Saw the movie United 93 yesterday. Man, what a powerful movie and very well done. It's essentially a docu-drama, played out in something close to real-time. What's interesting is that the film-makers spend about as much time focusing on what happened on the ground with the local air-traffic controllers, the national FAA air-traffic control center and the military air-traffic control center and the communication (and lack thereof) that happened that day. While the events on-board the plane had to be inferred from what information relatives and friends got from the calls from the passengers on-board and speculated from after that point (storming the terrorists and the crash), the events on the ground are theoretically very close to the actual events, especially since many of the people involved that day play themselves in the movie.

It's a gut-wrenching experience from the very start, knowing what's in store and the larger scope of what happened that day, waiting for the inevitable events to unfold. The film does a terrifyingly good job of conveying the chaos and fear on-board the flight which only serves to ratchet up the tension in you as you watch. It's an emotional 2x4 from start to finish.

I don't really know how to answer the question of whether the film is "too soon"; I'm not sure I'll ever really get over that day and not tense up when seeing images from what happened. The fact this film was made with the willing cooperation of the victims' families and many of those on the ground that day in the air-traffic control makes me think this is about as authentic a film about these events as we'll see. I personally wanted to see the film not only to support this kind of honest film-making (as opposed to a "Hollywood-ized" treatment) but also to support the victims' families who got a portion of the proceeds from the first weekend of the film.

I'm sure this movie will generate some controversy, not just due to the timing but also to it's realistic portrayal of the hijacker/terrorists (as opposed to painting them in cartoonishly evil strokes), but even if you don't think you can stomach seeing the movie just yet, you should eventually see it.

I'm sure this movie will generate some controversy, not just due to the timing but also to it's realistic portrayal of the insurgents (as opposed to painting them in cartoonishly evil strokes), but even if you don't think you can stomach seeing the movie just yet, you should eventually see it.

Haven't seen it, but in order to not offend some of the board readers, I fixed this for you.

youre not the only one who has a difficult time seperating your politics from being able to enjoy/experience/debate/talk about things outside of politics.

More discussion here:
http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=48827&highlight=untied

Saw this tonight. Shattering. Don't know that I'll be able to move far past that day either, and this brought it back as strongly as I've felt it since.

youre not the only one who has a difficult time seperating your politics from being able to enjoy/experience/debate/talk about things outside of politics.

So the "insurgent" thing offended you? Breakthrough. The movie might have a worth afterall.

So the "insurgent" thing offended you? Breakthrough. The movie might have a worth afterall.
Why is it offensive...they didnt call all muslims insurgents...just the guys HIJACKING A PLANE...i dont see why PC is needed in this case

Saw this Saturday night. It was very real. Very powerful.

***SPOILERS*** (yes, we know what happens, but that doesn't mean the "how" of the movie won't ruin it for someone who may still yet see it).

Like dawgfan, I absolutely loved (is "loved" the right word here? Admired?) the movie's approach to the ground events. They were terrific. Knowing what was happening and watching them try to figure it out as the horror unfolded before them was tragic and engrossing. It also gave us a reminder of what it was like to be something of a shocked onlooker, as opposed to the very much affected passengers on the plane, or the terrorists/hijackers. At one point, they show air traffic controllers in a New York tower watching as the second plane sails toward and into the second Twin Tower. It brought all those gut-wrenching feelings back of watching that same kind of shot on CNN a hundred times that day.

The tension on the plane was palpable. You could really feel the confusion, fear and anger, and then finalyl the desperation when they realized what the hijackers were planning. You even feel the humanity of the Muslims, particularly from the pilot/team lead, who seemed fraught with doubt, and very human, but also very ready to do what he believed was right.

The movie deserved an applause, but of course, none was coming. Everyone just silently filed out, and I am certain no one there would forget this movie (whether they liked it or not). I just remember feeling again so angry, and helpless, too, because we still haven't caught the bastard who organized this.

Most poignant momet of the movie for me was when the passengers were calling their loved ones to say goodbye. Wow, that was tough.

