You mean that the film was also intended to make people aware of certain aspects of 9/11 like Able Danger, while also having it serve as inspiration for an interesting McGuffin?
Precisely. I've blogged a bit about my McGuffin thoughts here: http://www.abledangerthemovie.com/blog/?p=120.
Who is your intended audience for this film?
People who like to go out on a date to the movie. I think you're very likely to get lucky after this movie if you go with a date.
There are three basic schools of thought on 9/11. There's the official version of what happened that everyone is familiar with. Then there's the theory that the government knew an attack was coming and allowed it to happen. And finally there's the theory that elements of the government actually orchestrated and facilitated the attacks. What are your own thoughts on 9/11?
My thoughts are the the truth is assuredly not available to us but that there has very clearly been great efforts by our intelligence agencies to dispose of the "truth."
We've already discussed Sander. I also noticed when Flynn is typing up his story on Atta's friend who claimed to be working for the CIA, the name "Hopsicker" appears. Is this Daniel Hopsicker? What other individuals have influenced your thoughts on the matter or had some influence on the film's script? Who else would you recommend to people that they listen to or check out their writing in an effort to seek out that hidden truth?
On the matter of 9/11 truth? Daniel Hopsicker, yes. A lot of Webster Tarpley in there. Anthony Sutton. Jake from Chinatown. I'm a big fan of conspiracy movies. Parallax View. The Conversation. Original Manchurian Candidate, Dr. Strangelove, etc.
How do you think your film will be/has been received by the "9/11 truth" movement?
Most "truthers" get it. I had the 9/11 ballot initiative (www.nyc911initiative.org) out collecting signatures all day before the film opened the Brooklyn International Film Festival. I'm not a priority for them to promote because they are industriously producing and promoting their own documentarian agenda. But they get that if this film can break into the mainstream a bit, then many more people will have to face issues that are important to them.
A number of fiction films have included factual pieces of information concerning 9/11. Two that come instantly to mind are in Casino Royale when "M" tells 007 about the insider trading that occurred just before the attacks and A Mighty Heart about the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl starring Angelina Jolie, which mentions the head of Pakistan's ISI spy agency authorizing the transfer of $100,000 to Mohammed Atta in Florida. There are of course any number of educational documentary films and videos on the subject. A lot of people might not be so interested in sitting down to watch a documentary on the topic, but would certainly watch an entertaining movie. So it certainly helps expose people to things they might not have ever heard of before. But there is also the risk that those same people might walk away not knowing that certain elements of the movie were actually based on fact. How many people walked out of Casino Royale or A Mighty Heart thinking the bit about the insider trading or the ISI chief was just another fictional plot element? If the purpose is not only to entertain, but also to educate, how does a filmmaker handle the subject matter in a way that lessens the risk that the audience doesn't walk away thinking that such information was just part of the fiction? What did you do in making this film to help ensure that people walk away knowing that certain pieces of information are not only elements of a fictional story, but are based on fact?
There is never a guarantee that people will take the things that I put into a fictional narrative for the truth. But there is no guarantee when a "truther" tells facts via a documentary or book or whatever that anyone will take his facts for [being] true, either. With regard to 9/11 truth, there are few facts that seem indisputable. With 9/11, we are dealing in the realm of myth -- where facts actually count for very little. It's about creating a weltanschauung -- a worldview that makes sense. We live in a post 9/11 world, as the neocons are so fond of saying, and that's like saying it's A.D. vs. B.C. In the film I tried to create a window into a universe where alternative explanations for 9/11 are accepted as potentially valid -- where the cracks in the myth can be seen. Where the audience can see and therefore visualize themselves in a world where part of being a hipster is not accepting the mainstream myth. Where being a bit of a truther comes into the realm of being a hipster -- which basically just means taking every mainstream media story with a grain of salt. Where hopefully we can see and identify with a person's struggle to acquire and disseminate the truth for no other reason than to serve the truth in itself. I see Thomas Flynn as a modern day Don Quixote taking on the windmills of "truth" of the media oligarchy. But the film is first and foremost meant to be a good date movie that will keep you entertained and titillated, and when it's over I hope there will be a somewhat more enlightened discourse -- and that will then then lead to seduction!
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
