United 93 - A review ***LONG***

[Dominic]

This is a film that is garnering a lot of controversial attention right now, both good and bad, and I can certainly see why. Some of the comments I've heard from people I know include:

"It's too soon."
"How dare they fictionalize something so tragic."
"I won't see it because I don't want to relive that day."

These are all valid points, and I understand the emotion behind them. I was not all that interested in seeing it either, until I read some of the glowing reviews in the media and felt it was worth checking out.

So, how was it?

I waited a couple days to write this review to make sure I wasn't resorting to hyperbole based on the very strong emotions this movie provoked in me, but quite simply, United 93 is one of the very best motion pictures I have ever seen. It's certainly the best film I've seen in the last five years.

Director Peter Greengrass uses the same documentary-style approach that he used in Bloody Sunday, and, to a lesser degree, The Bourne Supremecy, to great effect. In fact, it's reminiscent of another great document of a real-life event: The Battle of Algiers.

Greengrass's screemplay is sparse and full of language and conversations that wouldn't be out of place on a city bus or your own workplace. In other words, it's not showy, it's not theatrical, and it is very un-melodramatic.

There is no melodrama at all, in fact. We are not told to demonize the hijackers, nor are we asked to understand them. The same goes for the passengers and flight crew on the doomed flight. Greengrass gives us snippets of conversation and quick glances of these people, as if we are on the flight with them. They are the same faces and voices we hear (and try to ignore) every time we board a commercial flight ourselves. In other words, unremarkable.

The movie cuts back and forth between Flight 93 and the various ground crews and military who are trying their best to figure out what's going on. First, a plane refuses to respond to an air traffic controller. Next, something hits one of the World Trade Towers. The FAA and the folks at NORAD scramble to find out what's happening, all the way up to when the Pentagon is attacked. The confusion and fear and helplessness as the head of National Air traffic control grounds all air traffic into and out of the country is palpable. And the way Greegrass shoots it, it's like you're evesdropping on people at work. There is no "acting" going on.

The reason it all seem so real is that Greengrass used nine to ten of the real-life people on the ground to portray themselves. From Ben Sliney, who was on his first day on the job as the Head of National Air Traffic Control, to other Air Traffic Controllers, and even to various military personnel at Cheyenne Mountain who were responding to the emergency back in 1991, a lot of the people on screen are playing themselves. Greengrass gets better performances out of these non-actors as he could have from real actors. They are in their element, they know how to react to the situation at hand, they know what to say and what the protocols are. In my mind, this casting decision makes the movie.

Naturally, any scenes showing what happened on United 93 are based on cell-phone calls, Flight Data recorder info, and specualtion. But again, Greengrass refuses to "dramatize" the happenings as one would expect. He puts his camera in the plane as if it was jut another passenger, with all the knowledge and lack of knowledge that that entails.

We never really know which passengers are Todd Beamer or Mark Bingham or anyone else, and by the time "Let's roll" shows up on screen it is in such an offhand, terrified manner that you barely notice it. There are two recognizable faces on the plane among the mostly unknown cast: David Rasche and Denny Dillon. It's almost a welcome sight, being reminded that what you're watching is "only a movie," because to be honest, the tension and emotion during the last fifteen minutes of the film (all taking place on the plane) is almost unbearable to endure.

From the moment the 4 terrorists take over the plane to when the passengers try and take it back and it crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside, United 93 is the most riveting, most nerve-wracking piece of cinema I have ever seen. And trust me, I do not mean this in an entertaining sort of way.

Yes, we all know what happened. Yes, it's possible we're being manipulated by the filmmakers to remember that day and the emotions we went through. But United 93 is so technically brilliant, so devastatingly real that I don't think it would've mattered if 911 had never happened and this was a completely fictional movie of an ill-fated hijacking. It would still pack the same emotional wallop, still drive me to sit in the theater for five minutes after the movie was over so that I could compose myself.

The acting - by everyone involved - is superb.

The people on the plane are us. All of us. No heroes, no villains, just people. People forced to do do what they can to survive. And the filmmakers show that in all its chaos, all its terror, and all its humanity.

When I left the theater I was visibly shaken, in a way that was unlike any other movie-going experience in my past. It made me angry. And sad. And overwhelmed at both the complexities of our modern-day lives and the sheer capacity for compassion we all have for one another, regardless of what color our skin is, or what religion we choose to practice.

