United 93 -- The Movie

[Irvine511]

^ after reading that, i am now more certain that i won't go see it. the precariousness of life already freaks me out enough, i don't need another sobering reminder of how precious it all is, and how fate turns on a dime.

i have no problems with people seeing it, nor do i have problems with it being made (heck, i even worked on, briefly, Discovery's "The Flight That Fought Back") i just don't want to see it.

 

[redsox04]

Am I the only one who has never quiet felt right about United 93? I'm not suggesting that Bush was behind 9/11, I'm just saying I often wonder if the passangers took over the plane - and if they did, why didn't they try to land it? - or if the plane was shot down.

The recently-released cockpit recordings suggest that the hijackers flew the plane into the ground, believing they were about to taken over by the passengers. And as for passengers attempting to land the plane, I would imagine that would be an extremely difficult thing to do given the complexity of a modern jetliner.

 

[yolland]

I don't know that any generation is "Greater" or less than any other generation.

"The Greatest Generation" did show some remarkable commitment to fighting facism. . .after Pearl Harbor was attacked anyway. The "Greatest Generation" by and large stood by while a U.S. citizens had their property virutally confisicated and were placed in camps. While some members of "The Greatest Generation" fought and died to stop Hitler's racist regime their families back home had to sit at the back of the bus and couldn't vote in local elections.

On the other hand, just five years ago, some this generation's "self-indulgent" and "unwilling to sacrifice" members acted to stop terrorists from crashing yet another plane, others went in to burning buildings to save lives.

I don't say this to disrespect those who fought for our country (or those who refused to for conscience sake). My father in law is a veteran. I met over 100 veterans who, during World War II, fought on the island where I live now, and that was one of the most amazing experiences of my life.

But. . .

Perhaps, people are just people. Maybe the "conventional wisdom" of society changes. Maybe what causes Hollywood chooses to champion change. (And by the way, Hollywood has always existed to make money. They make what sells. Period.). But at the end of the day people are people, capable of great heroism, capable of great cowardice.

Thank you for this post.

You've touched on some of the more painful mixed feelings and ambivalencies myself and many others have always felt for the unquestioningly high regard in which the achievements of the WWII generation are held here and elsewhere. I also have known many veterans of both the Pacific and European theaters of combat, and share your awe for the heroism they showed, as well as reverance and sorrow for all their comrades who didn't live to tell their stories. We truly do owe them things that are almost beyond conceiving.

At the same time...on a more personal and, I suppose, selfish level, there were so many failures and mistakes made that I can't quite get around either. I can't quite get around all the things that happened to my parents' families and to millions of others like them, both during the war and in the limbo of the DP camps afterwards...more years lost because there was nowhere safe to go, no one and nothing left to go back home to. How many lives, how many little worlds unto themselves could have been saved if the Allies had undertaken certain actions earlier, if the United States had entered the war earlier than we did, if so many things that were turned a blind eye to until the last minute hadn't been...Then too, I think of all the childhood friends I had, growing up in a mostly black Southern community, whose grandfathers, uncles, cousins had been lynched, dispossessed, and otherwise subjected to the most awful of indignities while the bravest of stands in favor of freedom and equality were being taken elsewhere. Yet for every seemingly preventable loss and tragedy I can think of like these, there is another one I could point to that...in light of all the things that miserable war was destined to be from the beginning...seems wholly inevitable, completely beyond anyone's power to have prevented. Millions would have died either way, country after country would have seen its economy and infrastructure and prior way of life ruthlessly run into the ground either way. And who am I, really, when all is said and done, to fixate on some particular loss or tragedy as more immeasurable or regrettable than any other. I cannot truthfully or with certainty say that in the end I haven't personally benefited from it.

