Flight 93

[june]

Hello All,

Anyone seeing this film this weekend?

[Chris D]

Oooh, this is a tough one. Here's my take on whether this movie should be made.

1. I think we DO need a movie made about September 11th, to preserve in the film part of history the events of that day. The movie darn well better be good though--no Sunday evening TV-special quality.

2. So much of America has already forgotten what happened that day, and the events of 9/11/01 are thought of by some on the par of "yup, it happened, just like WWII did, some time way back, or that Dr. King gave an 'I have a dream' speech sometime in history." It doesn't seem applicable to many people now. This, IMHO, is a travesty. I think we as a country (world??) need to face the reality of terrorism head-on, ask ourselves the tough questions, and decide how we're going to address it day after day after day! (side note: from what I know of V for Vendetta, this is the same reason that I really want to see that movie)

3. I don't know if I'll see the movie, though. For me, I still feel the pangs of sorrow every time I think of that day.

I'll reserve judgment until it actually comes out. Of course, it's hard to rate a movie, if you don't actually see it!

[Foxman]

I caught some info about this movie on E or something like it and it made a big knott well up in my throat. I am not ready to see it, but I will concede that it's fine by me to make the movie at this point. I appreciate that the director went to every surviving family for permision.

It might be a while before I am ready to tackle this movie or anything like it.

[David Meek]

Agreed, Chris and Russ - I'm not ready. Honestly, I don't know if I ever will be. Not after struggling to deal with the events as they happened on that tragic day, and not after the sensory overload we all suffered through afterwards.

And, yes that was a good effort on the director's part to put it to the families before proceeding on the film.

[saurabh]

I think we as a country (world??) need to face the reality of terrorism head-on,

this was a very tragic incident and a lot of innocent ppl lost their lives, very unfortunate

[wkhanna]

I appreciate that the director went to every surviving family for permision.

That is a very interesting fact.
Flight 93 went down less than 50 miles from my house; its flight path nearly went directly over my home. I suppose I could appreciate that the families would see the movie as sort of memorial to their brave loved ones who were lost on that fateful day. But where will the profits go? What is the true motive and intent for the making of a film like this?

I appreciate the fact that that this event should not fade from memory, but I question whether a ‘Hollywood’ film is quite the appropriate and respectful way to go about memorializing it. Frankly, the whole idea leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

[Nick M]

The thing I don't like is that it's a "The Perfect Storm" type of film. Bits of facts are known from the phone calls, voice recorders, etc., but much of the film has to have been extrapolated. I plan to rent and take everything with a grain of salt as I did when viewing "The Perfect Storm". Most likely it will be Hollywoodized as well.

The commercial aspects don't bother me. Hell, companies were selling coins "made from the metal of Trade Towers" what, months after they were attacked? (That was in poor taste IMHO). As for "forgetting about 9/11", I think moving on is a natural part of todays fast-paced society and human nature. I have certainly taken a moment on each September 11th since the attacks to remember that horror and where I was when I heard, but it's not something I can honestly say I dwell over every day.

[Alaric]

wkhanna

100% agreement

[George Bellefontaine]

I'll pass on this one. I don't need a movie to remind me of what happened that particular day in history. Yet, as Chris says, the event should probably be preserved on film so that future generations don't forget. And it's good to know that the families were approached beforehand.

[Danbry39]

Both Ebert and Roeper gave it two big thumbs up, with Roeper calling it the best movie so far this year.

Still, I can't watch it. Still too painful. Maybe, way down the line, on video, but even that's uncertain.

[Shane Martin]

I'll go see it. The director did Bourne Supremacy so I think I will enjoy the movie and it won't insult the people who died.

[audioqueso]

Regardless if it's a good movie or not, or if their motives are sincere or greed, SOMEONE is going to take offense to this movie. And SOMEONE is going to try to sue and say something offended them, blah, blah, blah. It's America. It's inevitable.

