allen-roulston I give this movie three stars presuming it is a complete work of fiction. We certainly have no idea what happened on the aircraft, if in fact United 93 did crash on September 11, 2001.Why 3 stars? One for a clean sound track. A second for in focus camera work. A third for, dare I say, making me laugh from time to time, by way of peculiar actor performances which were amusing.This movie seems to rely completely upon patriotic support and a desire to honour the people who perished on September 11, 2001. If one takes that out of the viewing experience, and views it as a work of fiction, it remains a bad movie as it doesn't provide the audience with a compelling story. All of the characters are under developed. There is no story line upon which to focus our attention. Worse yet, what is happening over the course of the movie feels arbitrary and without motivation.Example: the four hijackers do not appear to be working together in a well co-ordinated manner. They are presented more as bumbling fools who seem unlikely to have been successful, especially with their very peculiar behaviour prior to launching the hijack attack.The way the passengers were portrayed was, in my opinion, insulting. Four men begin an attack and not one of the passengers close to them responds instictively with a counter attack and the reasoning presented (to not counter attack) is very thin.Over all this is a movie to watch to learn how NOT to make a movie.

cinemajesty Movie Review: "United 93" (2006)Director Paul Greengrass, who takes a particularly-researched, originally-written script on the 9/11-hijacked passenger airplanes after departing from the U.S. American East Coast airports in New York and Boston, using all his directorial powers, gained since a noteworthy "Bloody Sunday" (2002) and an high-end-visceral action-thriller "The Bourne Supremacy" (2004), to capture the continuous following events between 8:30 AM to 12:00PM on that terror-struck day of reckoning, when two of the four plans already crashed into the twin towers of the "World Trade Center" on the island of Manhattan in the State of New York, USA.The documentary-like appearing motion picture captured by cinematographer Barry Ackroyd, who mimics steadicam-techniques becoming hand-held shots in engaging confrontations between Middle Eastern looking hotel-room-prepared terrorists, who stab two passenger, one in the neck, the other into stomach to put the pool of estranged passenger, armed with their cell-phone to hyper-realistic moments of fear, despair and agony, calling their loved-ones in a certain death situation when the suspense levels already drop to an early occupied cockpit of a hostile takeover without any additional lighting transition dressed airplane interiors by never-seen-any-flight-training terrorists, who in retrospective, when I revisit the picture after twelve years after its first release, scare hardly any "war-on-terror" thriller-indulging audience.Nevertheless, 2007 Academy-Award-nominated director Paul Greengrass, whose Best-Director-nomination got favored over a political more relevant real-life terrorist theme against the story of a 10-year-old girl enduring nightmares in Spanish civil-war (1936-1939) scenarios-created by director Guillermo Del Toro, when "United 93" passenger initiative to fight against the hijacking terrorists, steering the airplane into descent, becomes improperly-build, dramatically late effort in an editorial of just exceeding the 100-Minute-marker, which should have been 85 Minutes, when up to three editors had been needed to assemble a majority of beat-subtracting close-up on close-up cut-aways.Yet this consequently realism-preaching motion picture to utmost-authenticity-playing no-star actors desired creative decisions by producing partners Eric Fellner and Tim Bevan at production company "Working Title", sharing a feeling of a by-stander perspectives in the Flight Control room before the naturally down-beating, discussions-engaging conclusion are history.© 2018 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

Parker Lewis I happened to see United 93 when visiting family in a London rental apartment and given we know the tragic ending, I must admit I didn't think I could be so gripped by United 93. Maybe it's because the director and writer Paul Greengrass is British, we get a non-gung-ho but moving account of this terrorist attack. The cast doesn't have any big Hollywood names, but we still really want them to overpower the terrorists.Even in the final, gripping and horrific scene, I was hoping against hope that the brave passengers managed to land the plane. That's how convincing I thought the acting was. I mean, when I watched the Titanic (the Kate Winslet one), I just felt it was inevitable that the iceberg would prevail, but in United 93 I really thought that just maybe in an alternative universe where Gore won the Miami recount in 2000, the terrorists would be overcome by the heroic Americans.

SnoopyStyle The terrorists prepare themselves and on September 11, 2001, they board United Airlines Flight 93 departing from Newark to San Francisco. As they prepare to take off, planes are being hijacked. Chaos break out in air traffic control. Once in the air, the first plane crashes into the World Trade Center. Four hijackers take over United 93 as confusion spreads. The passengers calling from the plane surmise the hijackers' plan and try to retake the aircraft.I saw it in a theater back in the day. Honestly, I couldn't stop shaking as I left. I had to take a few seconds before I start the car. It's almost ten years since then. 9/11 grows further into the distant past. Watching it again, I thought some of its power may have dissipated. I got a little blasé about it initially and then the terrorists break into the cockpit. The intensity comes flooding back. I'm shaking once again. I think the growing distance from the actual event has diminished the anxiety but it may always be there. Director Paul Greengrass is able to bring all of it out onto the surface.