United 93 - The Motion Picture

I don't think there's a thread on this already, correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm sure many of you have heard, or perhaps seen previews, of the new Paul Greengrass movie coming out called "United 93", the story of one of the planes hijacked on 9/11. Do you think making the movie this (relatively) soon after the events appropriate? Is it capitalizing too much of a tragic incident? Or a story that should be told?

Paul Greengrass has apparently done intense fact-checking to make it as accurate as possible. Also he directed the Bourne Supremecy, so I have faith in him as a good director. But is the subject matter appropriate for big-budget Hollywood movie while people are still feeling the direct effects of it?

I don't think I'm going to watch this one. It's a little too close to home still. I need more time, a lot more time. But I'm sure lots of people will see it and are looking forward to seeing it. From that point of view, it's not to early for this movie to be made.

I'm sure somewhere a twin towers screenplay hinges on the success of this one.

I don't think it's too early. I honestly think that a lot of people need a wake up call. Especially with the backlash that the president has gotten for tapping al-kida's phones.

Anyway, It's going to be rough, very rough. But I think it's needed to keep awareness up.

ok, i had people i knew in the WTC and i have a friend who lives no more than 2 minutes from where flight 93 crashed...

this was put out way too soon and i dont think that it should be shown. people give the argument "what about pearl harbor?"

ok that was almost 60 years after the movie was made, it involved the military, not civilians..i think it will get bad reviews and wont make penny...thats what i hope atleast

BMWteamPTG

.i think it will get bad reviews and wont make penny...thats what i hope atleast

Click to expand...

No luck so far...

Honestly, if this was done by somebody like Michael Bay in a "Pearl Harbor" kind of way, I'd be disgusted.

It is probably going to be one of those movies you should see atleast once... You know like The Passion, American History X, Shindler's List (sp?), etc...

I probably won't see it for a while, it is just too much too soon. It was hard enough hearing some of the 911 phone calls from 9/11 during the Moussoui case, and I just don't think I can sit through a two-hour movie about the same subject, day, whatever...

I just wonder how well the movie will do internationally, that is, if the movie is released internationally...

I'm going to move this to the Movies and TV forum.

However, to address the subject of the film.

Do I think it's too soon?
- Not sure.

Will I watch the movie?
- Possibly in time but not in theatres.

Do I think the story needs to be told?
- Hell yeah, Let's roll.


Words will not do justice for what is felt when addressing this subject and so I say again...

Finally, a movie worth seeing.

BMWteamPTG

ok, i had people i knew in the WTC and i have a friend who lives no more than 2 minutes from where flight 93 crashed...

this was put out way too soon and i dont think that it should be shown. people give the argument "what about pearl harbor?"

ok that was almost 60 years after the movie was made, it involved the military, not civilians..i think it will get bad reviews and wont make penny...thats what i hope atleast

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to sound cold here. But for the people that didn't know others that were lost in the actual attacks, the have pushed it to the back of their minds. This is something that we should never forget. Just like slavery, pearl habour, the hollocoust and other attrocities that humans have done to themselves.

In a discussion about this years ago, I felt that it borders on unnecessary, but not necessarily out of touch with reality nor tasteless.

Nearly everything that happened on 9/11 was captured by dozens of video cameras, and the drama that took place was seen by millions. Everything that happened occured on a live broadcast, save the crashing of Flight 93. However, there just was that terrible feeling that Flight 93 was destined to crash.

I supppose that if many the families' survivors approve of it, then it's not at anyone's expense at taste. But I'm not interested; it still feels like yesterday. Maybe I'll catch it on TV or rent it one day.

Ehhh I don't think I'll be seeing it anytime soon, not because it's about 9/11, but mainly because I hate being utterly depressed in a movie. But I really hope they don't hollywoodize the story line because this is one thing that should be told straight and true. I'll be pissed if I see it and they hollywoodized the hell out of it.

I would watch it, I dont think its too soon; its important to revive one's memory before too much time passes. But thats my view.