This really is a movie everyone should see (especially in the U.S.).

I also thought they ended the movie in a classy way. It's hard to explain what I mean to people who seen it, but for those of you who have, do you agree?

Most poignant momet of the movie for me was when the passengers were calling their loved ones to say goodbye. Wow, that was tough.
It's the only time I have ever cried during a movie. Very tough to watch.

So the "insurgent" thing offended you? Breakthrough. The movie might have a worth afterall.

Insurgents? What insurgents? The terrorists who hijacked the planes weren't American citizens, therefore they can't be insurgents.

Timothy McVeigh was an insurgent. Mohammed Atta was a terrorist.

Haven't seen it, but in order to not offend some of the board readers, I fixed this for you.

And the first shot is fired. Nice going, Dutch. :rolleyes:

I also thought they ended the movie in a classy way. It's hard to explain what I mean to people who seen it, but for those of you who have, do you agree?
I'm pretty sure I know what you mean, and I agree - it's really the only way they could've ended the movie and honored those on the plane and their loved ones.

And yes, the moments where the passengers are calling their loved ones to say goodbye is heartbreaking, especially the woman that cuts short her own call and hands the phone to her neighbor, telling her to "call her people". I'm getting misty just thinking about it.

So the "insurgent" thing offended you? Breakthrough. The movie might have a worth afterall.


I plan to see the movie...which is what this thread is about anyways.

I REALLY wanted to see this this weekend, but my wife didn't think she would enjoy it at all... so we saw Thank You For Smoking instead. A good movie in its own right, but I have heard so many good things about this movie, I'm still trying to get her out to it later this month.

I still can't decide if I'm surprised or not that it didn't do that well at the box office in the first weekend.

Insurgents? What insurgents? The terrorists who hijacked the planes weren't American citizens, therefore they can't be insurgents.

Timothy McVeigh was an insurgent. Mohammed Atta was a terrorist.

Timothy McVeigh targetted women and children and that's not terrorism in your book?

Timothy McVeigh targetted women and children and that's not terrorism in your book?
lets talk about the movie...take your argument elsewhere dutch :(

lets talk about the movie...take your argument elsewhere dutch :(

You got it.

Wow, thank you dutch

Alright, is the movie simply a play on 9/11 emotions or actually solidly developed through plot details and dramatic tension? I mean, is it just a play at your heart or a good movie?

Wow, thank you dutch

Alright, is the movie simply a play on 9/11 emotions or actually solidly developed through plot details and dramatic tension? I mean, is it just a play at your heart or a good movie?
I thought it was good, but because of the day, of course it will be a play at your heart type movie. I thought that it helps show you how big a clusterfuck everything was on 9/11, and how difficult it was for everyone to try and figure out what the hell was going on.

Alright, is the movie simply a play on 9/11 emotions or actually solidly developed through plot details and dramatic tension? I mean, is it just a play at your heart or a good movie?
It's a great movie, but as I said it's really best described as a docu-drama. There's no big-name actors - in fact many of the real people involved on the ground play themselves in the movie. The actions are played out in a very realistic manner. I'd need to read the transcripts from the flight to see how faithful the film-makers were to what is known, but given the level of involvement from family and loved-ones of those on the flight as well as the air-traffic personnel on the ground, I can't imagine there's much (if anything) in this movie that is fudged, outside of the things that had to be inferred or speculated due to us simply not having any way of knowing.

It's a play on 9/11 emotions only in the sense that you can't help but feel the awful tension of knowing what's going to happen. They don't flinch from showing some of the awful images of that day in terms of the planes hitting the trade center, but it doesn't like exploitation - it's a way to show the impact on those in the control towers and in the air-traffic control rooms as they witness the unbelievable events before them.

