United 93

[MacGuffin]

Trailer here.

Release Date: April 28, 2006

Starring: JJ Johnson, Gary Commock, Meghan Heffern, Olivia Thirlby, Khalid Abdalla, Opal Alladin

Written By: Paul Greengrass (Bloody Sunday)

Director: Paul Greengrass (Bourne Supremacy; Bloody Sunday)

Premise: A real time account of the events on United Flight 93, one of the planes hijacked on 9/11 that crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania when passengers foiled the terrorist plot.

[Gamblour.]

I have no real bias against this movie, but it kinda made me feel sick watching that trailer. It's just too goddamned soon for a movie about this. About real people. I think this will be a disgrace.

[ono]

It's films like this that make me hate people.

[Kal]

It really made me sick... nobody wants to relive that, or remember it like that... I dont fucking get how they make this... what is the fucking positive message about it? Its nothing like Oliver Stone's project.

[picolas]

what is the fucking positive message about it?

i think it's that brave people can do something about terrorism/sacrifice their lives for the greater good etc. i think it's an amazing story, but this dramatization is really unneccesary if you've read about it. too little actually happened to make a movie. even a real-time movie. and they're going to have to make up an ending. based on the teaser it'll be silly and upsetting.

[pete]

I'm willing to give this guy a chance 'cause bloody sunday was a really really good film.  but yeah, the premise sounds retarded and I hate these films with their obvious ideals and phony emotions.  post 9/11 is just badtimes for American films, because, unlike a post-war Italy or something, America's hardly even processed the tragedy and its place in the world ('cause unless you lived in New York, most people never experienced it), instead people were all told how to feel and went on with their lives.

[matt35mm]

Wait wait wait wait wait...

I think it's entirely unfair to judge the quality and relavancy of the movie based on that teaser.  Let's be clear: the teaser shows nothing.  It contains graphics intended only for this teaser.

Sure, it might be too early for a silly dramatization, but if it's an urgent examination of everything (it's real time, but no one said that it was nothing but the plane interior), the political climate and conflicts, etc. etc.  in other words, if it has something to say, then NOW is the time for it.  NOW.  I don't want to see safe pussy movies about 9/11, personally.  I think there are some things we need to look at seriously and with urgency.  Why wait?  Because it's uncomfortable?  Because it's about real people (a lot of films are based on real people)?  Is it really all that respectful to wait until it doesn't hurt anymore?  We still live in the midsts and shadows of 9/11.  Now could be the perfect time for a movie like this.

And we can't know if that is the case or not based on 2 minutes of a radar graphic and people saying bye on their cell phones.

The same sentiment goes for Stone's film.

[pete]

yeah but no one is judging the quality of the movie...people are reacting to the idea of such a movie which is perfectly fair.

[matt35mm]

Looking back on what people have said so far (i.e. "it'll be silly and upsetting"), yeah they are generally judging the quality of the movie, and this is based on the impression that it is nothing but a dramatic retelling, or even exploitation, of an upsetting subject matter.

But how can we bash even the idea of the movie when we don't exactly know what the ideas in the movie are?  That's my point.  Maybe there is more in this than the teaser would suggest (especially since this teaser suggestion just about nothing).  Maybe this could be a film bold enough to give us a kick in the pants in revealing the complexities of the whole situation.  I think most people simplified it too much (bad terrorist people blew up heros, let's be patriotic and prove that we're not to be messed with, and then forget about it a few years later).

With Bloody Sunday, Greengrass made a film in which he fully displayed how the political complexities led to a specific act of violence.  I can easily see how this movie would be more than just about how a group of passengers overtook some terrorists.

[Gamblour.]

The only complexity to this is how will they show terrorists taking over a plane with boxcutters? And were there only forty people on the plane?

I don't think there is as much complexity as you think, unless they milk some sentimental bullshit.

[hedwig]

i have no problem with movies about 9/11. i'd like to see a romantic film that takes place in the Twin Towers about two people who fall in love each other despite their socioeconomic differences. i think it would be a moving piece, especially the breathtaking climax where the two lovers jump out of the building in each other's arms and fall to their deaths in a dramatic slow-mo shot as Celine Dion's "My Heart Will Go On" swells on the soundtrack.

[matt35mm]

The only complexity to this is how will they show terrorists taking over a plane with boxcutters? And were there only forty people on the plane?

I don't think there is as much complexity as you think, unless they milk some sentimental bullshit.

I'm talking about political complexities.  Religious complexities.  Moral complexities.  What led to this moreso than just the heroic passenger stuff.  And I don't exactly understand how, as stated in your last sentence, milking sentimental bullshit would make it more complex.  OF COURSE I wasn't talking about the complexities of hijacking a plane with a boxcutter!

