The Controversy over 'United 93'.

Interesting point logboy, I'm still not undecided on the film, although seeing that last trailer proved to be a very uncomfortable experience for me (especially the way the trailer built up with "normal" events at the beginning) so I assume the actual film itself will be even more uncomfortable, and therefore, I'm most likely going to give it a miss, at least for a while.

Well the Studios seems to think its safe to cash in on the events of 9/11. Sure there will be a lot of pissed of people who are disgusted, this will then cause controversy and we the public will want to know what its all about, and so go and see it,I think they call it the "Watercooler effect" putting cash in the studios pockets and therefore justifying the decision to release the film, no doubt citing a "cathartic need" etc.....Maybe they should make it a double bill with Paradise Now if they really want to stir something up?
MAybe I'm just being cynical, but if this studio doesn't release something, another will. If people are going to be so upset by the film they should boycott the film, but the "Rubberneck effect" will kick in no doubt...

the regal cinema chain is running a theater ad on the making of the film featuring family members of the plane passengers endorsing the film. i heard they worked at getting approval for the film from all the families involved. the ad also showed the fund that you can donate for the united 93 memorial. the studio is definitely stepping carefully in the promotion of the film.
personally, i think that pretty much everyone's going to be crying during this film even from the beginning - i can't not imagine the same for me. watching the trailer brings back the memories of 9/11. i do feel that telling the story now is alright. it doesn't feel exploitive. i admired greengrass' work with bloody sunday - another tragic event in history, and i think his decisions like casting unknowns is an indication of the respect he has for the material. i am looking forward to the film.

I have to say that making a film about World War II while it is going on doesn't seem the same to me. I mean, making any film during WWII that is set in present time will basicly make it a WWII film by default.

I think this would be more comparible to a film that was made a few years after WWII, in a "you all remember how horrible it was, now if you pay us money we'll let you see it again Hollywood style" kind of way.

It's different from WWII or vietnam movies in the fact that it's made such a short time after the events and also the real event involved such a small number of people compared to the war.
I would say give it a decate at least before you start making movies about it. People are making films about the Gulf War now and that doesn't seem to be affecting anyone. This new Iraq war is already spawning films for that matter.

I saw this trailer before Inside Man, and my instant reaction was "oh no". The bottom line here is no doubt the all-mighty dollar. Making money on a tragedy is nothing new in Hollywood. I can also see this turning into some sort of rallying point for the misguided war being waged in the Middle East. Both disgust me.

However, this film taps into the very real curiosity of what happened on that flight. Obviously there the phone calls and the audio tapes, but none of them draw a clear picture of what happened. My guess is that Flight 93 will cross a line (for me) in fictionalizing the real events. Because we don't really know what happened, this film will become the testimony: perpetuating our desire to have heroes and demons, us and them, black and white.

Not a chance in hell I'm going to watch this. I remember the day all too well and I don't need to have it retold with more melodrama and more lies.

I don't believe for a second that this plane went down on its own. It's the one conspiracy theory, of all political ones, that I really believe. The 9/11 Commission's conclusions don't make a bit of sense and it was fairly clear what went down almost immediately after the actual events took place. I remember CNN coming *this* close to saying the government shot it down on that very day. The reports, the timelines, the evidence... none of it leads me to believe this plane hit the ground whole. And, you know, I'm not really sure I'd have a problem with that knowledge.

But ultimately, I can't imagine why I'd want to pay money to be manipulated by a melodramatic repackaging of a recent tragedy, not to mention one filled with lies. The trailer itself already reveals fabrications and logical inconsistencies. So, no thank you.

The WW2 comparison is a bit misleading, as the governments of every country involved had an active role in making sure what films got made and what was allowed to hit the screen. It was a far difficult getting films off the ground at all in those days, as there were no "independant" studios as such. Pre-censorship of scripts was also a standard practice in the UK, for example, until the 60s. Filmmakers have a lot more leaway to put their own spin on current events in today's climate.

This movie is, without a doubt, pure propaganda. Remember DC 9/11: TIME OF CRISIS? If you haven't seen it, you should - because this is the same sort of thing - an attempt to impart historical legitimacy on the "official account" of a historical event at a point where there are still many valid questions surrounding that event. Call it propaganda for short. As to the artistic merits of this piece of propaganda, it's "from the director of THE BOURNE SUPREMACY". I don't remember anything about BOURNE SUPREMACY, which I suppose may be a good thing, except that the camera seemed to be strapped to a paint mixer during the fights. I look forward to an inept presentation of some questionable information, presented as verifiable fact. To sum up, f*** this s***. Don't believe the hype.

Well, personally i don't care if they make it into a movie. I'm looking forward to it very much in fact. I enjoy the shaky-cam style of filming they have utilized here. We all lived through that disaster, and it is in the past. Nothing can change what has happened to our country, and going on wild goose chases in the middle east isn't the answer either. This film will be a breath of fresh air I think. To re-live the events of 9-11 would mean going back in time and being there as those planes collided with the towers. To make a movie about this event is certainly to cash in on the fears of people, and remind us why we need to go to war and kill people. Perhaps it isn't the reason at all, but it seems to me that since the korean war the united states has been killing someone somewhere in the world non-stop.

As for this film which looks to be a tasty bit of propaganda, i couldnt be more excited. I could care less about freedom, and patriotism, and homeland security, or new york for that matter. ive been there numerous times and it will always be a dump filled with jerks. Am i sad that people died? Sure i am, I lost a relative to asphixiation from all the dust of the collapse. Apart from the controversial nature of this film, i think as americans (very broad statement that one) we need to see this film, and then complain about it for a long time and rail on about the injustices of the government, and the bush administration, then in a week or so forget we saw it and go back to doing sweet eff all like we always do.