I'm sure the story this movie has to tell is is in many ways the same...a great deal of heroism, a great deal of bravery in the face of certain death, shot through--for the rest of us--with an awful lot of painful and disturbing if-onlys, I-wonders, and because this particular conflict is still going on, fears about where this is all headed. But as you say, ultimately from Hollywood's standpoint it's all just a story, nothing more, and the only real responsibility can be to tell it well. Like these public-service billboards we have stateside, "Courage. Pass it on..." Far too tidy and succinct to capture the way things really unfold when genuine crisis ensues. Hopefully this film will be taken as I'm sure it's meant to be, as a tribute and an inspiration not of the feelgood sort, but as a kind of collective memory pointing the way, without delusions of invincibility, towards how we should, must respond when faced with the terrifyingly unprecedented--whatever form it takes, and whatever best possible action on the part of each individual it calls for. Of course, the same goes for the much murkier threats to freedom that come from inside, and there are valuable stories to be told there too.

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

http://www.variety.com/VR1117942055.html

"A wrenching reminder of 9/11 was surrounded with red-carpet hoopla at the world premiere of "United 93," which kicked off the fifth edition of the Tribeca film fest Tuesday at GothamGotham's Ziegfeld theater.

After the film's devastating final scene, the screen abruptly went dark and a cacophony of loud, uncontrollable sobs could be heard coming from the back of the theater, where many of the nearly 100 family members of 9/11 victims were seated.

Some were seeing the film for the first time. As more than 1,100 viewers filed out, a funereal silence filled the theater.

And as the sobbing continued after the screening, there were sounds of other people comforting the family members and taking them outside."

I don't think I could bear seeing this movie right now, if ever.

It's just too soon.

 

[Irvine511]

"If anything should be controversial, it is Hollywood going AWOL while its country fights the scourge of our time, Islamic totalitarianism. For five years, America has been battling people who are dedicated to destroying every value that Hollywood claims to care most about -- freedom, tolerance, women's rights, secular government, equality for gays -- and Hollywood has yet to make a film depicting, let alone honoring, this war."

which war is he talking about? the GWOT? or the Iraq War? the two are not the same thing, and in fact, women's rights and gay rights in Iraq are already sliding, and will fall much, much farther once an elected theocracy comes totally to power as it probably will.

as for "honoring" this war -- we've been fighting Islamic terrorists on screen for over a decade now. think, "True Lies," that terrible airplane movie with Halle Berry and Kurt Russel ... most Mulim, or even Indian, actors in Hollywood have a difficult time getting a part that isn't as a terrorist.

simply because there has been nothing on Iraq itself doesn't mean that the "evil Muslim" hasn't fully infiltrated American popular culture at all levels. it has, and has done so for years.

it seems as if Prager wants a "Saving Private Ryan" for the Iraqi set at best, at worst he wants a red, white, and blue-dripping piece of propagandistic poo. could it not also be that Iraq does not lend itself to easy truths and unabashed pride in our country the way that WW2 does? has Prager seen many Vietnam movies? aren't those reflections of a more complex time, a more ambiguous mission, a difficult set of circumstances? perhaps Iraq much more like Vietnam in this sense, where lines are not clearly drawn, the nature of the combat itself is not lines of Panzer tanks but shadowy insurgents who fade back into the sand brick urban landscape as quickly as they emerged.

it would be very disappointing if Prager thought all movies were to do would be to "celebrate" and/or "honor" history -- at their best, they should explore history and attempt some sort of verisimilitude of experience that is only possible through cinema. read as many D-Day books as you want, none of them can convey the visceral, adrenalized sense of combat one gets from the opening 20 minutes of "Private Ryan." and what that film does is take heroic moments in American history and remind you that WW2 was every bit as bloody, as traumatic, as filled with mindless death and destruction as any other conflict. it also did a marvelous job at depicting modern, mechanized warfare -- how machines turn man into meat, and the randomness of the ferocity, and the ferocity of the randomness. ultimately, where "private ryan" fails is in the god-awful cemetary scenes that bookmark the film.

but i suppose in Prager's world we need such sentimental tripe shoved down our throats because we're all too think to deal with a bit of ambiguity and moral complexity. yes, let's demand our directors be obedient little Leni Riefenstahls who used her considerable talents to serve the needs of the fatherland.

(/rant off)

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Ebert And Roeper give it two thumbs up, there is an audio review on their site

This is from a Reuters article I just read. I agree, we still haven't really confronted it in many ways. Maybe in some ways it is a form of denial, and maybe it is a denial of sorts to be afraid of the movie. Of course there are so many other reasons to not want to see it, it is strictly a personal decision for everyone.

