exactly
And what do you most Americans think about when they see pictures of the Twin Towers these days
No, I’m not being obtuse. The numbers 9 and 11 are a freaking coincidence- he would have put those words on the screen over the tower shot regardless of whether there was a 9 or an 11 in it!
And I do wonder about the OP, frankly. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but this isn’t even in the ballpark.
Again- yes, the IMAGE is significant. The # of people killed is not.
So, you’re not going to answer my questions in the last paragraph of my previous post?
I didn’t see it as a conspiracy theory question at all. It was a question about a choice made by a director. I’m not sdure Speilberg would have put the words over the image of the towers regardless. He usually prefers to have no image behind words on a screen, so that the image doesn’t distract from what the words say. Maybe that was because it would help make his point by having those words and those images. Or maybe Speilberg just thought it looked neato. I think that’s what the OP wants to discuss.
I didn’t see it as a conspiracy theory question at all. It was a question about a choice made by a director. I’m not sdure Speilberg would have put the words over the image of the towers regardless. He usually prefers to have no image behind words on a screen, so that the image doesn’t distract from what the words say. Maybe that was because it would help make his point by having those words and those images. Or maybe Speilberg just thought it looked neato. I think that’s what the OP wants to discuss.
I think the image was of primary importance. It knocks us back to see them. And of course it is appropriate for the 1970’s setting.
Maybe that’s the point in the film at which we decide what we will take from the film.
Sometimes something can be a fortunate coincidence. Certainly there may have been only 9 of 11 terrorists killed, but that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t chosen to specifically comment on the fact at that point in the movie because the numbers did happen to line up. I don’t see any reason to think he didn’t take advantage of the fact.
I was reading a novel written in I think 1998 about a future world in which operatives are sent out to destroy art to make way for new art. In that book, set a significant number of years in the future, the Twin Towers are referenced. So they were considered permanent, not something that would ever change.
The twin towers also appear in Spielberg’s own vision of the future in A.I.
Here are some links about the Twin Towers in Munich
http://www.seattleweekly.com/film/0551/051221_holfilm_munich.php
Do you mind telling us what YOU think Spielberg was trying to say?
(And to answer your earlier question - dunno. Haven’t seen the movie.)