I just don't think that Greengrass, a British filmmaker who has proved that he has a point of view, a strong political awareness, and has a major sense of urgency to his films, signed on to make a film that's just 100 minutes of telling America how big its dick is.  In other words, I don't think this will be a blindly patriotic film, wallowing in sentiment.  I think it will provide interesting commentary on a recent event that changed the world.  I don't think this will be the simple film the teaser suggests it will be (read the article about film trailers in that thread if you don't already know that studios dumb down and change the whole idea of their movie to better sell it).  I've yet to see Greengrass settle for simple.  The Bourne Supremacy, while not necessarily all that fantastic, was not a simple or dumb movie.  And Bloody Sunday (which, in subject matter and tone, more closely matches this new film) shows a brilliance and a daring to give a hard long look at a government that fucked up.  Sound familiar to 9/11?  Sound like potentially interesting material for a movie?  I think so.  And you can't say that was easier to do because it happened so long ago, because Bloody Sunday was and is still a sore subject for both Ireland and England, and as an English filmmaker, Greengrass did not shy away from his government's part in the slayings of innocent people.  Bloody Sunday WAS a daring and relevant film, and stunningly well made.

I know that there is a great film to be made about 9/11, that should be made NOW and not when it's not important and actually relevant anymore.  It would be denying something to not make that film.  Now, is either this film or Stone's film The Great 9/11 Film?  I don't know.  I'm just saying that it's impossible to tell based on that trailer.  I do feel that these two filmmakers are good candidates in that they've each proven their ability to make great films that do not shy from true horror or political shadiness, which exist in spades with this subject matter.

[pete]

what political "complexity" did Bloody Sunday show?  It showed the Irish side of the story and ended with a U2 song.  It was really good because it used Dogme techniques to heightened the realism, but where was the relevancy in that film?  It was about half as relevant as the U2 song, and how daring was the U2 song?  How can you judge other filmmakers' "political/mora/religious" complexity when you're overglorifying the virtue of one film by one filmmaker as such?  How does that make you different from the rest of the posters who are merely "generally" reacting with the same fervor just on the opposite spectrum?  No matter how high you think your awesome horse is, it's time for you to get off it.

[Gamblour.]

The only complexity to this is how will they show terrorists taking over a plane with boxcutters? And were there only forty people on the plane?

I don't think there is as much complexity as you think, unless they milk some sentimental bullshit.

I'm talking about political complexities.  Religious complexities.  Moral complexities.  What led to this moreso than just the heroic passenger stuff.  And I don't exactly understand how, as stated in your last sentence, milking sentimental bullshit would make it more complex.  OF COURSE I wasn't talking about the complexities of hijacking a plane with a boxcutter!

See, to me, there's nothing complex about this. This whole event happened in like half an hour. Terrorists took over a plane, people tried to stop them, and it still crashed. Politically....terrorists are bad? Freedom is good? Morally...don't kill people? Maybe I'm oversimplifying it. But I honestly can't see how this can have vast ramifications interjected into such a short, tragic tale. I mean, really, how are they going to hit at anything complex, but by doing the most tasteless thing and using real aspects of these people's lives? Please, clarify how making THIS film into a movie about a government that fucked up will help or appeal to anyone. The biggest tragedy in the history United States may or may not have been its own fault, but are you going to preach or rub this in people's faces while using one of the most tragic parts of it all? I mean what the fuck.

[matt35mm]

what political "complexity" did Bloody Sunday show?  It showed the Irish side of the story and ended with a U2 song.  It was really good because it used Dogme techniques to heightened the realism, but where was the relevancy in that film?  It was about half as relevant as the U2 song, and how daring was the U2 song?  How can you judge other filmmakers' "political/mora/religious" complexity when you're overglorifying the virtue of one film by one filmmaker as such?  How does that make you different from the rest of the posters who are merely "generally" reacting with the same fervor just on the opposite spectrum?  No matter how high you think your awesome horse is, it's time for you to get off it.

You're right.  I was trying to ask everyone to give it a chance and went too far with my points.

Although I do think that Bloody Sunday was a relevant movie, because the issues at hand were still existing at the time the film was made.  The investigation of Bloody Sunday was reopened after the film was made, as I understand.  It showed the event from the Irish point of view, but Greengrass used that to show his feelings about it as an Englishman.  It was more than simply showing the event.  It had more meaning than that.  Its political complexities were in the scenes that showed what led to the British leader of the troops make his decision, and how it all went wrong.  But, you're right that I'm overusing that and that was a smaller scale accomplishment than what he'd probably be able to do with this movie.

I was equally wrong to judge the relevance of the film based on all of what I said as those who judged based on that teaser.  All I really mean to say is that I believe that there is more to that film than what the teaser suggests.

And Gamblour, I don't know if I was just unclear before, but I believe this film shows events outside of the airplane.  If the whole event happened in a half an hour, as you say, then what else is in this movie?  It's obviously not just all about this singular event.  There were accusations that the American government had some knowledge of this plot, and this movie might possibly delve into that.

But I do apologize for taking these possibilities of what the movie might be too far.  That was pretty hypocritical of me to speculate that much when I was asking everyone else to hold off on speculation until we get more substantial information of the movie.