Terror porn, every bit as repellent as that other big-budget snuff movie, Passion of the Christ. I thought Greengrass’s Bloody Sunday was terrific, even though it uses the same quasi-documentary style to recreate a real event. Why was Bloody Sunday so much better? Probably because there’s a more solid consensus about what happened, and there was more context, which allowed you to actually draw some conclusions. With United 93, you’re left with nothing but horror and a big fat question mark–why would anybody do this? The movie just fades to black.
And again, the question of fiction vs. non-fiction. If United 93 wasn’t based on a real event, nobody would want to watch it–it’s a lousy story.
United 93, Paul Greengrass, 2006. *
United 93 at Rotten Tomatoes - 90%! Somebody calls it “A fresh and powerful reminder of the day the music died.” Don’t they have the wrong movie?
[...] Our mail these days looks like Ray Pride’s, times two, and we’re trying hard to work our way through a ridiculous stack of For Your Consideration screeners before the NYFCO awards meeting next week. It’s the only explanation I have for putting on Oliver Stone’s insufferable September 11 drama. Maggie Gyllenhaal and Maria Bello act their hearts out, but it’s no use–nothing can save this crushingly sentimental turd. At least United 93 had the good sense not to milk that day for “uplift.” [...]
[...] docudrama about the kidnapping and murder of her husband, the journalist Daniel Pearl. After United 93 and several other pointless exercises in dramatizing the “War on Terror,” you might [...]
[...] historical reenactment Bloody Sunday but found it disconcertingly out of place in the gratuitous United 93. In the Bourne films, we get to enjoy the filmmaker’s prodigious skills without any of the [...]