"Gordon Felt, a relative of a Flight 93 passenger, stepped before the podium to discuss the $30 million private capital campaign for the memorial, to thank Universal for donating 10% of its opening-weekend gross to the fund and to introduce writer-director Greengrass, whom he thanked for approaching family members in order to present an accurate portrait of their loved ones.

"Our guides to the foundation and legitimacy of this film are the family members," Greengrass said, also mentioning the air traffic controllers, servicemen and others he met with to study the 9/11 Commission Report.

"Universal supported this film unswervingly," he added. "Like many, they believe in the power of cinema to challenge us and change us."

"I wanted to support my friend Ron Meyer and his company for doing something of this significance," MPAA chairman Dan Glickman said. "Is it too soon to make it? I think people will judge that for themselves. My judgment is it's not too soon. The longer you get away from it, the further your personal memories are of it. In this film, people can see how average people can rise out of their shells and do amazing things."

Former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey, who heads New York's New School University, said, "Having been on the 9/11 commission, I've heard from victims' families who say this film tells the story in a respectful and restrained way. I feel we need to be reminded of it. My wildest dream would be to recapture the spirit we had after September 11."

But perhaps actor Gabriel Byrne best summed up feelings about the film: "I can understand why some people don't want to see the film, and I can see why there's a compulsion to confront it, because in many ways we still haven't confronted it."

 

[angelordevil]

But perhaps actor Gabriel Byrne best summed up feelings about the film: "I can understand why some people don't want to see the film, and I can see why there's a compulsion to confront it, because in many ways we still haven't confronted it."

A much clearer version of what I was trying to say.

 

[nathan1977]

Having just seen it...

It's a fascinating experience, watching this film. I say "experience" because I think that's how audiences, American in particular, will encounter UNITED93. Throughout the film, I kept thinking, "I remember what I was doing then. That's when my wife called me to tell me about the second plane. That's when I got the call that the Pentagon had been hit." It's impossible to divorce yourself from the experience of the day, and as a result, the experience of the film is far more visceral than even the filmmakers may have intended.

Having said that, it's an incredible piece of filmmaking. Working from a semi-improvised script, with many of the lieutenants and officers playing themselves, Greengrass establishes a you-are-there style, unprecedented by the simple virtue of the fact that these events were real. While the film goes to great length to ensure that it is presenting a fictionalized version of events, the painstaking research the filmmakers undertook means that it's perhaps the best approximation of what happened that day.

It's perhaps wise that it took a British filmmaker to tell a consummate American story. American sensibilities these days tend to veer from one end of the spectrum to the other -- from self-flagellation for the events of the day, to suspicion or outright demonization of the Arabs at the heart of the plot. Perhaps we are still too close to the story to tell it correctly, but Greengrass, as an outsider, has a clearer eye that is perhaps able to tell a story we yet cannot. Moments that would be considered jingo-istic by an American filmmaker (Michael Bay, for example), come across as simple acts of heroism writ large -- a distinctly British perspective, to be sure, but perhaps a more accurate one on a day when "Let's roll" was probably less bellowed than it was whispered.

At times the film hits too close for comfort -- while the terrorists pray their last prayers to Allah, many on the plane say the Our Father (perhaps simply to note a common humanity; perhaps to illustrate that not all Gods are cut from the same image; it's really for the beholder to say). The government comes across fairly positively, by virtue of the fact that with no warning or lead time, in three hours the country was completely shut down. (No small thing, and unprecedented, as the film points out.)

But the government is not without culpability -- the hijacking go-to guy in the federal office is away from his desk, without a back-up man, and the President and Vice-President are both incommunicado, presumably being shuffled to secure locations.

Overall, however, the film stays away from these macro-moments, preferring to keep its lens on the ground, focusing on the woman and men who heroically shouldered the burdens of giants on the fateful day.

