« Ray Winstone in Death of a Ladies Man | Filmstalker | Grind House signs Fergie from the Peas »


Omen Press conference

Omen666.jpgThere's been a press screening of The Omen, but unfortunately it appears that those who have seen it have been sworn to secrecy on whether it's good or bad, but not on what happened during the event. Apparently one member of the press decided to latch onto the use of images of the Twin Towers rather than the film itself and was quite angry at the Director.

Over at The Reeler there is an extensive right up of what happened.

[Critic] "Are you from New York, John?"
[Moore] "No," Moore said. "I'm Irish."
[Critic] "Why do you think it was OK to use an image of 9/11 to manipulate the audience's emotions for your horror movie?" He was referring to two brief replays of planes crashing into the World Trade Center early in the film.
[Moore] "Well, I didn't manipulate. The response that an individual has isn't necessarily up to me. But I believe--" The man responded unintelligibly before Moore continued. "Can I answer the question, or do you want to come up here and take the microphone?" he said. "Because I can see your anger, sir. I can see it from here. But let me answer the question you asked me. What happened on 9/11 was a world event. I understand that it's particularly sensitive to New Yorkers, and what happened on 9/11 deeply affected me also. I happened to be in America when it happened. And it left a lasting impression on my mind, and the impression that I had was that we were in a very dark time, and it seemed to me to be the beginning of a very dark series of events. And that's why I put it in the movie."

I think Moore spoke well and managed to retain his composure while the critic seems to be angry over these few scenes, so much so he condems the movie and is incredibly inarticulate in trying to back up his response.

[Critic] "It's a good thing the movie is such a piece of shit that nobody is going to see it," the man shouted.
[Presenter] "All right, sir," Rose said, waving his arm as the man walked out of the theater. "Professor, I think you can address the thing: Why--"
[Moore] "You know what?" Moore interrupted. "You want to come back and actually finish your thought? Or do you want to just be like most thugs? Make your statement and leave before anyone has a chance to talk about it?"
[Critic] By that point, the man returned. "All right, John. What else do you want me to say?"
[Moore] "Well, could you expand on why you think the movie is a piece of shit?"
[Critic] "I'm watching it, and I'm seeing you use something that hurt a lot of people to manipulate our emotions. That's what I think you were doing."
[Moore] "All art will manipulate your emotions."
[Critic] "What's that?"
[Moore] "The point of art is to manipulate and stimulate emotion."
[Critic] "I don't think the movie's art. I just don't think so."
[Moore] The man continued, but Moore replied over him. "You have an opinion, but I'd like to posit the idea that what happened on 9/11 was a global event, and believe me, as an Irishman, it's in the movie to signal to you that I felt it was a dark and evil a moment as you might have felt on that day."

Well I think Moore came out rather well from that, and the assault on him and the movie continued from other critics suggesting that he was riding the wave of religious movies at the moment with Da Vinci Code, etc. He also puts that to bed quite nicely.

Overall it seems like they were giving him a seriously hard time, and nobody seems to have really questioned the movie - perhaps that was removed to save the Reeler from mentioning anything about the movie. It does seem to me nowadays that critics are becoming extremely cynical and destructive, and are forgetting what the cinema is about and what once drew them to the big screen.

I'll reserve judgement and hope that there's a screening in Edinburgh for me to pass on a review.



I can understand how some people could find it in bad taste to use such imagery but doesn't it understate our strength and will to go on to just complain every time something like this is shown on screen?

I refuse to say that from here on in every reference to 9/11 is exploitative and disrespectful taboo. It's just not that simple. How many movies were made about the Nazi dictatorship before people got used to it? Why is it still okay today? Indiana Jones for example makes light of such a social threat.

These people may well be defending the best interests of those affected by this atrocity but there has to be some point where we can openly talk about, visually represent and recount these events in a way which allows us to ultimately further the world society.

If everyone who sees these images is reminded of how it affect people in general, maybe the next generation will be a little more tolerant than the previous and be educated with respect for human life.

Worst case scenario; It's exploitative. Don't go see it.

I believe that artists should be allowed to comment on such affairs, albeit with respect to the affected families.

This type of reaction helps no-one to come to terms with 9/11. Families are made think that this is a topic which should be held under guard and mourned for a longer peiod of time than may be in their own best personal interest. Society should be allowed to heal and move on.

There can be no change for the future without acknowledgement of the past.



Site Navigation

Latest Stories



Vidahost image

Latest Reviews


Filmstalker Poll


Subscribe with...

Windows Live Alerts

Site Feeds

Subscribe to Filmstalker:

All articles

Reviews only

Audiocasts only

Subscribe to the Filmstalker Audiocast on iTunesAudiocasts on iTunes



Help Out


Site Information

Creative Commons License
© filmstalker.co.uk

Give credit to your sources. Quote and credit, don't steal

Movable Type 3.34