Bradley, you always tell us that we should see Aeon Flux, Stick It, Gigli, or any other movie that you love before we judge it. A bit hypocritical aren't we?

And loyal, I really don't think it's fair to say that we're all just being brainwashed into liking the film because it's about 9/11. To say that critics liked the film because they felt they had to strikes me as shortminded - it's their job to be objective about the films they see until after they view them. With a movie this controversial, very few are going to feel like they're required to regard it as a good film. Rather, I'd be so bold as to suggest that people have differing opinions of art, and just because you're on one side doesn't mean the other is wrong because of outside factors. You must realize how that comes off as immature.

United 93
MPAA Rating: R for some intense sequences of terror and violence
Running Time: 111 minutes



September 11th, 2001 is a date that is engraved in every American's mind. The day started out like every other, a beautiful, fall day in New York City. Out of no where, a plane crashed into one of the Twin Towers. The city and the nation were in shock; most thought it was just an accident, others thought it was a terrorist attack. Then out of no where, a second plane crashed into the other Twin Tower. Now more than ever, it was known that America was under attack. While all of this was happening on America's soil, in the air 30,000 feet, another plane was being hijacked. Flight 93, Boston to Los Angeles. In the air, a group of passengers will try to take over the cockpit from these terrorists, and stop the plane from crashing into its target - the capital building in Washington.
United 93 (originally named Flight 93, but changed due to the recent made-for-TV film, which took that name) is one of the most powerful films in recent memory. I saw the A&E film Flight 93, and I can say I wasn't too impressed. I thought it was average. It was extremely "Hollywoodized" and was dry on the emotion. Sure, it had some moments of sad moments, but they were only sad because we lived through these attacks. If it was a fictional movie, it would have been a really crappy, sentimental film. United 93 isn't like that, its shot with handheld camera (which some don't like, but I love), and it gives the film a gritty documentary feel. You feel as if you're there in the plane with all of the passengers. From the second you see the first plane hit the Twin Towers, you're in for an emotional rollercoaster. I saw this film opening night, at the best theater in town, and I'll admit, I was extremely uncomfortable during many of the film's emotional, powerful film. I couldn't stop thinking about what others felt, what they were thinking, and how they were reacting. I couldn't stop looking around the crowd (though during the film's final twenty minutes, my eyes were glued to the screen).
The director, Paul Greengrass, who is responsible for such, films as Bloody Sunday and The Bourne Supremacy, directors a passionate film. Even the family members adored the film, and said it should be seen. It was an extremely well-done, tasteful film. United 93 is one of the most depressingly real films I've ever seen. I recommend it to everyone, if you can handle the film's subject matter, anyways. It's such an amazing film; it would be a shame if it was missed. It will surely be one of the year's best films.

10/10 (A+)

Not to split hairs MD, but as a teenager, you often post about doing illegal drugs.

Let's not lecture.

Movies35, you never answered my question. You said you were taking your little brother to see United 93. How old is he?

I really don't think it's fair to bring that up, it's semantics and I'd say I handled the insults and rude comments that people were all too happy to throw my way rather well. But whatever, the thread of mine that you chose to lock has nothing to do with the argument.

And I am sorry, lecturing you wasn't my intention. I'm just trying to state my thoughts, not attack you. I don't want to come off as condescending, lord knows this board has enough people who have that covered.

I wouldn't say people are being brainwashed. I think in general it's difficult for many to be critical of something that's considered sacred. For some, United 93 is their Schindler's List. But there's not a single frame of daring footage in United 93. It's about as cookie cutter as they come.

Taping a picture of the Capital Building to the yoke? You have to be kidding me. Greengrass played loose and fast with what bits of info were available. But in his defense, had he crafted a story about what's known about United 93, his film would have ran about 12 minutes.

Didnt the director have a few facts in the cockpit voice recordings, phone calls and ATC transcripts?

Or we're those made up?

Uhhh... That is what they did according to the cockpit voice recorders.

the new journal on your website doesn't work yearsago.

As you just said, some things had to be assumed due to the lack of 100% confirmed facts of exactly what happened onboard. Complete historical accuracy is simply not something that we can ask of United 93, and heavily knocking it for a fundamental issue like that doesn't make much sense to me. But conspiracy theories aside, I think they got about as close to the truth as they could while balancing that with the intent on making the film work thematically. Still, the plane crashing and everyone dying doesn't really strike me as "cookie cutter". Wouldn't that have been the passengers managing to make the plane land safely on a runaway?

I'd love to see the crowd's reaction to that one

A few seconds of cockpit recordings buried in static? Unverified phone calls?

Yeah, United 93 is swimming in facts.

Oh it's cookie cutter. Sappy and cookie cutter.

Historical accuracy is only one issue of many. How about the use of nonactors throughout the film. Why, after putting so much effort into this sort of stunt casting did Paulgrass undermine his own efforts by hiring character actors like Denny Dillon (Saturday Night Fever) and Gregg Henry (Slither).

You know what would have great. He hired real flight attendants and ATCs. Why not hire real terrorists?

Sorry, I didn't see that you asked me He's thirteen, he'll be fourteen in August.

I'm so happy you didn't say he was 6.

I almost went out to see it on the weekend, it might have been nice to see this latest attempt at hype-nosis - but now I simply can't be bothered. Instead I saw a great movie and a very good movie (Stick It & Hard Candy), and if I find time to see another movie this week, it's gotta be Devil and Daniel Johnston. So no luck for U93 - though I feel much more positive about making it out to Oliver Stone's upcoming 9/11 movie...

(BTW, I haven't seen Gigli.)

When Bradley and I are on the same side of an argument, you have to understand there is something terribly wrong with United 93.

No, I wouldn't take my six year old little brother to see this He was supposed to go with my mom and I when we saw it opening night, but decided not to because he was working on a bike and he was almost done, so he wanted to finish that instead of going with us.

What do you mean when you say unverified? What about the call from the plane to the 911 United Airlines emergency Dispatch?

How the hell do you verify phone calls anyways?

uhh its more like there is something terribly wrong with your point of view.

My POV is perfect. I don't let emotions blind my critical analysis of cinema.

ooook, your right and everyone else is wrong.

Sensational, shocking, brilliant, gut-wrenching. Best movie in a long time. A+

To be fair, Loyal, I don't think this is as much of an issue as "Everyone is brainwashed because everyone loved it and I didn't!", as much as a simple split of opinion.

I'm as willing as the next doubter to concede that Greengrass obviously had to interpret a good number of the events onboard the plane in the film, but I don't think that takes away from the superlative and powerful quality of the film.

I am not understanding why some people are worrie that Greengrass interpreted/made up events on board in his own way...that's dumb. It is not a documentary, it is a fictional film.