WARNING: the film is not for the squeamish. I sat through it with my neck and back slowly growing more tense. Blood and violence is kept to a minimum; this film's true power is the emotional havoc it touches. You watch the film hoping the ATC officers will catch AA11 and UA175 in time; you remember the day and you know they won't. When UA93 seals its doors and pulls away from the gate, you know the plane has just become a tomb. And when, in the film's climactic moments, the passengers rush the cockpit, you can certainly believe that they breached it without being able to escape their tragic fate.

 

[dazzlingamy]

Having sat through the whole sept 11 thing as well, i feel deeply for them and their families, and i have paid my respects to ground zero, but i believe this film is uneccessary. No one knows for sure what happened in the plane, and i have read many reports saying tha the terrorists lost control of the plane and thats why it crashed rather then the passengers fighting back. I am glad that is wasn't made by an american, as i do believe an outside perspective is needed, and not to demonise the terrorists, who were doing something they justly believe in.

I also think its not really a story to be told seeing we have so few facts. People went up in a plane, plane came down, everyone died. Its been done a thousand times and i dont think the movie was warrented, and feel that it was made to make money off the backs of one of the scariest and saddest things that has happened this century.

 

[A_Wanderer]

not to demonise the terrorists, who were doing something they justly believe in.

Their deeds are what demonises them, those mass murderers, like many others, did so in the service of Allah and it shouldn't be white washed - demonise all Muslims, no, but the religious ideology of the terrorists should be openly discussed.

Humanise them for what they are, believers

As for "justly believing" that those who are not Muslims have been offered the "righteous" path and refused therefore are fair targets for death I can't quite wrap my mind around that being "justly believed in".

 

[dazzlingamy]

justly in THEIR mind....not mine. I don't believe in any religion so therefore anything done in the name of religion is to me, done in the name of a lie. But for them, they TRULY believe that america is the enemy, and therefore what they were doing was pleasing their warped views of islam. And sadly, they are human just like every one of us - regardless of what they did.

 

[nathan1977]

I don't believe in any religion so therefore anything done in the name of religion is to me, done in the name of a lie.

So Bono's crusade to save Africa, which is heavily steeped in the scripture's call to look after the poor, is a lie?

 

[dazzlingamy]

well its not only the SCRIPTURE that tells us to look after the poor, so of course i am behind the crusade to save Africa's starving. But if they were handing out christian propaganda along with rice, then i would have a problem because they are letting their religion over run something there.

I think saving people is called COMPASSION, which you don't need to be religious to feel.

 

[A_Wanderer]

So Bono's crusade to save Africa, which is heavily steeped in the scripture's call to look after the poor, is a lie?

Yes it is.

 

[maycocksean]

Having just seen it...

It's a fascinating experience, watching this film. I say "experience" because I think that's how audiences, American in particular, will encounter UNITED93. Throughout the film, I kept thinking, "I remember what I was doing then. That's when my wife called me to tell me about the second plane. That's when I got the call that the Pentagon had been hit." It's impossible to divorce yourself from the experience of the day, and as a result, the experience of the film is far more visceral than even the filmmakers may have intended.

Having said that, it's an incredible piece of filmmaking. Working from a semi-improvised script, with many of the lieutenants and officers playing themselves, Greengrass establishes a you-are-there style, unprecedented by the simple virtue of the fact that these events were real. While the film goes to great length to ensure that it is presenting a fictionalized version of events, the painstaking research the filmmakers undertook means that it's perhaps the best approximation of what happened that day.

It's perhaps wise that it took a British filmmaker to tell a consummate American story. American sensibilities these days tend to veer from one end of the spectrum to the other -- from self-flagellation for the events of the day, to suspicion or outright demonization of the Arabs at the heart of the plot. Perhaps we are still too close to the story to tell it correctly, but Greengrass, as an outsider, has a clearer eye that is perhaps able to tell a story we yet cannot. Moments that would be considered jingo-istic by an American filmmaker (Michael Bay, for example), come across as simple acts of heroism writ large -- a distinctly British perspective, to be sure, but perhaps a more accurate one on a day when "Let's roll" was probably less bellowed than it was whispered.

