Shock and Awe

Rating: 3/10 (17 July 2003)

Not the movie. I mean the number and variety of comments here. The question is why this third-rate flick merits all these weapons of mass destruction aimed at it by critics and viewers alike.
The history has been done before, and better. The love stories with the historical event as backdrop have been done before, and better. The film pyrotechnics have been done before, and better. Hawaii has been done before, and better. And the acting, such as it is, represents a new nadir within the entire context of all these categories and more. Ben who? Oh, you mean the guy who would be a nobody but for hanging on to the bootstraps of Matt Damon.
Everything else is just a blur of publicity hype and exploitation of sentiment generated by the 60th anniversary of the attack. What grieves me most is to see those of my own generation who remember the day with greater clarity than 9/11 get teary-eyed when anything at all -- even dreck like this -- reminds them of the actual event and the unparalleled suffering that it caused then and for the next four years. Anyone under the age of 65 cannot begin to fathom the true emotions swelling yet beneath the placid surface in our retirement communities. We are constantly looking for that bit of actual war footage showing even a glimpse of a familiar face gone forever. (And this says nothing of the equally great tragedy of Vietnam and the films it inspired.)
Some memories should not be toyed with. My advice for those who enjoy war stories is to concentrate on those that take place in the future, as cautionary tales.