How We Rated This Film TC Candler - A- Richard Propes - B+ Jacob Hall - A+

TC Candler's Comment

This film is handled with respect and dignity.  Technically, I have nothing even remotely worth complaining about.  I do have a few issues with the entire concept -- it is essentially a recreation of an event without a point of view.  It doesn't feel like a filmed story so much as it feels like a visualization of something I am very familiar with.  I would feel the same way about a film documenting the final 90-minutes of JFK's life, fading to black as the bullet entered his brain.

This film serves as a nice memorial to the victims.  The possible factual inaccuracies are worrisome, but "United 93" never feels exploitative or emotionally manipulative.  It is a reminder and a historical context of the timeline from that horrific morning.

It is a brave project... a sad film... tremendously executed -- but it feels just a little redundant in and amongst the vast sea of information from that fateful day.

Richard Propes' Comment

Rage.

No, wait. Grief.

Or is it sadness?

I'm sitting here at my computer attempting to find the word to describe my feelings a mere one hour after having viewed Paul Greengrass' "United 93."

I think, maybe, I've found the perfect word.

Numb.

I am numb throughout my body. I am numb emotionally. I may even feel numb spiritually. I seldom ask this question, but the question keeps entering my mind "What kind of a God allows such things to happen?"

The truth is I don't know.

Have I ever, even for a single moment, experienced such blind faith that I would willingly take the lives of innocent people truly believing it to be God's will?

Have I ever, even for a single moment, been so afraid for my life, so intent on that primal urge for survival that I would fight back with a "kill or be killed" philosophy?

Have I ever, even for a single moment, fathomed events such as those on 9/11? Or for that matter events such as those in Sudan currently? Iraq currently? In many other nations of the world currently?

The answer to all of these questions is "No."

Paul Greengrass doesn't, however, approach a philosophical or spiritual or ideological interpretation of the events of 9/11, most specifically those involving United Flight 93. This film isn't about humanizing the victims of or the perpetrators of the events on September 11, 2001. That is, perhaps, what makes the film so much more horrifying. These were ordinary, anonymous human beings on September 11, 2001 who only became humanized at the cost of their lives. We are sitting there, watching the events unfold and, inevitably, remembering our own experiences watching the day's events transpire. Greengrass, incredibly wisely, doesn't utilize familiar faces in "United 93," choosing to give the audience nothing familiar other than the knowledge of this story's tragic ending.

The story of "United 93" is already deeply within the American conscience. In the wrong hands, this film could have been a crass, commercialized and dramatized film that felt manipulative and falsely patriotic. To his credit, Greengrass avoids the many potential pitfalls of tackling this story and, instead, takes an almost documentary style approach to the events of the day.

The film, if I were to compare it to any other film, would be most similar to Gus Van Sant's under-rated "Elephant." In "Elephant," Van Sant took a calm, methodical and remarkably subdued approach to share his own interpretation of the Columbine killings. Van Sant knew that the story itself was already so deeply within the American conscience that he need not do anything other than show up, observe and present the events "as is." Similarly, Greengrass doesn't develop characters, storylines, points of conflict, or unnecessarily histrionic conversations. Greengrass attempts to take the facts, as known, and presents them in a straightforward, almost subdued manner. While the "Let's Roll" line is presented here, it is presented matter-of-factly and without pretense.

There are no individual heroes in "United 93," and there are also no demons. Greengrass doesn't pass judgment on those who hijacked the planes, but instead chooses to also present them as nervous, scared, hesitant and, in one instance, even capable of saying "I love you"...something, I suppose, we cannot fathom a terrorist doing.

Greengrass is also, in moderate ways, not hesitant to point fingers at the systems that failed on September 11th...most notably, pointing out the difficulty in reaching the vice-president and the challenge of getting cooperation between national agencies during such an unimagined crisis.

In "United 93," Greengrass brings us back to the power of his film "Bloody Sunday," which offered a similar tone, camera style and script to "United 93." While the shaky camera style of Greengrass's more commercial "Bourne Supremacy" remains, it fits perfectly with the rest of this film.

As a critic, reviewing a film such as "United 93" is a tremendous challenge. How can one balance the incredible importance of this film while also acknowledging, in fact, that it is not the perfect film that we desperately, emotionally need it to be? How can one possibly separate the inevitable rage and tears and numbness that accompanies this film? How can a film such as "United 93" truly be evaluated from a critical perspective?

"United 93" is the perfect film about United Flight 93. It is a perfect first cinematic step into picking off the scabs that hide our wounds and talking, venting, feeling, expressing and allowing ourselves to experience what we need to experience in moving away from our numbness, learning our lessons and taking baby steps towards some semblance of humanity again.

I can't use the word "healing." I simply can't. There are certain life experiences from which "healing" seems such a shallow word. 9/11 is just such an experience.

"United 93" includes several cast members who are not actors, but were, indeed, players in the events that unfolded on 9/11. They include several FAA personnel, including Chief Ben Sliney, and an actual United Flight Attendant who was on a different plane in the air that day. This adds a stark reality to the proceedings, but is not always cinematically effective. While interviews have indicated the experience to be cathartic for these film participants, it also explains the overwhelming feeling that, at times, these individuals (most notably Sliney) were going through the lines and the actions of the day, but would not and could not surrender themselves emotionally. At times, this gave the action onscreen a detached feeling that it is hard to imagine truly existed.

Additionally, I found myself a tad troubled by the dramatic license Greengrass took during the film's ending. While much of the action is based upon transcripts, phone calls and research, it is not known what truly happened in those closing moments. Did the passengers breach the cockpit? Did they ever gain control of the plane? Did they actually kill a terrorist or two? Quite simply, it is not known. Greengrass's final moments seem, subtly, like a bit of "rah rah" patriotism designed to derive at least a small sense of victory out of a tremendous tragedy. It is one of the very few moments in the film that feels contrived and manipulative.

These are, however, minor quibbles for one of 2006's most important films. "United 93," despite a few minor critical flaws, is the perfect film to allow, possibly, America to start breathing again and, perhaps, allow the rest of the world to start breathing again, as well.