UNITED 93 (2006)
Reviewed by Jerry Saravia
(Originally reviewed in 2006)
I am thankful that the filmmakers of "United 93" did not exploit the 9/11 tragedy and turn it into an "Airport" version of the story. "United 93" is a white-knuckled, thoroughly intense and emotionally devastating movie - it is so intense that many viewers could easily pass out. We all know what will happen and the eventual outcome, and it is that knowledge that makes the film almost unbearable and riveting from start to finish.
"United 93" begins with a recitement of the Koran by two of the suicide hijackers before they board the United 93 flight from Newark. One of them shaves all the hair from their body, and another one remains almost unsure of himself. They board the plane without a problem. We see all the passengers on board, including the flight attendants, stewardesses and the airline pilots. There is a 30-minute delay which makes the hijackers nervous, including the leader. We almost don't want that plane to take off but it does, and the intensity begins. We see the military commanders in a station getting ready to conduct a NORAD test. There are also air-traffic controllers in airport towers and at a control center in Ronkokoma, NY. It is business as usual, making sure all flights are in communication with the air-traffic controllers. Then, a hijacking is reported. Then one of the flights disappears in a radar scope (we know what's happened at that moment) and all hell breaks loose. The World Trade Center has been struck by aircraft, the Pentagon is in flames, the President is nowhere to be found, and the F-16's are not getting any confirmation on what to do or where the missing aircraft is. Communication is at a standstill, and Flight 93 is unaware of the hysteria until the hijackers attack the passengers and take control of the aircraft.
You know what you are in for when watching "United 93." What makes the film riveting and involving is director Paul Greengrass ("Bloody Sunday") who has employed a hand-held camera immediacy to the proceedings. Hand-held cameras are often used in manufacturing a documentary-look to a fictional recreation of a historical event. What Greengrass and writers have done is make us bear witness to a tragedy unfolding in real time without ever truly knowing the passengers. This is an inspired stroke, in a sense, because the audience will feel as they are aboard that plane with them (and how often do you get to know the passengers when you board a plane). The immediacy places you squarely in this infamous day's events in ways that not even the newscasts could ever accomplish. We feel for the passengers and their anxieties and fears, especially when they learn the pilots are dead and that they are part of a suicide mission. It becomes relentless because we feel helpless and want to do something.
All the actors perform as credibly and realistically as possible, and some of the air-traffic controllers and other personnel are played by the actual participants (Ben Sliney plays himself as the chief of air-traffic control). In fact, there is not one frame of "United 93" that feels false or inaccurate. And the movie doesn't inflate the patriotism of our first freedom fighters (as the passengers on board this plane have been known as), especially a key moment where Todd Beamer says the famous words, "Let's roll." When the moment happens, it is caught as a glimpse rather than a grandstanding moment where the audience can cheer.
"United 93" is a controversial film largely because of the subject matter. Was it too soon to have a film depicting the events of 9/11? I would say no: a film like this, as honest and intensely emotional as it is, is never premature. A bad, exploitative, dishonest take on these events would've been premature. Thankfully, "United 93" is the former.
1 comment:
It easy to see why over 25 years later, United 93 is so far regarded as the best 9/11 film. It could have become a pretty dramatic and sensationalist movie, but it was really handled with integrity and respect for everyone involved. The film doesn’t glorify the passengers nor does it demonise the hijackers. Peter Hermann portrays passenger Jeremy Glick with unaffected dignity, both brave and tearful, anguish etched into the lines of his frowning face, and revealing himself to be a beast, as he knees Haznawi and snaps Naomi’s neck. Trish Gates is gut-wrenching as flight attendant Sandra Bradshaw, despairing over the certainty they will die but assisting in any way possible with the revolt. After the very first take, Jamie Harding (who played the hijacker Ahmed Al Nami) was sobbing. “We all came out with stuff we've never seen in ourselves before,” says Harding. The sobbing is actually visible when Nami/Harding is overpowered by the passengers. Throughout the film, Harding's Nami is potrayed as the most violent of the hijackers, beating and berating the passengers. Even though he tries to hold the passengers back, he is overwhelmed and his sobbing before he is killed is so realistic; it is almost not just because of the realisation that he and his team will fail in their mission, but also he is going to go out being killed by the people he was terrorising and he, despite being trained as a killer, suddenly acts like a scared kid surrounded by gripping hands
Post a Comment