February 12, 2012

Edward Zwick

by MovieMaker Staff | Published December 11, 2006

Director Edward Zwick on the set of Warner Bros. Blood Diamond - 2006

Ed Zwick has a taste for the epic. The Chicago-born moviemaker graduated from the AFI Conservatory in 1975 and quickly made his name as a writer and producer of the hit 1980s sitcom, â€œthirtysomething.â€ In 1989, Zwick made waves in the moviemaking world with the award-winning Civil War drama Glory, which nabbed three statues at the 1990 Oscar ceremony. After this first big-screen coup, Zwick continued his stream of critical and commercial hits as a director (The Last Samurai), writer (The Siege) and producer (Shakespeare in Love).

Now, Zwick has turned his eye to high-minded international thrillers, with the release of Blood Diamond. The film, which opened in theaters on December 8th, tackles the tough subject of the Sierra Leone diamond trade and its various political, social and economic repercussions. But donâ€™t think that Zwick is simply about cheap thrills; as he himself explains: â€œThere is no reason why challenging themes and engaging stories have to be mutually exclusiveâ€”in fact, each can fuel the other. As a filmmaker, I want to entertain people first and foremost. If out of that comes a greater awareness and understanding of a time or a circumstance, then the hope is that change can happen. Obviously, a single piece of work canâ€™t change the world, but what you try to do is add your voice to the chorus.â€

Sound Off: When making a film about a social issue, do moviemakers have an obligation to make more than just a crowd-pleasing blockbuster? Is any topic fair game when it comes to making it big in the box office? Or should film be used as a medium to educate audiences? Has Zwick managed to merge these two goals with Blood Diamond? Talk back in the comments section!

SHARE THIS STORY

TAGS
moviemaker of the week

COMMENTS | POST A COMMENT

Comment by John Mele on 1/24/07 at 10:06 am: Films that are made to educate people about injustices from all over the world are excellent pieces that help people see what is happening on the other side of the world or right in their back yard. These films can grab people who can sympathize for the terrible events that are taking place. A movie like blood diamond is a great way to inform the world of what can happen in a war torn area when people fight for control of something that has value. The problem arises when studios begin to make movies about single distinct events. For example, Pearl Harbor, United 93, or Black Hawk Down. These movies are the artists depiction of what it may have looked like from an omniscient perspective and this is what makes people angry. The people who were there or want to think about the event in more than just physical pictures hold the occurrence to a higher degree than just to satisfy a visual longing. The problem I have with it is that we are allowing the directors to make up our minds for us, showing us what they think happened at that particular place at that particular time. Don’t get me wrong, I love to watch things blow up and learn about wars from all over the world in movie form, but there is a thin line between education and revenue.
-----