Author Topic: WTC.  (Read 5307 times)

Offline sparkle_motion

  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 432
  • Stacey.
WTC.
« on: August 03, 2006, 08:57:24 pm »
I haven't been around lately so I don't know if this has already been discussed...
But I saw a sneak peek of the World Trade Center movie last night and guess who plays Maggie Gyllenhaal's father? Go on, guess.
...then you ask me about Mexico and tell me you'll kill me for needing somethin' I don't hardly never get.

Offline David

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,097
Re: WTC.
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2006, 09:48:18 pm »
I honestly don't know.   I have only seen the TV previews and they only specify Nick Cage as the lead actor.     And just the 30 second TV spot gives me goosebumps.

Who plays Maggies Dad?    I'm going to guess the absurd.....Randy Quaid? 


OK,  now you've made me curious.  I'll have to go over to IMDb and look.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2006, 10:55:02 pm by DavidinHartford »

Offline David

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,097
Re: WTC.
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2006, 10:53:55 pm »
OMG NO!       That is twisted!

Offline Katie77

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,998
  • Love is a force of Nature
Re: WTC.
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2006, 11:37:37 pm »
I saw a short of it and I think I saw the bloke who played Old man Twist...


Is that right?
Being happy doesn't mean everything is perfect.

It means you've decided to see beyond the imperfection

Offline Aloysius J. Gleek

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,011
Re: WTC.
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2006, 01:07:19 am »
You're all so clever. Peter McRobbie, of course.

Here's more WTC IMDb trivia:

After seeing his performance in the film, Crash (2004/I), Maggie Gyllenhaal recommended Michael Pena for the role of Officer William Jimeno.


As part of his research, Michael Pena moved into Officer William Jimeno's home in New Jersey.


Due to her infamous quote that "America is responsible in some way" for the 9/11 attacks, Maggie Gyllenhaal personally offered to withdraw from the project to Officer William Jimeno and his wife Allison Jimeno. They both declined and gave their blessing for Gyllenhaal to take the role.
"Tu doives entendre je t'aime."
(and you know who I am...)


Cowboy Curtis (Laurence Fishburne)
and Pee-wee in the 1990 episode
"Camping Out"

mvansand76

  • Guest
Re: WTC.
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2006, 07:11:47 am »
Due to her infamous quote that "America is responsible in some way" for the 9/11 attacks, Maggie Gyllenhaal personally offered to withdraw from the project to Officer William Jimeno and his wife Allison Jimeno. They both declined and gave their blessing for Gyllenhaal to take the role.[/i]

I also read in an interview in EW that she kind of took that quote back and made it into something more subtle, but it feels like she was told to take it back. This is an interesting discussion, do you guys think she was wrong in saying that? Or do you feel she was right?

Offline David

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,097
Re: WTC.
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2006, 07:43:41 am »
Are we responsible?   Well, not directly, but if you read about how the Government missed so many clues or the different agencies didn't share info to what the terrorist were up to, then yes, we are a little responsible due to complacency. 

It all reminds me so much of the Titanic sinking.   Biggest ship in the world sailing into known trouble.  It was built to withstand the worst possible collision. So many people had clues to what could happen that night, but none were connected.    The horrible event shocks the world and brings people together.   After a big inquiry changes are made to future ships to prevent such a loss.  The Coast Guard is formed to protect the shipping.

WTC?   Biggest building in the world is a target for terrorist.  It was built to withstand the worst possible collision.  So many people had clues to what could happen that day, but none were connected.   The horrible event shocks the world and brings people together.  After a big inquiry changes are made to future buildings to prevent such a loss.  The Department of Homeland Security is formed to protect the borders.


Yes, an Iceberg sank the Titanic.   Yes Terrorists brought down the Towers.     Are we guilty for letting it happen in either case?   NO.   nobody in either timeline ever thought these situations would play out.

Did communication issues and design flaws contribute to the failure of both the ship and the towers?  unfortunatley YES.

Are we Guilty?    No, because nobody wanted to see any of this happen.  The Crew of the Titanic didn't steam into an iceberg intentionally figuring the ship wouldn't sink and it would be good publicity to prove how safe she was.

No more than the agents at the FBI or CIA would have tossed important memos in the waste basket so they could go on vacation with a clean desk. 

  Hindsight is 20/20.   The dots connect visably now.   Just as then in the Titanics case, we are guilty of complacency.  The failure of over confidence in a system with flaws.  Flaws that are not known until a tragedy happens unfortunately.


Offline chefjudy

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 339
  • "a pair a deuces"
Re: WTC.
« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2006, 08:08:25 am »
 :) very insightful, David - thanks...........................
Judy


"it could be like this, just like this, always......" Jack Twist

mvansand76

  • Guest
Re: WTC.
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2006, 08:32:48 am »
I'm not sure if it's just complacency. I am baffled by the number of questions about 9-11 that remain unanswered by the government. There are hundreds of organisations that have asked the government for answers to questions such as Why did building 7 collapse? I know this goes a bit further than saying that the government is in a way responsible for the 9-11 attacks, but I think the government is holding back a lot of information about what happened that day and people are starting to wonder about those things. It's natural for people to start wondering about things like this, because they are not told the whole truth. Is it arrogance, do they just not care, or do they really have something to hide? 

Offline David

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,097
Re: WTC.
« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2006, 08:52:09 am »
Why did building 7 collapse?

PBS had a special show on about the structural failures of 9-11.    They did show the failure of Building 7.    Basically all structural steel will fail from high heat if left exposed too long.   And like a deck of cards, if you pull one out from the bottom at the wrong place the whole thing collapses.  And that is what happened at WTC#7.

Why was the fire left to burn?   Well, think about it.   The building was severely damaged by the falling debris of the towers.   200+ firefighters were just killed and the remaining ones were trying to put out the fire at WTC 1 and 2 so they can rescue anyone trapped there.    It was known that WTC#7 was empty when it was burning.   Authorities figured the building was a total loss, so they concentrated on WTC 1 and 2.
Nobody at the time was thinking about structural failure due to the fires.   


What amazes me is how after towers one and two failed, nobody even flinched when WTC#7 collapsed.    The day before if a 50 floor building caught fire and collapsed it would be big news.  But as it happened 8 hours after #1 and 2 fell, peole were just too numb to be surprized.     Even the media was like: "oh, and there goes building #7" and they turned the cameras back to other things.