Go backBack to selection


in Filmmaking
on Jun 2, 2006

I don’t know if it’s the editing of the interview or the thought processes of the director, but Jenifer Merin’s interview with Omen director John Moore in New York Press seems quite bizarre:

From the piece:

MERIN: The Omen’s the first feature to use 9/11 World Trade Center towers footage in a story other than the story of 9/11. And, you’ve included images from Katrina and other disasters. Why?

MOORE: To contextualize the story. I want to make films that comment on what’s going on in the world, but not be ugly, stupid and raw about it by making dumb-ass angry-young-man new genre of self-aware derivatives—like remakes of Hostel or some of Tarantino’s oeuvre that’s so tongue-in-cheek and disposable. It’s dangerous.

The Omen offered the chance to finesse an idea and say something. It’s a great story—almost Shakespearean. Doing the remake’s a bit like asking an actor if he wants to do Macbeth or Death of a Salesman. Nobody in their right mind says no. Plus, there was the small but definite opportunity to contextualize as we do at the film’s beginning.

MERIN: Have you gotten flack for using 9/11 footage?

MOORE: Well, some people said, “Geez, couldn’t you have just put Rwanda?” But I included 9/11 footage because of the ongoing failure to interpret what happened that day as part of a larger picture. Continuing to believe it’s a singular evil act is dangerous, I think, and has driven this great nation towards a dark precipice.

In Hollywood moviemaking, very few vehicles allow you to say something. Now there’s a rash of scripts about Iraq, but most are bad because there’s little contemplation behind the scripts. They’re going to be vomited upon us.

The Omen’s such a well-established, lean racehorse of a story. You know it works. The other side of that coin is that you get beat up for doing a remake.

© 2024 Filmmaker Magazine. All Rights Reserved. A Publication of The Gotham