At times the film hits too close for comfort -- while the terrorists pray their last prayers to Allah, many on the plane say the Our Father (perhaps simply to note a common humanity; perhaps to illustrate that not all Gods are cut from the same image; it's really for the beholder to say). The government comes across fairly positively, by virtue of the fact that with no warning or lead time, in three hours the country was completely shut down. (No small thing, and unprecedented, as the film points out.)

But the government is not without culpability -- the hijacking go-to guy in the federal office is away from his desk, without a back-up man, and the President and Vice-President are both incommunicado, presumably being shuffled to secure locations.

Overall, however, the film stays away from these macro-moments, preferring to keep its lens on the ground, focusing on the woman and men who heroically shouldered the burdens of giants on the fateful day.

WARNING: the film is not for the squeamish. I sat through it with my neck and back slowly growing more tense. Blood and violence is kept to a minimum; this film's true power is the emotional havoc it touches. You watch the film hoping the ATC officers will catch AA11 and UA175 in time; you remember the day and you know they won't. When UA93 seals its doors and pulls away from the gate, you know the plane has just become a tomb. And when, in the film's climactic moments, the passengers rush the cockpit, you can certainly believe that they breached it without being able to escape their tragic fate.

Great review.

Granted, movies, ESPECIALLY, Hollywood ones have become a rather tacky and manipulative way of making money. But. . .they can also be art. And one of the things art does is address and comment on the tragedies that befall us all. 9/11 is one of those tragedies and I'm not sure that there is anything inherently wrong with making (or viewing) a film that seeks to memorialize, understand, share what happened on Flight 93. Based on nathan1977's review it would seem this movie has done so respectfully.

Art has always dealt with the horrors of war, and not always after a "suitable"amount of time has passed.

What was that painting by Picasso? Guernica?

 

[Numb1075]

I won't pay $ to see this film. I go to the movies for entertainment. I don't find this subject entertaining. I find it too sad and way too scary.

Perhaps I will watch it one day at home, but no time soon.

I knew people who perished that day and my mother was in her office building (140 West street) across the street and it was heavily damaged from the blast and she was metnally scarred from what she saw in her evacuation route. And I was petrified waiting to hear if she was ok.

My opinion is that it is too soon. But to each their own.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I'm so sorry Numb about the people you knew who died that day, I can't even imagine what it was like that day for your Mother.

I didn't think I would see it, I just did. I was nervous and upset before it even started. Beware-it is not a sanitized TV movie, it is in your face and as real as it can be. It was a very emotional experience for me, and as difficult as it was for me I would still never say I wish I hadn't seen it. Something in my head and heart was telling me to see it. I am even more in awe of the passengers on that plane and I will be forever.

The late matinee I went to was very well attended w/ a mix of all different ages of people.

My only criticism of the movie was the music, it wasn't needed.

 

[nathan1977]

^
The use of music was interesting. I think there's about twenty minutes where there's no music, and I remember thinking, "Nice choice -- maybe they won't use it at all." I was surprised when it came in. I agree, it probably could have done without it.

 

[Sue DeNym]

i don't know... i'll probably go see it by myself at like a matinee. it's certainly not a "date" movie, that's for sure.

I'll probably do the same. It's going to be a rough movie, but like Schindler's List, it is a story that needs to be told and learned from.

 

[deep]

Well,

my date took a raincheck

so I can drive up the hill
and watch this tonight

I hope I don't walkout
like I did on the Passion

 

[deep]

i thought it was pretty good

the music, drums (for suspense) did not bother me too much

I found this movie much less exploitative than so many other things that I have seen about 911

it is hard to say exactly what happened on flight 93

it seems there are some that believe the passengers decided to crash the plane and sacrifice themselves for a greater good

the film suggest they were trying to take the plane back with the hope of landing it. (much more plausible)

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

It's very well done. It does not push any agenda, it does not exploit the passengers-it tells their story with respect and dignity. If you think you can handle it I would urge everyone to see it. It makes you feel like you are on the plane with those people, and that is what it should do. The phone calls to their loved ones are extremely tough to take, but again done with so much respect. I'm very impressed that the director was able to make the movie that way.