There are a lot of people that were affected by 9/11, myself included, and it would be nice to have a good gesture made from the events. I would appreciate it. But I think people need to also learn that it happened, and nothing can change that. It was 5 years ago, and I believe the rest of the world has the right to bring it up without fearing an attack from American for doing a movie like that. We can't change the past, so no one should still complain and point fingers. But we can learn from the past, and make changes to prevent it. It may be a movie with more motives for money. Or it can be a tool to protest and speak out against terrorism. I hope for the latter choice.

I would definitely go see this movie, and at first take is for what it is: a movie. If it does justice, then more praise for the team that made this movie.

[tech_table]

Has it been released yet ?

[Chris D]

I think it comes out this Friday.

Nick, I was thinking about what you said today. I agree, that I do NOT want anybody "dwelling" or "brooding" about 9/11. Nor do I want anybody living in fear of that kind of thing--that exact reason is why I do the profession that I do--so that others can live without fear. However, I believe that we simply can NOT turn a blind eye to terrorism, nor file 9/11 away as a historical event yet. In our current age, that is a topic that is real and present, and must be dealt with, one way or another. To do otherwise, I think, would be the equivalent of putting Pearl Harbor behind us and moving on, in 1944, at a time when it was very real and relevant.

As always, IMHO. You and I always have some great differing views on things that challenge the way I think.

[saurabh]

Well as I see it, its all about BAD policies and politics, remember Russian occupation of Afganistan and US funding the Guerilla's with arms and ammo against russia, remember formation of the taliban regime, remember pakistans tieups with taliban, remember spreading of terrorism around the world and remember the world powers not doing anything about it, till their house is set on fire.

And innocent ppl loose their lives, due to our politicians.

Do I need to say more!!!

[Shane Martin]

It doesn't matter how you see it, it's how it's presented. There are plenty of movies that don't need to include their political spin on things but do anyway. It's also whether or not you agree with the spin.

Rarely but it does happen that we get a movie that is "middle of the road" on either side of the issue at hand.

Currently it's at 88% on Rotten Tomatoes. That means that it is more than likely a great movie to go see.

[Chris D]

Yeah, it started at 93% and is dropping a bit, but still great ratings.

[wkhanna]

saurabh,
I feel compelled to add another issue to your list.
Had the big players in world politics and economics put less than 1/20th the effort into resolving the Israeli / Palestine conflict over the past 25 years as they do now in one year of antiterrorism policies, 911 would never have happened. But this area of the world previously held no economic resource or strategic advantage, therefore, got less attention, despite the human suffering incurred on both sides. Denying basic human rights to any group or region over a period of time will always be a catalyst for revolt. And there will always be those that will manipulate a small percentage of the disgruntled masses to fanatical beliefs and actions.

IMHO, the best methods for fighting terrorism are fighting for basic human rights throughout the world, and promoting and defending policy that support ideals as simple as clean water, education, and property rights.

As far as this movie is concerned, as Nick put it, docu-drama lends nothing more than the opportunity for a propagandized style of patriotism to an issue deserving far more truth to its telling.

[sikoniko]

10% of the profits go to a memorial fund.

[Chris D]

wkhanna/saraubh: I'd be very careful on two issues:

1. I've heard more than one review of this movie that says that this movie does an amazing job of NOT pushing any agenda. You ARE right, though, that it treads on dangerous ground there.

2. I will never understand how anyone can make (or continue to make) the point that WE CAUSED 9/11 to happen due to our policies, not paying enough attention and affection to any group of people, etc. If country X pays more attention to a country that is anti-American, say Iran, than it does to the US, let's say that it even pays money to anti-US organizations. Let's even go WAY overboard and say that Country X funds, supplies, encourages, and supports groups that kill Americans, targets our economy, poisons our food, and attacks our very way of life.

Regardless of how bad Country X is, would that provide at ALL, in the SLIGHTEST, any justification for us taking over civilian airliners from Country X, killing civilians, and crashing them into the biggest heart of the civilian population of Country X, completely bypassing any military or strategic targets of Country X?

Could you say at ALL, that "Country X should not be surprised that we committed such a heinous act"?

