Predictably gut-wrenching, Paul Greengrass’ “United 93” is a respectful tribute to the fourth hijacked plane on Sept. 11, 2001. While the movie seemed to be a sincere attempt at honesty without sensationalism, it couldn’t deny its subject matter, leaving a haze over the audience as raw as an exposed nerve.
To ensure the authenticity the film was based on, and held true to, the Government Approved 9/11 Commission Report, transcripts of passenger telephone calls and audio tapes from the plane were all used. To further engage the audience, the film was shot in documentary style and a relatively unknown cast was used alongside real-life players, including Ben Sliney, the FAA operations manager who played himself.
The strongest and most unexpected aspect of the film was Greengrass’ avoidance of trivial ethnic stereotypes. The terrorists were not portrayed as crazy radical Muslims; instead the film gave a glimpse into their lives. The opening sequence details the hijackers preparing themselves for their fate with silent emotion and heavy reliance on prayer. Before hijacker Ziad Jarrah boards the plane, he is seen calling a relative and with an almost distraught hesitation he takes a deep breath and says “I love you.” This decision took away the animalistic monster depictions of the men and highlighted their relatable human characteristics. I still hated the hijackers, but I understood them a little more.
The most powerful scene in the movie was a tie between the harsh and poignant ending and a scene on the plane before the passengers retook the plane. The end, while predestined, was done in a way creating a surprise effect that left mouths agape as though viewers didn’t already know the outcome.
The scene on the plane intercuts the passengers, eyes closed, reciting the Lord’s Prayer with the hijackers in their native tongue, seemingly praying to the same God. The back and forth comparison between the two groups is breathtakingly intense and once again gives emotion to the attackers, putting both groups on a level playing field.
Despite its sensitivity, no film and no subject matter are above criticism. The real life participants on the grounds crew were obviously not professional actors, and on many occasions their performances were so contrived they broke the reality of the movie’s atmosphere. Throughout the film, I felt like I was a part of the action – not a bystander but a participant. It was in these forced moments of acting that I was drawn back to my seat in the theater, which took something away from the experience.
While the overall portrayal of the characters was positive, I felt a little more sensitivity could have been given to the victims. On the plane, sheer panic and chaos were at times distracting from the film’s self-proclaimed goal of heroizing the passengers. It was a frantic and stressful situation; one I could never imagine being in, but the emotions frequently made the flight attendants look less courageous and at times frustrating.
Although I dreaded seeing the film up until the moment the opening credit began, my overall opinion of the movie is that it was made with sincere intentions and with the objective to portray the events as they occurred in real life, while representing the people with the utmost respect.
Despite debating opinions on the release time, this movie successfully depicts an event no one is exempt from experiencing. Bottom Line: Every American needs to see this movie.