You don't even know the passengers' names other than recognizing them from media attention that some of them received. They are realistically depicted, not made into some sort of cartoon superheroes. They are all unknown actors-there is one guy who has a recurring role on Boston Legal. I never realized it was him until I saw him on Larry King last night.

Roger Ebert's review, and he makes a good point-don't be fooled by the trailer

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060427/REVIEWS/60419006

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

CREW

Jason Dahl, 43, from Denver, Colorado, was the plane's captain. He had a wife and son. Dahl had a lifelong interest in flying, said his aunt, Maxine Atkinson, of Waterloo, Iowa.

Leroy Homer, 36, from Marlton, New Jersey, was the first officer on board. He was married and had a daughter.

Lorraine Bay was a flight attendant.

Sandra Bradshaw, 38, of Greensboro, North Carolina, was a flight attendant.

Wanda Green was a flight attendant.

CeeCee Lyles of Fort Myers, Florida, was a flight attendant. She reached her husband, Lorne, by cell phone to tell him that she loved him and their children before the plane went down. The couple between them had four children.

Deborah Welsh was a flight attendant.


PASSENGERS

Christian Adams

Todd Beamer, 32, was from Cranbury, New Jersey.

Alan Beaven, 48, of Oakland, California, was an environmental lawyer.

Mark Bingham, 31, of San Francisco owned a public relations firm, the Bingham Group. He called his mother, Alice Hoglan, 15 minutes before the plane crashed and told her that the plane had been taken over by three men who claimed to have a bomb. Hoglan said her son told her that some passengers planned to try to regain control of the plane. "He said, 'I love you very, very much, ' " Hoglan said.

Deora Bodley, 20, of Santa Clara, California, was a university student.

Marion Britton

Thomas E. Burnett Jr., 38, of San Ramon, California, was a senior vice president and chief operating officer of Thoratec Corp., a medical research and development company, and the father of three. He made four calls to his wife, Deena, from the plane. Deena Burnett said that her husband told her that one passenger had been stabbed and that "a group of us are going to do something." He also told her that the people on board knew about the attack on the World Trade Center, apparently through other phone calls.

William Cashman

Georgine Corrigan

Joseph Deluca

Patrick Driscoll

Edward Felt, 41, was from Matawan, New Jersey.

Colleen Fraser

Andrew Garcia

Jeremy Glick, 31, from West Milford, New Jersey, called his wife, Liz, and in-laws in New York on a cell phone to tell them the plane had been hijacked, Joanne Makely, Glick's mother-in-law, told CNN. Glick said that one of the hijackers "had a red box he said was a bomb, and one had a knife of some nature," Makely said. Glick asked Makely if the reports about the attacks on the World Trade Center were true, and she told him they were. He left the phone for a while, returning to say, "The men voted to attack the terrorists," Makely said.

Lauren Grandcolas of San Rafael, California, was a sales worker at Good Housekeeping magazine.

Donald F. Green, 52, was from Greenwich, Connecticut.

Linda Gronlund

Richard Guadagno, 38, of Eureka, California, was the manager of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge.

Toshiya Kuge

Waleska Martinez

Nicole Miller

Mark Rothenberg

Christine Snyder, 32, was from Kailua, Hawaii. She was an arborist for the Outdoor Circle and was returning from a conference in Washington. She had been married less than a year.

John Talignani

Honor Wainio

 

[AchtungBono]

CREW

Jason Dahl, 43, from Denver, Colorado, was the plane's captain. He had a wife and son. Dahl had a lifelong interest in flying, said his aunt, Maxine Atkinson, of Waterloo, Iowa.

Leroy Homer, 36, from Marlton, New Jersey, was the first officer on board. He was married and had a daughter.

Lorraine Bay was a flight attendant.

Sandra Bradshaw, 38, of Greensboro, North Carolina, was a flight attendant.

Wanda Green was a flight attendant.

CeeCee Lyles of Fort Myers, Florida, was a flight attendant. She reached her husband, Lorne, by cell phone to tell him that she loved him and their children before the plane went down. The couple between them had four children.

Deborah Welsh was a flight attendant.