Could you say that, "if Country X put less than 1/20th the effort towards being nice to us, than they spend paying attention to Iran, that we would not have had to commit terrorism"?

I really don't understand how you would believe that Osama Bin Laden, who has it as his life goal to eradicate America and Israel from the planet, who hides in high mountain caves eating dirt, would stop killing civilians and reduce his terrorism if we were to promise him ideals like clean water, education, and property rights.

The death of innocents goes way, way, way beyond smaller issues like that, however important they still might be. How can you compare life to that? How does that explain the death of civilians?

[brac]

First, I'm not ready to relive that day. I don't want to sit in a theater and cry either, I will see it when it hits DVD not because I'm ready but because God help us if we forget what happen, or even if we only remember it in a text book way.

Next I can't even go in to what I think of people that think we "The USA" brought this on our selves, that is just asinine.

And as far as bringing peace to Israel and Palestine in the space of 25 years. (Not to mention Israel and Iran) Get a clue these people have been killing each other for over 2000 years nothing we could do will bring peace between those countries.

And finally God Bless Our Military for keeping the fight on their soil and not ours.

[Nick M]

I believe that we simply can NOT turn a blind eye to terrorism, nor file 9/11 away as a historical event yet. In our current age, that is a topic that is real and present, and must be dealt with, one way or another.

I couldn't agree more. However, ignoring/denying any responsibility when our influence in the world is so large is being short-sighted. We've played both ends against the middle for so long that we've basically pissed everyone off who doesn't continue to recive money from us. As saurabh pointed out, we have been playing politics in many of these countries for a long time.
Here is Rumsfeld (working for Reagan) shaking hands with Saddam back when we were supplying them with weapons, supplies, intelligence, etc in our fight against Iran.



Similar funding went to Osama and the Mujahedeen for their resistance against Soviet occupation (via Carter & Reagan) in Afghanistan. Clinton and Bush Jr. were no better given their courting of the Taleban regarding the Unocal pipeline. I believe the Taliban even came to the US and were given tours! Over the past 50yrs we have pumped close to US$100Bn into Israel which Palestinians see primarily as weapons. Pakistani's see us supplying nuclear material/technology to India now with Bush's recent nuclear trade agreement.

It's not like one day a bunch of poor muslims led by extremeists got up and decided to attack a country on the other side of the planet that had no dealings in the area. Maintaining the living standards and rate of resource consumption we enjoy isn't supported by olive branches. That said, I hope we squash 'em, but reducing our reliance on oil is a must. Personally, I wish we would simply pull out - have gas go to $20/gal over the next decade, and deal with our addiction. I feel terrible for all the guys/gals who were marched into that mess without an exit strategy. I also feel terrible for our grandkids who will feel the effects of US$9T worth of debt to foreign nations like China and the consequences those debts bring. As for Bin Laden/Saddam hiding in holes and not running to the front lines with Kalashnikov in hand - I doubt we will see Bush heading out to Fallujah with an M16 any time soon. I'd bet if leaders had to lead the charge those planes wouldn't have flown into the towers, and we wouldn't be in Iraq/Afghanistan/etc. Today Canada banned the media from showing soldiers returning home in caskets, and the practice of flying the flag at half-mast for fallen soldiers has been repealed.

Personally I think that if we wiped out every terrorist on the planet we would still have the same conditions that spawned the guys we're duking it out with now. It's like trying to wash your hands with dirty water.
-----
Films like this usually end up slanted left or right as Shane mentioned. Whether it's liberals portraying pre-war Iraq as peaceful with kids playing and bambi frolicking, or conservatives portraying post-war Afghanistan as the new land of the free.

[wkhanna]

Chris

With all due respect, I was being careful. Very careful.

On issue 1., we have no debate. I have not seen the movie, and can not render an opinion.

On issue 2., I was careful not put blame on any single country, party, or specific policy. I was attempting voice the opinion that terrorist organizations in general, and Osama in particular, could not even exist in the first place if world leaders put more effort into promoting human rights as opposed to control of energy resources and corporate profits. But by doing so, they create regions of disproportionate wealth and poverty. This in turn creates an environment rich with the catalyst that spawns the hopelessness necessary to feed terrorist philosophy and participation.