It's also not a traditional "story" with classic plot lines and what not given that they attempt to follow a very near real-time recreation of the events. That said, there is some attempt to build up the story a bit by showing the hijackers in their hotel room praying in the morning before leaving for the airport - suggesting the role their devout faith played in their willingness to do this horrific act. They also show a small amount of extraneous every-day actions of the head FAA manager going about his daily work as a way to illustrate the contrast between his normal day and the completely abnormal day that is unfolding.

This movie doesn't feel "massaged" at all, and is definitely not a "hollywood"-ized version of the events. It feels painfully real, and that reality probably draws the viewer in even closer (making it that much more of an emotional experience).

I still can't decide if I'm surprised or not that it didn't do that well at the box office in the first weekend.

I think the #1 reason people go to the movies is still escapism - and this movie is obviously directly opposed to that idea. So I'm not surprised it's not going to end up as a "blockbuster".

I REALLY wanted to see this this weekend, but my wife didn't think she would enjoy it at all... so we saw Thank You For Smoking instead. A good movie in its own right, but I have heard so many good things about this movie, I'm still trying to get her out to it later this month.

I still can't decide if I'm surprised or not that it didn't do that well at the box office in the first weekend.

Well, it only opened on 1800 screens, and posted a pretty solid per screen average. I would guess it will do around 35 million total in gross, but perhaps it will hold up well next weekend. Although from here on out, getting screens and keeping screens will be hard, so it may only play 3-4 more weeks.

Considering it was the #2 movie this weekend in total gross and was the #1 movie by a ways in terms of per theater gross, I'm not sure why anyone is thinking that the movie isn't doing well. It's already done $11.6M in gross, and the production budget was only $18M, so they should cover costs just with the theater release in the next couple of weeks.

This strikes me as the sort of movie that could stay in the top ten for a long time, as opposed to having a massive opening weekend and then fading quickly. So many people are taking an approach of "I want to see it, but I don't know if I'm ready" that there could be some sustainable long-term business if theatres stick with it.

This strikes me as the sort of movie that could stay in the top ten for a long time, as opposed to having a massive opening weekend and then fading quickly. So many people are taking an approach of "I want to see it, but I don't know if I'm ready" that there could be some sustainable long-term business if theatres stick with it.

That is a possibility, "adult" marketed films(not pr0n) do tend to have longer shelf lifes. I'm not really sure why they opened this movie now when going into the summer a lot of films will have "Must carry" contracts in the theatres. I would think that a December for awards opening, and then an early January opening would have worked better.

I saw it on Saturday night and I have to echo those that said this was a very powerful film. Some reviewers said the stuff outside of the plane distracted from the centerpiece of the film (ie, United 93), but I thought it was necessary. Without it, I don't think the film works as well (and the plane scenes would have had to have been streached out greatly, which IMO would have reduced some of the tension as boredom would have come in). As it was, I thought the pacing was incredibly done, which keep your eyes glued to the screen, much more than any 'thriller'. The fact that you knew what was going to happen just made it that much more powerful to watch. It's like an ancient Greek tragedy. You know they will fail and you feel horrible for them as you watch, your heart beating in your chest, knowing these people will give their lives up.

The ground scenes, at the beginning, work very well because Greengrass actually tries to depict what happened. Everyone in the crowd KNOWS what is going on, but the FAA is trying to piece things together, and you want to yell at them with the benefit of hindsight. Let them know what is going on! The sense of confusion was just done perfectly.

And then in the plane.. a march towards a tragic end. Using no name actors who didn't seem to be refered to by their character names very often either, showing a sense that these were just ordinary people who decided to do something extraordinary. But man, was it painful to watch at the end. But worth watching every second.

Btw, I never realized that a delay at Newark Airport probably saved the Capitol. Wow.

Haven't seen it, but in order to not offend some of the board readers, I fixed this for you.

STFU, ya dumb bastard.

Seriously,

I normally try to keep my opinion to POL threads and I was out of line here. I'll write it off as a bad day, but I wanted to apologize to those I antagonized out of place. I was wrong.

