dealing with the same things. What these cutaways do is remind us we are watching a film, a recreation of a horrible event. Every time we are reminded of this, we have to wonder why this film was made.
Is it necessary to see a dramatic recreation of such a horrible event? If the film were made to offer some education or to posit an argument, I might say yes, but as a piece of entertainment, it seems a little early. In Woody Allen's "Crimes and Misdemeanors", Alan Alda's character, an obnoxious television producer, explains his theory about what makes something funny. The gist of his theory is that you can't make a joke about something that just happened, there is still too much pain involved. If you wait a while, you have more latitude. The character's a jerk, but what he says has a grain of truth. Stone abandons his usual conspiracy theories in favor of a very straight forward narrative, a recreation of the story of two men. Yes, the story is amazing, but is it necessary to see a film about it at this point in time?
In "United 93", the film spent time showing us how the events may have transpired, providing a documentary-like look at the event. "WTC" is smaller in scope, but larger in scale, showing us the plight of two men when almost 3,000 died.
As we return to Cage and Pena, we are constantly reminded that Nicholas Cage is playing this character, Maria Bello that character, Maggie Gyllenhaal that one. These are very recognizable actors and their presence, even when they are good, serves to remind us that we are watching a film. The performances are all good, and the film is very moving. But because we recognize these actors, especially Nicholas Cage, we are constantly reminded we are watching a 'film'.
I think it is too early for "WTC". Releasing the film just shy of the fifth anniversary of 9/11 seems like a marketing ploy. If the film were made in another five or ten years, I think it would be easier to accept the recreated nature of the film and it would serve as a good reminder of a horrific event.
It won't fit. Please read the full review at thornhillatthemovies.com
email this review to a friend
Comment on this Review:
Sorry, you must be a member to add comments to reviews.
Join or Login. |
 Subscribe to MatchFlick Movie Reviews through RSS
|