I certainly would never purport a rational negotiation with a terrorist, let alone think offering someone like Osama a clean glass of water would in any way change his mind or cause him to lay down his arms. The guy is a sociopath. But working through a visible and sincere policy that is focused towards creating hope and basic resources that will provide for their families would go far to eliminate participation by those who make up the ranks of terrorist armies.

I would surely hope you agree that things like clean drinking water, access to minimal health care, and the ability to own the land that you use to produce the food that feeds your children are not small issues.

I in no uncertain terms would ever attempt to justify the killing on innocent people to advance any doctrine regardless of its intent, whether altruistic or otherwise. Yet governments have, do and will always justify ‘collateral damage’ as necessary to defend their agenda.

I do, in fact believe we have beliefs more in common than you might expect. As an engineer, I have had the opportunity to work on and design such things as the computers used by the USAF and State Dept., circuit breakers used by the US Navy (the USS Cole had breakers from the manufacturing line where my responsibility was as Quality Engineer), the Hellfire missile, the Patriot anti-missile system, the first generation of the Apache helicopter pilot ballistic shield and numerous other military aircraft windshields, the glass in presidential limousines and some of the components for the B1 Bomber. In my younger and somewhat more idealistic years, I justified the moral conflict of my contribution to the national military defense industry by knowing that if I didn’t do the job, someone else would. So I did it to the utmost best of my ability, fully realizing that the fate of my fellow countrymen’s lives would ultimately depend on my capabilities. I felt I was able to fulfill this task better than most, and have no regret, despite my pacifistic value set.

So just as you work to defend us, I have worked to defend you, and provide you with best tools I possibly could to get your job done, and with a tiny bit of luck, see that that you get back home to enjoy the little things in life, like dinner with your family, and watching your children grow, hopefully happy and healthy. Are the little things in life really that small?.

Real security will come from building a foundation for improving the human condition, not fences.


sikoniko “10% of the profits go to a memorial fund”

???? ……..and a senator has just purposed cutting the federal money appropriated for the building of the memorial for Flight 93 in Shanksville, PA. A few measly million (by federal budget standards), in order to help curb the current deficit?!?!?!?!!

[Vince Helm]

yes we should all go.

Hello All,

Anyone seeing this film this weekend?

I will see the film for the reminder of 9/11 and because they died for our freedom. They did not die in an attempt to save their lives, but rather to save ours. I think we all should take a deep breath, swallow the lump in our throats and out of respect for their efforts... go see the movie. How many of you would charge the bad guys? How many of you would just sit and hope for the best? Sometimes life requires courage. Go see the movie!

Thanks
Vince

[saurabh]

I couldn't agree more. However, ignoring/denying any responsibility when our influence in the world is so large is being short-sighted. We've played both ends against the middle for so long that we've basically pissed everyone off who doesn't continue to recive money from us. As saurabh pointed out, we have been playing politics in many of these countries for a long time.

Similar funding went to Osama and the Mujahedeen for their resistance against Soviet occupation (via Carter & Reagan) in Afghanistan. Clinton and Bush Jr. were no better given their courting of the Taleban regarding the Unocal pipeline. I believe the Taliban even came to the US and were given tours! Over the past 50yrs we have pumped close to US$100Bn into Israel which Palestinians see primarily as weapons. Pakistani's see us supplying nuclear material/technology to India now with Bush's recent nuclear trade agreement.