Lets hope it's more of a documentary than a Hollywood blockbuster. If anything good can come out of a horrible incident like this it's that we should honor and remember heroes.

I won't be going to the theater to see it but I will watch it one day, probably when it's on TV. Maybe it's not as close to the bone for me as for some who have already posted, I don't know anyone who was directly affected by 9/11 but I believe this is a story worth telling, as long as it's told in the right way.

I caught a few snippets of this film (my parents were watching it, I wasn't intrested) and it seemed very Hollywood blockbuster-ish than documentary (it could be the score though).

Do you think the "World Trade Center" movie is trying to follow the same route as "United 93"?

Im not sure I will be seeing these movies. The idea that someone can make a profit off of an event that terrorists caused is a disgrace. While I may not be as close as those who live around the area, I believe it is almost a slap in the face to do something like this. Maybe my mind would change is the profits were donated but what are the chances of that.

i think people should see it for the "hero" aspect. It shows regular everyday people like us putting their own lives at stake knowing that they would die anyways, to save possibly hundreds more. This kind of thing actually gives me hope in the human race and makes me proud to be an American.

I'm not sure about the profits thing, but I think this movie was created to pay tribute and respect to the victims and their families. I think profits came second to the respect and tribute.

95GTIVR6

Maybe my mind would change if the profits were donated but what are the chances of that.

Click to expand...

Hollywood with a soul??? No chance.

95GTIVR6

Maybe my mind would change is the profits were donated but what are the chances of that.

Click to expand...

I can't remember the percentage but some of the opening weekend profits were being donated to the memorial fund.

I gotta catch this movie.

I saw this film last night, so here is a brief report of what I thought about it....

The whole film is dealt with in quite a 'matter of fact' style, with much of the movie being based around the air-traffic controllers attempting to figure out what is going on, and trying to liaise with the military who are frustrated by official procedure at nearly every turn. This does portray a sense of realism, and you do get a genuine feeling for the confusion and disarray that the authorities must have been in on that morning. However, from a purely objective point of view, it doesn't make for a particularly interesting movie.

The film begins by following the hijackers on to the plane, and then watching as they wait for the right moment to attack... meanwhile, events elsewhere are unfolding. Attention is deflected from the three other hijacked planes in this movie (as you might have expected), with only brief glimpses of the events at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. This is partly to focus attention on United 93, but mostly I feel it is to give the viewer a similar view to what the controllers/military on the ground would have been seeing as well. In doing so, the film avoids being voyeuristic and potentially disrespectful...

As the events on the ground unfold, United 93 is eventually also hijacked. This is when things start to get a little less 'matter of fact'. Although the events on board must have borne a great deal of similarity to those shown in the movie, you can't help reminding yourself that most of it is conjecture. However, the film deliberately avoids characterisation of any of the crew or passengers. Even the hijacker's characters are not explored in any depth. At first I thought this was a shortcoming of the film, but now realise that this is probably a fair/necessary thing to do, since nobody knows exactly who did what anyway. You certainly get a palpable sense of the fear and panic throughout the crew and passengers, esp. as they collectively decide to storm the cockpit, and a real appreciation for the bravery that it must have taken to rush the hijackers.

I left this movie thinking that I didn't really come out any the wiser for watching it. Basically, it puts pictures to what you can already have imagined it was like already. The amount of time and focus on the air traffic controllers and the military, who ultimately couldn't stop what was happening anyway, does (unfortunately) make for a rather dull film, despite the intensity of some of the scenes on board the plane. Although, one questions whether or not 'entertainment' or 'excitement' are two things that anyone who goes to see this movie actually wants or expects.... I am glad that I have seen the film, but almost certainly won't see it again.

So basically, the film was like a documentary, describing things in chronological order. Is that it?

I've seen a documentary on Flight 93 two months back on TV. So I didn't go into watching the movie, but I'm pretty sure it's very depressing, isn't it?