The United States was a wonderful country to live in years ago, but since we got janked it's gone downhill. No one does anything about it and we all continue our daily lives because we have nothing better to do. Oh yeah, and to the rest of the world we're a bunch of pricks. That sucks, I remember when it was easy to get some european chick to go home with you when you went overseas, but now all they do is tell you how terrible your country is and refuse to relinquish ownership of the secks. So i guess the main point of this whole rant is this: ever since we got janked by (insert forces of evil here) we have become jerks, and the world hates us for it. Not to mention we are ruining students who study abroad chances of getting laid. That is the true crime here.

i agree that all this is about is $.

but it reminds of 9/11 -- the actual day -- and i was amazed -- still am -- at how quickly the media had framed and packaged the day's events even as they transpired. i think most americans' natural reaction would be a mix of horror, crying and screaming "WTF is going on?" and yet within hours the media has framed the whole thing for us and by dinner time the Pentagon was drawing up war plans.

i don't know what i believe -- conspiracy theory or what -- but i just resent the media handing me reality.

I would only be okay with this is they announce all the money to produce it was donated and all the money it makes will be donated to the 9/11 funds. The idea of anyone making money off this makes me sick.

Awww glenn, you're right. America is cool, and the media is honest and truthful. In no way do they prey on our fears. God bless America Amen.

OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG THE JEWS DID IT, AND THERE WERE BOMBS IN THE BUILDINGS AND DON'T YOU GUYS READ THE VERY SCIENTIFIC AND OBJECTIVE WEBSITE WHATREALLYHAPPENED.COM????!!!!???

Poking fun at the tin-foilers aside, I don't see anything wrong in this movie. For some people, it may be too soon. For others, there will never be an appropriate time to make a film. I'd like to see a portion of the proceeds being donated to the victims of 9/11 or something like that.

The difference between this film and films about the Gulf Wars, is that 9/11 felt like a more immediate personal threat to the average American. Sure, there are people dying in Iraq, but the difference is that it's "over there" and it's not going on here.

Perhaps the reason people are uncomfortable with this film is that it is bringing back memories that we're trying to forget.

I think it falls under exploitation in my book merely because this is the second feature about the flight in less than six months here in the US (a cable film titled FLIGHT 93 debuted in Jan. 06). As it stands, the producers had to know this other television film was being made and decided to go ahead with their theatrical version, somehow deeming it necessary to have two projects about the exact same scenario.

Let's go over some things.

The trailer claims there were 40 passengers. The 9/11 Commission Report states that there were 37 passengers, two pilots and 5 flight attendants. It's conceivable the trailer means to say there were 40 non-terrorists onboard, which would be correct.

The trailer shows one hijacker with a bomb strapped to his chest with an ignition trigger in hand. The 9/11 Commission Report states that cell phone calls indicate hijackers claimed they had a bomb, but there was no mention of a passenger ever seeing a bomb. The report tells that the hijackers announced their having a bomb over the loudspeaker. One passenger told their caller that they did not believe the threat was real. No evidence of explosive devices was ever found at any crash site.

The hijackers of United 93 were all in first class, which the trailer dismisses. "All the hijackers had seats in first class, and they seem to have used them." The implication that the hijackers began their attack from the rear of the plane flies directly in the face of how the report says the hijacking went down.

Tinfoil hat or not, the 9/11 Commission Report's ultimate conclusion on the flight is a little shady. They found no evidence that passengers ever broke into the cockpit, so why would the hijackers be so spooked into taking the plane down? There's quite a leap in logic there. It also states that the hijackers did not consider "breaking them [ed. the doors] down a viable idea", so how exactly are we to believe that the passengers got close to doing so?

I wonder how many Canadians who are boycotting Joel Bender's Karla will likewise boycott Paul Greengrass' United 93?

I seen the trailer and it is unfortuately a cheap attempt to cash in on and sensationalize the events on that flight. It looks like a hastily made TV movie rather than a true theatrical release. It is unfortunately such utter trash attempts to capitalize on a very tragic event.

I don't have a problem with it, but then I have no interest in the film anyhow.

Politians have been exploting 9-11 since 9-12, why would the movie industry be any different?

Ug, that should be Politicians and exploiting . Damn typos.

I'm not sure how I feel about this particular film, but I'd like to point out that films like Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now came out at about the same time (5 years after the fact). I think comparisons to Vietnam films are more apt than ones to WWII films, since Vietnam shook the national consciousness in a way more akin to 9/11 than WWII. Hope that made sense.

Screw this movie! If you want a true recount of what happened to flight United 93, then you need to watch Snakes on a Plane. I'm convinced it is the factual acount of that fateful day.

Wait a minute, that poster - did United 93 go anywhere near the Statue of Liberty?

If people want to know what happened on board the plane - there are documentaries about it.

Why get your facts wrong - if anyone goes to see it, they'll want to at least know what happened.

Hollywood...there is not a creative bone left in the business machine. This movie is a cheap low class attempt at making a controversial picture with boxoffice success through controvesy.

It won't work. The stupid ass executive who green-lighted (Please post his name and contact info) this project wants to create a buzz like passion of the christ...well, let me tell you Mr. "Executive" you are a non-creative in both business and movie making. You should be fired and relagated to a $10/ hr job for the rest of your life because you are professionally not worth a dime!

Why would a studio back this concept other than to capilize on a tradegy?

The answer is simple, the stooges (MBAs) running the studios are not creative they are not able to use their imaginations to inspire, entertainment, or honor anything. These dolts need to have their portions of their brians scopped out of their skulls without anesthesia and then be fed their very own eyeballs. Well, all I can say is there won't be anything to scoop out becuase those ninnies don't have any grey matter to begin with!