PASSENGERS

Christian Adams

Todd Beamer, 32, was from Cranbury, New Jersey.

Alan Beaven, 48, of Oakland, California, was an environmental lawyer.

Mark Bingham, 31, of San Francisco owned a public relations firm, the Bingham Group. He called his mother, Alice Hoglan, 15 minutes before the plane crashed and told her that the plane had been taken over by three men who claimed to have a bomb. Hoglan said her son told her that some passengers planned to try to regain control of the plane. "He said, 'I love you very, very much, ' " Hoglan said.

Deora Bodley, 20, of Santa Clara, California, was a university student.

Marion Britton

Thomas E. Burnett Jr., 38, of San Ramon, California, was a senior vice president and chief operating officer of Thoratec Corp., a medical research and development company, and the father of three. He made four calls to his wife, Deena, from the plane. Deena Burnett said that her husband told her that one passenger had been stabbed and that "a group of us are going to do something." He also told her that the people on board knew about the attack on the World Trade Center, apparently through other phone calls.

William Cashman

Georgine Corrigan

Joseph Deluca

Patrick Driscoll

Edward Felt, 41, was from Matawan, New Jersey.

Colleen Fraser

Andrew Garcia

Jeremy Glick, 31, from West Milford, New Jersey, called his wife, Liz, and in-laws in New York on a cell phone to tell them the plane had been hijacked, Joanne Makely, Glick's mother-in-law, told CNN. Glick said that one of the hijackers "had a red box he said was a bomb, and one had a knife of some nature," Makely said. Glick asked Makely if the reports about the attacks on the World Trade Center were true, and she told him they were. He left the phone for a while, returning to say, "The men voted to attack the terrorists," Makely said.

Lauren Grandcolas of San Rafael, California, was a sales worker at Good Housekeeping magazine.

Donald F. Green, 52, was from Greenwich, Connecticut.

Linda Gronlund

Richard Guadagno, 38, of Eureka, California, was the manager of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge.

Toshiya Kuge

Waleska Martinez

Nicole Miller

Mark Rothenberg

Christine Snyder, 32, was from Kailua, Hawaii. She was an arborist for the Outdoor Circle and was returning from a conference in Washington. She had been married less than a year.

John Talignani

Honor Wainio

Thank you for that list.

I have to tell you guys that I'm in tears just READING about this movie and I have no doubt that I'll be very blurry-eyed when I see it.

Another thing that saddens me terribly is that the ashes of those monster terrorists are forever mingled with the ashes of the innocents they murdered.

May G-d rest the souls of United 93 and all victims of 9/11.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I'm pleased (weird to say and I don't mean it quite that way) that it did so well, I hope it will continue to do so. I didn't know age 30 and above skews "old" either


(Reuters) "United 93," the first Hollywood movie to deal with the events of September 11, was No. 2 at the weekend box office in North America with respectable ticket sales of $11.6 million, according to studio estimates issued on Sunday.

The new Robin Williams comedy "RV" drove off with the top prize, selling about $16.4 million worth of tickets for the three days beginning Friday, while the teen gymnast drama "Stick It" opened at No. 3 with $11.3 million.

"United 93" is a dramatization of the events surrounding the flight that crashed in a Pennsylvania field after passengers fought back against the hijackers.

But its tough subject matter made it difficult to forecast how the film would open and there were reports that pre-release surveys indicated that female filmgoers had little interest in it. As it turned out, women slightly outdrew men, 52 percent to 48 percent, according to exit surveys.

"LOUD AND CLEAR"

"I think Americans have spoken loud and clear, that they were ready for a film like this," said Nikki Rocco, president of domestic theatrical distribution at Universal, a unit of General Electric Co.'s NBC Universal Inc.

Rocco said the studio had had no expectations for the film's box office performance. It "wasn't the first and foremost aspect of producing the film," she said.

The film did skew old, though, with exit surveys showing that 71 percent of viewers were aged 30 and above. The film received a grade of "very good" or "excellent" from 95 percent of respondents (the norm is 80 percent), while 76 percent would definitely recommend it (the norm is 55 percent), the studio said.