It's not like one day a bunch of poor muslims led by extremeists got up and decided to attack a country on the other side of the planet that had no dealings in the area. Maintaining the living standards and rate of resource consumption we enjoy isn't supported by olive branches. That said, I hope we squash 'em, but reducing our reliance on oil is a must. Personally, I wish we would simply pull out - have gas go to $20/gal over the next decade, and deal with our addiction. I feel terrible for all the guys/gals who were marched into that mess without an exit strategy. I also feel terrible for our grandkids who will feel the effects of US$9T worth of debt to foreign nations like China and the consequences those debts bring. As for Bin Laden/Saddam hiding in holes and not running to the front lines with Kalashnikov in hand - I doubt we will see Bush heading out to Fallujah with an M16 any time soon. I'd bet if leaders had to lead the charge those planes wouldn't have flown into the towers, and we wouldn't be in Iraq/Afghanistan/etc. Today Canada banned the media from showing soldiers returning home in caskets, and the practice of flying the flag at half-mast for fallen soldiers has been repealed.

Personally I think that if we wiped out every terrorist on the planet we would still have the same conditions that spawned the guys we're duking it out with now. It's like trying to wash your hands with dirty water.

I totally agree with Nic and I am not saying that US did it knowingly or delibrately but inorder to emerge the NO 1 power then (vs Russia) they funded these terrorists, who later turned against US.

[wkhanna]

Didn’t anyone see this film yet?!!?

Bob Mondello, one of the few critics I seldom disagree with, gave it a very positive review, which I heard on Friday. This, despite going into the film with the same trepidation for the exact same reasons we have all expressed here. He specifically noted that the opportunity to take advantage of inferred hero-making from extrapolating footage for undocumented events was NOT to be found in this film.

[Chris D]

Good to hear, wkhanna! :T

Good for us to get back to talking about the actual film, too. Sorry for getting off track there. I'll just end my part by saying, yes, I can absolutely understand that sentiment, resentment, hatred, etc, has been stirred up by American (and others!) politics over the years. That does not translate in the slightest to any sort of understanding, justification, or anything of terrorist actions and civilian murder. They are totally separate and any attempt to correlate the two only gives support to the terror.

I'm sure I'll see this movie sometime in my life, and I agree with the premise. Just not sure if I'm going to see it right now. In that sense, I feel pretty much the same way about Schindler's List--I think every person in the world should see that movie, but it's not one that I think I ever want to see again.

[Chris D]

Well, that's interesting... I was just watching TV, and right before Battlestar Galactica came on, the Universal HD channel had a preview ad for Flight 93. I found myself crying, just watching the ad.

This is tough. If I go see it, I'll be forcing myself to. I might need to wait 6-12 + months, although I'm not sure I'll really ever be ready.

[George Bellefontaine]

Larry King spoke very highly of this film. I was a bit surprised that he would be one of the first to see it. When he asked Paula Zahn if she planned to see it, there was a long pause before she said she would eventually see it. Got a feeling she is in no hurry.

[wkhanna]

Good to hear, wkhanna! :T

Good for us to get back to talking about the actual film, too. Sorry for getting off track there.

With only the utmost respect for your feelings and opinion, Agreed!
I too, apologize for going off tangent, but this issue is such a major and emotionally charged one, that it gets the best of all of us at times.
And BTW, congrats on passing your latest flight-testing!

[Chris D]

Wow... I finally saw this film. I'm not sure I ever would have intentionally rented it to watch, but it just came on HBO here in my hotel room, so I figured I should watch it while I could.

I give it a full :5: out of :5: As I mentioned above, I was very hesitant to see this film, and one of the biggest reasons was that the dramatized portions of this non-fiction story made it dangerously susceptible to politics, propaganda, etc. However, I found it to be one of the most neutrally done films of its type I've ever seen. Nobody can deny the animalistic brutality of the hijackers that day. The world watched while those planes were driven straight into civilian targets, slaughtering their victims. It's quite impossible to deny the events of the day.

Everything was portrayed just as events that happened, without commentary, or being placed in any "light". There was no music, lighting, or special effects to demonize a certain person. No dramatic slow-motion shots with violins to make you feel sorry for anyone or put somebody in a hero light. Perhaps my only critique is some less-than-stellar acting by a couple people, but I was amazed to see in the final credits that a lot of the real-life people involved played themselves. There were no famous actors, either, to detract from the film.

