In a society that prides itself on freedom of speech and thought, creativity is actively celebrated. However, when is creativity more detrimental to the audience than entertaining? This thought came to me as I saw a newsreel discussing the newly released “Patriots Day” starring Mark Wahlberg portraying the events of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. I was initially surprised by the film as I hadn’t heard anything advised about the film. My second reaction was one of defense as the terrorist attack was only three short years ago and the trauma of an event like that doesn’t simply fade away for the victims and their families.
Now I have not seen the film or heavily researched it but from what I know, none of the money profited from the film will be given to those affected by the tragedy. I have also noticed the film has received mixed reviews. The question I wish to pose is: what is the acceptable waiting period between a tragic event and a media outlet creatively interpreting this event to turn some sort of profit? As a journalist I understand the importance of telling stories and informing/honoring people and events, but when is too soon and when can creative non-fiction truly influential?
So while I’ve never seen “Patriots Day” I personally think the movie is coming coming out too soon and is entirely unnecessary. The marathon bombing is still fresh in this country and to create a movie about the occurrence seems like a weak attempt to inspire and retell a story. However, I do not wish to speak for any of the victims and their families… I would love to hear the opinions of anyone who has seen the movie and/or what your thoughts are on this type of issue.