Dutch

Considering it was the #2 movie this weekend in total gross and was the #1 movie by a ways in terms of per theater gross, I'm not sure why anyone is thinking that the movie isn't doing well. It's already done $11.6M in gross, and the production budget was only $18M, so they should cover costs just with the theater release in the next couple of weeks.

With all due respect, I don't think anyone said it was a "failure". However, it did finish behind friggin' "RV". Which looks like maybe the worst Robin Williams movie ever, which is saying a lot. Also, it wasn't really a small release. 1800 screens is not exactly an art-house opening. It just wasn't getting those "multiple screen" type deals at many of the multiplexes. But I agree that it probably won't be a quick fader. But it better move fast, because the summer movie season is upon us, so it won't have an opportunity to hang on for long.

With all due respect, I don't think anyone said it was a "failure". However, it did finish behind friggin' "RV". Which looks like maybe the worst Robin Williams movie ever, which is saying a lot. Also, it wasn't really a small release. 1800 screens is not exactly an art-house opening. It just wasn't getting those "multiple screen" type deals at many of the multiplexes. But I agree that it probably won't be a quick fader. But it better move fast, because the summer movie season is upon us, so it won't have an opportunity to hang on for long.

It made like $2,000 more per screen than RV! You have to look at the circumstances of each release and see RV was released to more theaters. If it was one the same number of screens RV was on with the same theater average, it would have scored $23mil

I'm checking it out in about an hour and a half. FOFC has convinced me that it's worth seeing...

I just got back from seeing the film....I walked out of the theatre in tears.

It made like $2,000 more per screen than RV!

But overall it made less money! I can use exclamation points too!

But overall it made less money! I can use exclamation points too!

So what? It was because it was in less theaters. Saying it didn't do well in theaters when it had about $6,400 per theater, over $2000 more than the 2nd place flick, is being silly.

So what? It was because it was in less theaters. Saying it didn't do well in theaters when it had about $6,400 per theater, over $2000 more than the 2nd place flick, is being silly.

I am just surprised it didn't do better. Not finishing #1 over RV is a failure for it, and a surprise to me. It was on enough screens to hit #1 if the demand had been there, but it wasn't. I think, though, as others have said, it has a better chance than most films to have a prolonged stay without the sharp drop-off other films experience.

I just got back from seeing the film....I walked out of the theatre in tears.


I couldn't tell you the last time I cried as much during a movie as I did yesterday...

So, are we still going to argue over whether or not this movie was a success? It will break $30 million, but that's about it. The production budget was said to be $20 million, and the advertising budget had to have been fairly small... so it probably broke even or even made a bit of money. But not much.

Will Oliver Stone's forthcoming movie about the WTC fare better, do you think? Frankly, just going on previews this looks like the better film. By far.

I think it will do a lot better on DVD. I want to see it, but my wife and I agreed it's probably too intense for a public viewing... the trailer alone gets me worked up.

So, are we still going to argue over whether or not this movie was a success? It will break $30 million, but that's about it. The production budget was said to be $20 million, and the advertising budget had to have been fairly small... so it probably broke even or even made a bit of money. But not much.

Will Oliver Stone's forthcoming movie about the WTC fare better, do you think? Frankly, just going on previews this looks like the better film. By far.
Nope, no argument - this movie is without question a success. It's already turned a profit from its theater run, and that profit margin will grow with the DVD release. Considering how many movies don't turn a profit, this is a definite plus. Now, if you're talking blockbuster - it's obviously not. Then again, I don't recall anyone claiming it would be.

As for Stone's movie, I'm not sure I'm ready for a "Hollywood-ization" of 9/11, which is what his movie appears to be (and United 93 was most definitely not). Different strokes for different folks, but I'm indifferent at best about WTC.

Furthermore, I think United 93 was more 'difficult' for people due to their knowledge of the tragic end. WTC will have a more upbeat ending (the firefighters get found) and while they are in the WTC as it comes down, probably will not be as hard to watch.

In the end, I think that while WTC may make more money, United 93 will have a greater effect on society.