In the new issue of
Entertainment Weekly,
Mark Harris frets and moans over the preview for
2012 and the orgy of mass-destruction that I enjoyed so much.
He wept for the
millions of people who are dying, because what are they, in the grand scheme of things, but extras. Yes, it is a disaster movie of epic proportions and lots of unseen people die... I believe that is the definition of a disaster. The underlying thrill of the disaster movie (and horror) is that you are not one of those unlucky victims. Is that somehow immoral? I think not.
He goes on to bemoan the scene of the escape plane zipping
between two parallel high-rise towers just seconds before those towers collapse into each other, presumably killing thousands of CGI flyspeck humans. OMFG!!! We can't show such a thing!! After 911, it is horribly inhuman to show such a thing in frivolous entertainments!
Bite me, Mark Harris. This movie is nothing but a thrill-ride of escapist entertainment much like the campy disaster flicks of the 70's. It is not a moral failing to derive enjoyment from such films. Tragedy strikes all over the world on a daily basis, but I don't think that should dictate what can or can't be included in books and films in deference to those that suffered and lost loved ones to such events. Most likely, they won't choose to see such films. Is it somehow insensitive that many do choose to see such films? Life is insensitive and it isn't about them or me for that matter it just is.
End of rant.
