He'd have multiple exterior view points of the towers collapsing... in slo-mo. He also cuts repeatedly to the interior scenes, showing the heroes somehow leaping from collapsing floor to collapsing floor, in a vain attempt to escape.
He'd have multiple exterior view points of the towers collapsing... in slo-mo. He also cuts repeatedly to the interior scenes, showing the heroes somehow leaping from collapsing floor to collapsing floor, in a vain attempt to escape.
He may have a side plot of navy seals rescuing the President from ground assault. Or one of the F-16 pilots doing something that never happened, like waiting for the order to shoot an airliner down. And the buildings would blow up like Parliament in V for Vendetta. And that third building would get a dramatic explosion filled collapse.
and all the heroes are men. The women cry and shout and have tight pants.
Again, this will be accurate, if Bay will do one thing, it's that he'll make the sequence of events and imagery as accurate as possible, .
How horrifically Bad and Insulting would it be?![]()
Or would it somehow by some miracle actually be good?![]()
one thing about pearl harbor , the plot was completly and utterly insane but the japanese attack was uber cool especially the fleet sinking part if u take the emotions out of it(seriously watch the attack scenes only and suddenly you think its a decent war/action movie) .
.
Don't forget the fighter pilot near DC, who has to scramble with the rest of his squadron. This plot line never really goes anywhere or contributes anything, but provides an excuse for lots of shots of fighter planes taking off and doing fancy maneuvers. Said pilot may end up bombing Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
Not sure if this is sarcasm or notAccuracy in a Michael Bay movie is oxymoronic.
The point of my post I was trying to laboriously get to was that Bay isn't a bad film maker; he's rather one who falls back onto cliches and imitation, be it of movies he thinks have 'cool shots', or simply hyper-powered reshuffled of the things he thought he did right. When it came to Pearl Harbor, most inaccuracies can be chalked to the 'rule of cool'. He puts things there because it's visually interesting, and because, in the movie,the his focus was on recreating an experience as opposed to authenticity. It's also worth noting that Pearl Harbor was before 9/11.
Now in Bay's hypothetical 9/11 Movie, unlike Pearl Harbor he has an incentive to be as accurate as he can be whilst still playing in the Rule of Cool. He wants to be as accurate as possible because this movie is his tribute of sorts, and, whilst he may play with some events to fit the desired flow of his movie, it would likely be accurate outside the fictional characters (assuming he goes fictional).
It won't be disaster Porn, and it won't be explosions every eight seconds, and it certainly won't be as inaccurate as Pearl Harbor. For all his faults, Bay isn't that un-self-aware, and I think he could make a decent film. Not a great one, but one that isn't forks awful.
The point of my post I was trying to laboriously get to was that Bay isn't a bad film maker; he's rather one who falls back onto cliches and imitation, be it of movies he thinks have 'cool shots', or simply hyper-powered reshuffled of the things he thought he did right. When it came to Pearl Harbor, most inaccuracies can be chalked to the 'rule of cool'. He puts things there because it's visually interesting, and because, in the movie,the his focus was on recreating an experience as opposed to authenticity. It's also worth noting that Pearl Harbor was before 9/11.
Now in Bay's hypothetical 9/11 Movie, unlike Pearl Harbor he has an incentive to be as accurate as he can be whilst still playing in the Rule of Cool. He wants to be as accurate as possible because this movie is his tribute of sorts, and, whilst he may play with some events to fit the desired flow of his movie, it would likely be accurate outside the fictional characters (assuming he goes fictional).
It won't be disaster Porn, and it won't be explosions every eight seconds, and it certainly won't be as inaccurate as Pearl Harbor. For all his faults, Bay isn't that un-self-aware, and I think he could make a decent film. Not a great one, but one that isn't forks awful.