I don't have any geo-political theories as to why they should or shouldn't do this...but I guess these movies are for Middle America who didn't know anyone who could have possibly been in the planes, towers, or Pentagon. If it affected you, you probably don't want to see it. There are people, however, who will.

Best Friend Munchkin died about two years ago...and already a movie's been made about it. I'm probably less upset about it than her parents are, but I'm probably more upset than a random acquaintance or casual friend would be. This might not make sense but this is what I'm thinking.

She is not representative of the West Coast. Trust me. lol

Most people I've met get upset about it whenever they're confronted with it and some say it's gotten better with time just like most tragic incidents.

-Rudey

Premier was tonite @ The Tribeca Film Festival

It's strange to see an entertainment reporter for the local news at the theatre reporting on the movie of such a horrific event. Those family members interviewed that saw it tonight seem to agree that the movie needed to be made to keep the legacy of their loved ones alive.

I think it would just be too much to see. And yet a small part of me wants to see it.

The Film Festival was founded to bring back attention/money/etc downtown after 9-11 so it was fitting this movie opened the festival tonight.

I saw United 93 tonight. (I am a movie reviewer by day, serial dater and party girl and novelist by night, lol)

WOW.

Incredibly intense and moving and heartbreaking and inpriring film. Very well done. VERY well done. Not Hollywoodized at all. I sobbed through it due to various personal connections I have to the WTC attacks on 9/11. When it started, I panicked and was pretty sure I would not be able to sit through it. I was actually nauseous.

The film was so interesting and fascinating and well... maybe a bit like a trainwreck. Like in the aftermath of 9/11, the start of the war with Iraq, and Hurricane Katrina--when you know you should just turn CNN off already and get on with life but just can't...

I applaud the filmmakers of United 93. It is an unflinching look at the events of that day that highlights the ineptitude of our government, FAA and military (without being heavy handed political at all) and showcases the incredible acts of bravery and love the passengers on United flight 93 undertook.

And here is a bizarre thing--I kind of want to see this movie again.

What?? That is truely pathetic if the directors of this movie interjected their opinions and biases when creating this movie. It shouldn't be political at all, and if it is, then I would say it is a pretty damned Hollywoodized movie. The focus should be on the people in the plane, not the ineptitude of certain organizations. Furthermore, I really don't see how you can call the FAA, government, and especially the military inept when discussing the events that occurred that day.

First, she never said the directors interjected their opinion or biases.

Second, it is not for anyone else to start telling another person that they can't feel that the government agencies were inept on that day. It's her opinion, if you disagree, fine. End of discussion.

amycat412, I personally agree with you. I think they were slightly inept on that day. I feel they could have done some things a bit differently, but hindsight is 20/20.

Bias is inherent in anything and everything. There would be no way to make any film, novel, news story or piece of art and keep any personal bias out of it.

I think it was too soon to make this movie, but given the turnout of the decedents' family members, it wasn't too soon (or it was a tool to help them move on from their grief).

FAA and NorAD were asleep that day

SEE the movie and THEN argue with me, OK? lol

They did NOT put a lot of personal biases in. They simply reported what happened and Bush was NOT REACHABLE that day. FACT is the miliatary did not even KNOW United 93 was hijacked until 4 minutes AFTER it crashed. FACT is FAA spent a chunk of time focusining on a Delta flight that was not hijacked, whose pilot repeatedly told them it was not a hijack and did not focus so much on United 93. FACT is no one in the government was avail to give the miliatry the permission to engage.

FACT is WE, as a nation, were grossly underprepared for such an attack.

That is not personal bias of either the filmmakers or me. that is FACT.

Even the writers of the 9/11 Commission Report admit that the various federal agencies were NOT prepared for this sort of thing, and they were just as stunned as any civilian.

But, you probably didn't read that either.

I want to see which real critic can deflect the extreme emotional pressure involved in a film like this and write a bad review. I think the only way to do so is to still say that the events are so tragic that no movie could ever capture them well. The only bad reviews on rotten tomatoes will probably come from a tiny set of critics that nobody takes seriously and the big name commercial critics will definitely fall in line like they did with Brokeback Mountain.

I personally don't think I can see the movie. I felt awful enough in Million Dollar Baby so I can only imagine what this is like.

-Rudey

I was merely stating that if the directors put in their own opinions into the movie then it would be upsetting. I wasn't trying to attack amycat in any way. Her original post made it seem like she left the movie with that impression. Didn't realize that is what she personally felt.

Do I think we might have been unprepared for such a massive operation? Probobly so. Do I think that these various organizations were inept? No. Interesting that you comment on the FACT that the military didn't know that the plane was hijacked until 4 minutes after it crashed. I have never heard this from anywhere. I would think they would have considering the phone calls that were made and the fact that there were F-14's in the air at the time of the crash.

Munchkin, yes, I have read and watched just about everything that has been made available.

Some of you people scare me. Seriously.

Are you kidding me? Is this not a Hollywood production? Last time I checked I'm pretty sure Hollywood was the ENTERTAINMENT capital not the history lesson capital of the world. As I recall, no one survived that crash so we dont know first hand what happened. What they are showing in this movie is purely assumptions and circumstantial facts so please dont undermine anyone's intelligence by saying its a history lesson. Its entertainment which has been based on actual facts that have been recreated for entertainment purposes and to make a buck, why else do you think they've only donated 10% of the first weekend's earnings?? They didnt even have the decency to donate at least 10% of all earnings!

Furthermore it really ticks me off that just because someone can actually see the difference between history lesson and entertainment, they immediately have no heart or hate the US. What type of logic is that??? I'm willing to put money down that no real history teacher/professor will ever use this movie in their classroom.

While I wouldn't say that someone hates the US......I sort of agree that the word "entertainment" doesn't come to mind when considering seeing this movie. I see movies like Anchorman and Oceans 12 to be entertained. Personally, if someone went and saw it and told me, "yeah it was good, very entertaining..." I'd probobly give them a pretty odd look.