I'm glad this one was made, to document the events of the day as we best know what happened. Like "Schindler's List", it's not an easy watch, but something I think everybody should see sometime in their lives, especially future generations who may hear and think about 9/11 as some abstract event that happened, that can be explained away with thoughts that "well, it wasn't that bad", or "those things couldn't have really happened... it must have been an accident/mistake/whatever by the hijackers." But also like Schindler's List, I don't know if I ever want to see it again. I was openly crying by the end of the film, vividly remembering that day.

Wait, wait, wait... just to clarify, I realized that I watched the film UNITED 93, which is actually a different movie than FLIGHT 93, although they're obviously about the same subject. I couldn't say what the difference is, in the movies. I just know that I enjoyed "United 93".

[WillyD]

Wait, wait, wait... just to clarify, I realized that I watched the film UNITED 93, which is actually a different movie than FLIGHT 93, although they're obviously about the same subject. I couldn't say what the difference is, in the movies. I just know that I enjoyed "United 93".

Ok, wait..are we talking about the made-for-TV movie or the box office movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475276/

Because that one also goes by the name Flight 93.

And I too was unsure about this movie for most/all the reasons previously mentioned, but I thought it was fantastic. What I enjoyed most about it is how it put you, the viewer, directly in the middle of the action. I felt like I was on the plane going down with the other passengers, you know? It had that feel to it.

[Chris D]

Willy, you're right, your imdb link is the one I just saw, "United 93".

I see all sorts of movies and "made-for-TV movies" out there about 9/11. It's tough to distinguish one from the other. I see:
United 93
Flight 93 (different from the one above, and a TV-movie)
The Flight that Fought Back
Let's Roll: The Story of Flight 93
Portrait of Courage: The Untold Story of Flight 93
World Trade Center
Fahrenheit 9/11
Fahrenhype 9/11
9/11
The Path to 9/11
Sorry, Haters (Untitled Post-9/11 Cab Drama)
9/11: The Falling Man
DC 9/11: Time of Crisis
National Geographic: Inside 9/11
9/11 Momorial from Ground Zero
9/11: The Twin Towers


... and many others

[bigburner]

In October 2006 the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University published a study claiming that approximately 600,000 Iraqis have been killed in the violence that began with the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

The majority of these people were civilians – not soldiers, insurgents or terrorists.

On 9/11 approximately 3,000 civilians were killed. Whilst undoubtedly this was a dastardly crime, this death toll pales into insignificance when you consider that 3,000 civilians have died on average every 6 days since the invasion of Iraq.

No weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. No connections to Al Qaeda have been uncovered. These fellow citizens of Planet Earth were basically victims of a huge lie. Some people would therefore consider that this massive loss of civilian life is an even more dastardly crime than 9/11.

I wonder how many of us would think twice about going to see a Hollywood movie about the invasion of Iraq? I probably wouldn’t. Perhaps I should?

Nigel.

PS You can find the John Hopkins report here: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/images/1...ost.of.war.pdf. Are the figures accurate? Judge for yourselves.

[Chris D]

I realize it's tough to talk about films like these without getting into politics associated with the events, but perhaps its best that we talk just about the movies themselves.

I will say, though, that I do think that films capturing major historical world events are appropriate and important, as long as they are as accurate as possible. That goes whether it's the Iraq war, Afghanistan war, Balkans, WWII, WWI, the Holocaust, major moments in sports, major political events, slavery, or whatever. We as humans have to face the reality of the things we do, and those that have happened, whether we like them or not, and whether they were the right thing to happen, or our biggest faults.

[Chris D]

I realize it's tough to talk about films like these without getting into politics associated with the events, but perhaps its best that we talk just about the movies themselves.

I will say, though, (neutrally) that I do think that films capturing major historical world events are appropriate and important, as long as they are as accurate as possible. That goes whether it's the Iraq war, Afghanistan war, Balkans, WWII, WWI, the Holocaust, major moments in sports, major political events, slavery, or whatever. We as humans have to face the reality of the things we do, and those that have happened, whether we like them or not, and whether they were the right thing to happen, or our biggest faults.