United 93 is a great film. I'm not going to make any proclamations like, "every American should see this movie." I understand those who don't want to see it. But I am glad I saw it. Greengrass is an amazing filmmaker, and for him to pull off this story without resorting to cliches, melodrama or blatant manipulation is simply remarkable.

[xorbie]

Dom,

Thanks for the review. I will be checking this out.

[diebitter]

Yeah, sounds good. Your comparison to 'Battle for Algiers' really drew my attention.

I've never even heard of this movie, and will be watching out for it.

Very nice review.

Thanks Dom.

[mslif]

Great review, thanks for posting it. I had not really thought of going to see it since i was expecting a lot of drama but you've made me want to watch it.

[BarronVangorToth]

Terrific review even if I don't think the movie justifies it. My friends and I went to see the four films that came out last weekend (this, RV, Stick It, and Akeelah) and we were totally unimpressed by all four.

None of our criticism stems from it being "too soon," but rather it was just rather, well, boring in my book.

I had a decided "...and so...?" thought going the whole time.

You obviously see a lot of movies so I was even more amazed by your 'best movie I've seen in five years' as this isn't as good as a number in this very lackluster year (Three Burials, Inside Man, and Eight Below I enjoyed far more and intend to rewatch each on DVD). I doubt I'll even buy this on DVD and, if I do, it may suffer one more viewing as many have seemed to like it and it may have just caught us off guard in between high school girls doing gymnastics and spelling bees.

While the subject matter and delivery is different, it's almost comparable to last year's Munich: something dull this way comes.

[illeagle]

Did the movie make any reference to the drills being peformed that morning causing confusion for NORAD officials?

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
Did the movie make any reference to the drills being peformed that morning causing confusion for NORAD officials?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, NORAD is about to do a big operation off the Eastern Seaboard and there is some confusion as to what's part of the drill and what's "real world."

[tdarko]

What I liked:

How the passengers were portrayed as ordinary people stuck in a situation beyond control. There wasn't any movie heroism involved, it was simple, they did what they could do which is realistic and probably what happened. They weren't portrayed as these Bruce Willis action hero's but scared citizens which was correct, imo.

No hollywood glitz and glamour to the film.

Anyone who says its "too soon" or "it's not sensitive to the families" isn't thinking. The film is portraying a group of people as heroes, people that did everything they could to foil a plan and we don't know "exactly" where the plane was going (white house/capital) but it was the only plane that didn't hit its target. Sensitive? If I were a family member I would have been proud watching this, anyone who complains is just looking for something to complain about, as always.

What I didn't like:

I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion but I thought some of the movie was somewhat slow. I do like that they showed what the Air-traffic Controllers had to go through and what a complete disaster this day was and how completely blind-sided we were but as a member of the audience I "got" this the first hour during the back and forths and I was getting restless.

That was about it.

I really liked the movie, but I am pretty sure you liked it more than I.

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
What I liked:

How the passengers were portrayed as ordinary people stuck in a situation beyond control. There wasn't any movie heroism involved, it was simple, they did what they could do which is realistic and probably what happened. They weren't portrayed as these Bruce Willis action hero's but scared citizens which was correct, imo.

No hollywood glitz and glamour to the film.

Anyone who says its "too soon" or "it's not sensitive to the families" isn't thinking. The film is portraying a group of people as heroes, people that did everything they could to foil a plan and we don't know "exactly" where the plane was going (white house/capital) but it was the only plane that didn't hit its target. Sensitive? If I were a family member I would have been proud watching this, anyone who complains is just looking for something to complain about, as always.

What I didn't like:

I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion but I thought some of the movie was somewhat slow. I do like that they showed what the Air-traffic Controllers had to go through and what a complete disaster this day was and how completely blind-sided we were but as a member of the audience I "got" this the first hour during the back and forths and I was getting restless.

That was about it.

I really liked the movie, but I am pretty sure you liked it more than I.

[/ QUOTE ]

well....yeah....

Slow??? I'm not sure the filmmakers could've gotten me more on the edge of my seat without using a cattleprod.

I thought the slow buildup to the first plane being hijacked was very well done.

[tdarko]

Barron,

We obviusly agree somewhat with this movie, though I think I liked it a little more than you. But before you say its a slow year you need to realize that we are in the slow months of movies and basically the garbage is out right now, then the summer sequels and blockbusters, then the fall and winter you get into the Oscar stuff that gets all of the attention. With that said, of course there are great movies released early each year but for the majority its trash and the talent is late.

FWIW, I thought Three Buriels was fantastic, my favorite movie I have seen in 2006--though its a 2005 movie.