United 93

[Ash]

Skaboi's Loose Change thread got me thinking about the upcoming release of United 93.
It's the story of the passengers who tried to re-take the flight after they realized it was part of the 9-11 terrorist plot.



I will probably go to see this though I'm not quite sure what to expect.
You'll probably notice that the cast is made up primarily of unknowns.
I think that that's a good idea.  Having major stars in this film would just seem wrong and I'm sure the filmmakers thought the same.

ABCNews.com has this article about the movie
One of the main points they bring up is if people are ready to see this yet.
Is the movie a bit too early?

There's a poll that you can vote on asking if you think it's too early. (that link only shows the results, go to the main page to vote)

I voted "No" but the results say otherwise.

Personally, I think that now is the perfect time.
The passengers who died on Flight 93 are all heroes.

Who knows how many hundreds of lives they saved by fighting back?
Their story needs to be told.

What do you think?

[Scott]

Actually this whole story is interesting as the (Mousoui spelling?) trial case is revealing the tape recording of the flight. There has been a story circulating that a Wisconson Fighter group stationed in Virginia shot that plane down and even Rumsfeld made a blurb about the plane being shot down. I've heard this even from people in the military and aviation fields that they have heard and believe that it was shot down over Pennsyvania and now this tape surfaces during the trial and the movie is also about to be released. Which is true?

Sanity would lean towards the passengers taking the plane down. Regardless if it's true or not.

[odinn7]

Tragic as it was...I would really prefer to believe those passengers brought it down but I would not put it past our government (or even blame them in this case) for shooting it down. Still, which is better? I prefer to believe they decided their own fate and saved many other lives in doing so.

As far as the movie is concerned...I can't agree with it. They are trying to make a movie about this that nobody alive really knows how it all happened inside that plane. I just don't see it as being a good idea.

[dcjohnson]

I saw it at a press screening (I'm a reporter for the Suffolk Journal). Like Titanic and other such films based on historical tragedies, there's not really much to give away. If your into films with low emphasis on characters and more focus on groups as the protagonist, such as the works of Eisenstein you should enjoy this movie.

[dcjohnson]

I saw it at a press screening (I'm a reporter for the Suffolk Journal). Like Titanic and other such films based on historical tragedies, there's not really much to give away. If your into films with low emphasis on characters and more focus on groups as the protagonist, such as the works of Eisenstein you should enjoy this movie.

[ulthar]

Again, remembering my thoughts as they were unfolding on 9/11, I told my wife that (imo) that plane was shot down.  I like the romantic notion of the passengers taking it down, but I lean toward it being taken down.

I don't have a problem with that.  Fighting a war is ugly business, and that's what we had that day.

In either case, the people on board WERE heros, imo.  Not just because they happened to die in the 9/11 events, but because there is audio evidence that (1) they AT LEAST died with dignity and bravery (not cowering simps like people in disasters are portrayed in movies/tv) and (2) may have fought back (even if a missile ultimately brought the plane down).  Both are always good things.

One question I always ask on this subject is *IF* it was shot down, why cover it up?  It is certainly nothing to hide.  Shooting it down would have been the right decision to make under the circumstances.

About the movie, I really don't have much of an opinion.  I agree with Odinn in the sense that there is probably not enough info to make a meaninfully accurate film, but on the other hand, I think this 'too early' stuff is garbage.

What are we? Two?  We all know 9/11 happened.  We know people died that day.  Since when did ABC or anyone else in the entertainment industry become our parent to protect us from things we "shouldn't" see, or when we are 'ready' to see them?

That said, I probably won't go see it. I have no interest in seeing some fantasy depiction of a major historical event I witnessed.

[trekgeezer]

They've already done a reenactment with actors on TV. I think it was on the History Channel, I don't see a lot of point in this movie.

[Just Plain Horse]

But Trek, we must not forget 9/11! Whatever will Bush use for his excuse when we go to war with (insert country here)? ...or, for that matter, anything else he does? Aren't you an American? Don't you fly the flag of America? Don't you say the pledge every morning? Don't you read the Bible?Don't you like apple pie? Don't you buy American? Eat American? Sleep American? Breathe American?

*like all Americans, I must grossly exaggerate to make a point. Now if you'll excuse me, I must go drink heavily and make fun of other cultures while talking on my cellphone and driving my SUV over small animals.

[trekgeezer]

Sometimes being a patriot requires one to be a dissident, especially when the ideals your country is built upon are ignored by those who would supposedly lead us.



 As far as this movie goes, I just don't think we should over do it.

[Scott]

It's the lack of public knowledge that intrigues and/or bothers people. In the end its all entertainment I suppose for human consumption.

[Just Plain Horse]

I would call it "wishful entertainment"... acting like we're a nation of heroes because the brave-albeit dead- citizens stopped one flight while three others managed to reach their targets. It's like General Turgidson acting like General Ripper's mental "slip-up" that led to nuclear armageddon was no reason to "get our hair mussed".

I suppose next we'll get to see a movie about the one black family in New Orleans who didn't lose their home/jobs/family members/respect for the administration after Katrina. Somebody let me know when we as a nation are done playing make believe and are ready to find that mysterious word called accountability. It'll be coming back to haunt us soon enough. Now, if you'll excuse me, my SUV burned an entire tank of gas while I was typing this, and it needs a refill...

[Ash]

It seems critics everywhere are praising this film.

Roger Ebert has written a fantastic review of United 93.
He gave it 4 stars.
READ IT HERE

After reading it, do you think you will go see it?
I will.

[dcjohnson]

Well, I'm not exactly Roger Ebert, but if anyone's interested I've written a review, which can be located here, http://www.suffolkjournal.net/media/storage/paper632/news/2006/04/26/Arts/Art-Imitates.Life.In.New.PostSept.11.Movie-1878764.shtml?norewrite200604280649&sourcedomain=www.suffolkjournal.net in it's online form. The article in part has quatations that you probably won't find in other newspapers as they were taken from the recent press meeting that I took part in with the director.

[ulthar]

Okay, that's a pretty good review; at least the first half.  The Page 2 link goes to a Suffolk Journal registration page.

(Oh, and the site reset my 'back' button so I had to from-scratch navigate back to this page to send you this message...tell your web folks that is a a BIG no-no; their job is not to inconvenience the user, or to care in anyway how I navigate through their site or to/from others.  Geeesh ).

[Just Plain Horse]

Ebert's a decent critic, I just don't share his tastes. I don't go see many movies theaterwise... and I don't see myself buying the DVD either... so, until it comes on TV- with the contents and coherence removed- I doubt it.