9/11 And Films

Friday, September 11, 2009


As Brooke reported eight years ago, witnesses of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and those watching on TV used a common vocabulary to describe the scene: it was like a movie. Not only did that day change the way people process images of mass violence, it also affected Hollywood itself. In his new book, Firestorm: American Film in the Age of Terrorism, Virginia Tech professor Stephen Prince explores how filmmakers have taken on the challenge of capturing the truth of the 9/11 attacks.

Comments [8]

Melissa G.

I really enjoyed the topic in the pod., becasue it discusses the touchy subject of 9/11. I think that the entertainment industry rolls in the cash when the feature a film with the world in diseaster. They seem to get more thumbs up if it involves the tradegies that the world over comes. No matter what the incident their will always be a important back story to cover. This keeps the box offices up and running no mater the outcome
P.S. I loved the movie "The Siege"

Apr. 21 2011 07:23 PM
Bacchus Grant from Raleigh, NC

This story is right in
some ways and wrong in others. A lot of terrorist attacks have been described as being like a World War movie, but the word conspiracy doesn't begin to explain these horrific events. These were not just conspiracies because they were planned, foolish acts.

Nov. 09 2010 07:01 PM

Reign on Me?? Adam Sandler & Don Cheadle. Best film reference to 9/11.

Dec. 09 2009 06:05 PM
Francisco from Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Thank you for the film tip. I'm now looking up "The Siege (1998).

Sep. 15 2009 03:45 AM
Francisco from Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Throughout your segment on films I couldn't help think of a film and a TV series. The film was Love Actually and the series was Star Trek: Enterprise (where for a whole season they dealt with the aftermath of a major attack on Earth).

Sep. 15 2009 03:36 AM
Tim Ryan from San Jose, CA

I love your show but was mystiifed today. OTM is based on the lies politicians, corporations, the military. et al, tell us through their cypher, the media. On 9/11 theories, bogus or not you don't get to dismiss them because the government says there is no basis. Right? Architects and Engineers for Truth about 9/11, are questioning the NIST report, and are signing on to a request for further inquiry. Did you know this?

Then you proceed to interview a pentagon spokesman about how have they have allowed coverage of the wars for eight years. No counter to this from your interviewer. You and I know "embedding" was their way of controlling what was said about Iraq. As reporter, Nancy Youssef, recently said on Bill Moyers, as horrible as the image was of a young soldier dying in battle, how else do you tell America that young Americans are dying.

Finally, why has no one asked the Afghani people, Taliban or not, what they want for a future?

Sep. 13 2009 11:52 PM
Roy from Queens, NY

I wonder what Mr. Prince thought about the films, the smart-aleck gonzo satire "War, Inc" and the poignant drama "Grace is Gone", both starred and were produced by John Cusack, which take a look at America's military response to the attacks. Both films are well made.

Also is the recent comic book adaptation, "Watchmen", which, though an alternative take on the Cold War in the 1980s, involving costumed crimefighters, there are haunting parallels. The Towers are present in the film.

Sep. 13 2009 05:03 PM
David Lewit from Boston MA

Your show is a step in the right direction: finding the truth about the 9/11 attacks. However, I found it a bit slanted toward the safe (official) conclusion. You repeated the term "conspiracy" several times, implying foolishness, rather than using more objective references to the planning of the attacks. You made a point of "9/11 Truthers" (another negative connotation, as if skeptics were conspirators) taking out of context an eyewitness impression of an exploding tower. Though the witness quoted subsequently disavowed any belief in controlled demolition, her immediate impression cannot be dismissed when combined with similar impressions from others and studied testimony of demolition experts. (And have you producers pondered the videos comparing 9/11 views with those of earlier controlled demolitions? Have you read recent studies of tell-tale nano-thermite in 9/11 dust?)

I have read D R Griffin's "Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11" as well as many other analyses of 9/11 events, and feel that you may have selected this title because it suggests a link with fundamentalist Christian profession. I know David Griffin and two of his colleagues at Claremont Graduate School of Theology, and there could be no one farther from the thinking of science-scorning fundamentalists. Griffin has written extensively and recently more conclusively on 9/11, but you chose this older title to feature---Why?

NYCCAN has gathered 80,000 signatures to put on the November NYC ballot a request to undertake an impartial investigation of 9/11. I hope that you do not use our public radio medium to belittle or help quash this citizen effort.

David W. Lewit, PhD
Boston MA

Sep. 13 2009 03:54 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.