Monday, April 24, 2006
Newsweak Misses The Point - Again
Every film needs a critic - someone who just so outraged by the very subject matter of the motion picture they can't get past their own personal bias long enough to talk about the film. They have to talk about the politics surrounding the film - both real and what they wish was real.
For the upcoming United 93 this critic is David Ansen of Newsweak Magazine. He praises the director and cinematography of the movie as a motion picture, but is quick to cite the "outrage" surrounding the subject matter.
Evidently the offensive subject matter is the act of 56 people deciding they were not going to go quietly into the September morning. Aware of what had happened to three other hijacked planes that morning, they decided to fight back. That is what outrages Mr. Ansen.
Unable to resist taking political potshots at W and Big Time for their actions that morning, Mr. Ansen takes a thinly veiled jab with this verbiage:
Though you know the outcome, you can't help hoping (as you would at any thriller) that things will turn out differently, that the military will intervene, that the president will be found, that someone will define the rules of engagement. (Emphasis added)There were no procedures in place for the events of this day. A Presidential Order to fire on American Citizens had not been given since the Civil War. If Mr. Ansen were to have done his research and actually read the accounts of that morning, he would know that the President was never "lost" and that the order to fire had been given.
Under the headline "Is This Film Necessary" he calls into question the very reason for the film - one which was made only after every single family member had given their individual blessing to do so. I have no doubt the subject matter will be disturbing - as it should be. We should never forget those who perpetrated the attacks of that Tuesday morning in September, nor should we forget those who gave the last full measure of devotion in defense of this nation on that same day.
Mr. Ansen may be disturbed. He may be outraged. He has the right to both of those emotions. I simply call into question his ability to divorce his political and intellectual slant from a commentary on a film which all Americans need to see.
Here endeth the lesson.
UPDATE: Memo to Representative Charles H. Taylor, (R-NC):
Sir, you are on the wrong side of this issue. Find some other tract of land on which to fight your battle against Federal land ownership. Build the United 93 Memorial in Shanksville. Your fifteen minutes are up.