About 51 percent of people showed up with their spouse while 11 percent of viewers showed up on a date.

 

[angelordevil]

About 51 percent of people showed up with their spouse while 11 percent of viewers showed up on a date.

I saw it Friday evening. None of my friends were willing to go with me; they all said it was much too early for a movie like this. I can understand their logic, but I felt compelled to see it -- I guess because the issues surrounding it (terrorism, security...peace) are things that buzz around my head everyday anyway.

The movie just underscored all of those things, and breathed life into the newspaper reports and sometimes slanted coverage we've all seen. At times, I felt like a voyuer, which was unsettlling. Even before the movie, as I was lining-up for the ticket, the "United 93" title on the display board grabbed my eye. It looked like an image a passenger would've seen on that day, as they waited to board their flight.

It was interesting to see who did go to the movie...a mix of really old, young, and a few people in wheelchairs...an eclectic mix for a new release.

In my view, the film is far from exploitative, and something I highly recommend. In that plane, there were real lessons for humanity--parallels and principles that link all of us, rather than divide. Two days after seeing it, the ending is still haunting me, even though it has been securely etched in history for the past four years. I desperately wanted someone to grab the controls of that plane and stop the inevitable waste and senselessness of it all.

I guess I see United 93 as a kind of symbol...a microcosm of the best and worst of us under one roof. Beyond the easy targets of faith, or ethnicity, it's ignorance and misunderstanding on all fronts that will truly undermine our ability to soar.

Easily the best, most moving, and important movie I've seen this year.

 

[maycocksean]

I'd like to see this film. But, I doubt they'll bring out here to Saipan.

But we've got RV.

 

[oceane]

^
The use of music was interesting. I think there's about twenty minutes where there's no music, and I remember thinking, "Nice choice -- maybe they won't use it at all." I was surprised when it came in. I agree, it probably could have done without it.

I haven't seen the movie (and won't now since I am taking a plane on Friday), but one of the most powerful aspects of 'Bloody Sunday' (another one of Greengrass' movies, and I HIGHLY recommend it) was it's use (or lack) of music.

It's an incredible movie, all done in a very realistic way, and there is no music whatsoever during the entire movie. Then during the credits at the end they play this amazing live version of Sunday Bloody Sunday, from some bootleg I can't identify (but it's from the Joshua Tree era). Unbelievable. It was so powerful I couldn't stop crying.

 

[angelordevil]

I haven't seen the movie (and won't now since I am taking a plane on Friday), but one of the most powerful aspects of 'Bloody Sunday' (another one of Greengrass' movies, and I HIGHLY recommend it) was it's use (or lack) of music.

I rented this last year...incredible. U2 at the end was very fitting, and powerful.

With both of these films, it's amazing how the viewer is tugged through the events depicted. It's almost as if you're planted in time as an observer--with the moral judgements left up to you to decipher. That's a great strength.

 

[ouizy]

I recently went to go see Inside Man in a packed NYC theater.

Don't know how many of you have seen a movie in NYC, but the place was packed, everyone was amped up to see the movie and everyone was talking to each other.

The lights went down, and on came a trailer for U93. People kept talking, and then out of nowhere was a clip showing the actual footage of the second flight hitting the World Trade Center.

Needless to say the place went silent seeing this on a big screen in front of their faces. Then, came the boos.

My own opinion is that it is way too soon for a movie like this, and just makes me think how disconnected Hollywood is. For those of us that were there, it was like a punch in the stomach seeing that image up on the screen.

I was truly shocked by it because I was not expecting that trailer, and it brought a tear to my wife's eye because we were there, and she lost a friend in the tower they showed on the screen.

I think using that trailer, especially in New York City is a bit shallow, and distasteful.

Now, I know the movie is about the heroics on that flight, but when I saw that trailer it hit way too close to home. For me, and the other 200 or so others in that theater.

I will not be seeing this movie, as I agree with those here, that I pay for entertainment, and I do not find this subject entertaining. I could not imagine going to see that film and having someone sit next to me munching away on popcorn, or Goobers.

Sorry - just my two cents.