United Flight 93

Update: Ads will be purchased on liberal blogs now. Thank you. I will watch the move on Sunday and post a review.

It appears that the new movie, United Flight 93, is getting some good reviews. When I first saw a trailer for the movie, I must say that I was overcome with a wave of emotions. I feel very strongly that the passengers on that plane were American heroes of the highest order. Their actions, which no one asked them to make, and which they knew would cost them their lives, saved the lives of other Americans. September 11th, 2001, was the worst day in the recent history of America by a long way. Thousands of Americans were murdered. National treasures were destroyed. Our economy was sent into an immediate recession. I doubt that anyone over the age of six will ever forget where there were on that day.

Among the many heroic actions of that day, somehow the actions of the passengers on Untied Flight 93 always stuck in my mind the most. Maybe it is because no one asked them to do what they did. Maybe because they had no training to deal with the situation they faced. Maybe it is because they were all alone, and had no one else to rely upon. Maybe it is because of the cell phone messages they wee able to leave on the answering machines of loved ones before they decided to take action. Whatever the reason, those people still represented in my mind what is best about America. They were ordinary Americans acting not to save their own lives, but to save the lives of other Americans. They voted on their actions before taking them.

Those were not the only emotion that stirred in me when I saw the trailer. I also worried that a movie studio might be trying to make a buck by exploiting some of the most painful memories of Americans. I worried that it might be too soon. I also worried that conservatives would try to exploit this movie in order to further their own agenda, as they have tried to exploit 9/11 to further their own agenda for over four and a half years now. From the way Republicans talk, you would think that only Republicans died on 9/11, that only conservatives took action aboard United Flight 93, that the New York City fire fighters all voted for George Bush, that only people who have somehow "forgotten" what no one could ever forget oppose the Iraq war. I remember trying contact every member of my family like everyone else. I remember one of my students telling me he was taking a trip to NYC around that time, and only later finding out that he had been on the roof the World trade Center two days before. I remember being the only person walking around Center City Philadelphia at one point that day, and spending hour after hour after hour watching building burn, collapse, people covered in ash hugging one another. I remember it all, like everyone in America who was alive that day. This is why I have a question for the marketers for United Flight 93. Why are you only marketing this film to conservatives?

I am the manager of the Liberal Blog Advertising Network, which has 86 member blogs that combine for 17.78 million page views per week. It is the second largest advertising network at Blogads. From what I can tell, not a single blog in that network features the Untied 93 advertisement that apparently was purchased on all 103 members of the Conservative Blog Advertising Network. That network was 4.37 million page views per week, just under 25% of our traffic.

Why did the marketers of United Flight 93 decide to only advertise on conservative political blogs? The Liberal Blog Advertising Network is four times as large, and is even a 20-30% better deal per page view (or CPM, to use the relevant industry term). Do they think that attack is only relevant to red America? Do they think that only Republicans were attacked on 9/11? Do they think that only conservatives remember that day? Do they think that the only people who took action on United Flight 93 had voted for George Bush one year earlier?

The Americans aboard Flight 93 were red and blue, male and female, white and not, gay and straight. They were all heroes, and all Americans recognize them as such. All of America was attacked on that day, and all of America worked to save lives that day. There have clearly been, and continue to be, disagreements about the appropriate course of action for us to pursue as a nation in response to that day. However, on September 11th itself, we were all united, including on United Flight 93.

For some reason, in memory of that day, the marketers of Untied Flight 93 have taken it upon themselves to continue the conservative slander against liberals and progressives in this country that we don't remember that day, that we didn't care about the lives that were lost, and that we somehow hate our country. If any single day in American history should have shown just how utterly slanderous statement like that are, it was September 11th, when right in the heart of blue America we all stood together. And yet, even in the marketing of their own film about a day when we were not divided, Universal Studios and the marketers of their latest film have chosen to divide us. That is sad and offensive. As not only the manager of the Liberal Blog Advertising Network, but also as a proud patriot who works every day to try and help the country that I love, the country in which I was raised, the country where nearly everyone who I ever loved lived and lives, the country that has produced my favorite works of art, music and literature, that country that I still believe is the greatest beacon of hope the world has ever known, I am saddened and offended by this. And I promise that I will not be attending this movie, which I had been intended to see and review on Sunday, until I receive some sort of explanation on this matter.



Display:


Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Not being able to speak for them- I would hazzard a guess that maybe it's not a left/right thing. Maybe they thought they could obtain market penetration for people of the right through only right leaning media, whereas lefties or progressives would also tend to find out about the movie through MSM?


by bruh21 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:17:08 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

My guess would be that the basic story line of the movie is more popular with Republicans and Bush supporters because its the "American hero" story that can't be exposed as a lie, unlike Jessica Lynch's Rambo exploits and the first version of Pat Tillman's death.  Everybody who could contradict it is dead.

The truth is, this movie is speculation and fiction.  The official record contains very little to base a story of "American heroes saved Washington, DC" on and thats just a fact, whether acknowledging that fact hurts Democrats in the 2006 elections or not.  Read the transcript of the Flight Recorder:  it does not help the heroes story and 9/11 Commission was only willing to speculate what "must have" happened to posit a "heroes" story.  Heroes and glory and war, war, war.  

We've already paid a very heavy price for Democrats going along with dishonesty because they didn't want to look churlish and apparently, thats not going to stop any time soon.  


by Rowena on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:10:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Having now read the thread on this subject, I think Chris's post is much ado about nothing. ie, if they decided to advertise on HuffingtonPost, and on networks like Air America, as is being claimed below, then it's not a question of did they  advertise on liberal media- its a question of which liberal outlets the choose. There is nothing that says they must choose all liberal and all conservative outlets.

Also, I notice below the conflating of people's political agendas with the film. I am not sure why they didn't advertise here, but given the kind of attitudes I am seeing below, I wouldn't want to advertise here given the agendas being put out about the movie, which I am guessing most here have not even seen yet.


by bruh21 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:26:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll join you. (none / 0)



I, too, am baffled by the lack of advertising for this film on liberal sites. And disgusted.
If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution
by Maryscott OConnor on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:18:26 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Not sure how this relates to the direct marketing for United Flight 93 by the studio, but the one piece of marketing that I have seen for the movie was an email from Netflix. It read approximately: "As someone who enjoyed Fahrenheit 9/11, you might enjoy United Flight 93 which is premiering on April 28."

Netflix thinks fans of Fahrenheit 9/11 will want to see United Flight 93. Maybe the studio should be focusing additional advertising on the progressive audience.


Check out Future Roots, for rootsrockreggaegrass from the heart of Oregon's beautiful Willamatte Valley!
by robin oz on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:29:18 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (3.00 / 1)

9/11 illustrated to me how the social contract in this country is broken.  That is, the federal government is now much more interested in protecting itself than in protecting the American people.

Remember, only citizens onboard Flight 93 fought back that day, and only local firefighters, police officers, healthcare workers, and municipal officials tried to help the victims of the attacks.  New York Mayor Giuliani gained hero status that day simply by doing his job.

Meanwhile, where were Bush and the other members of his woeful administration?  They all ran and hid.  Bush hid twice, first in Louisiana and then in Nebraska.  He then sneaked back into Washington after dark.  


by Stuart Shaffer on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:31:32 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

It's on HuffPost - she's known as liberal, but I wouldn't per hers in the same category as you and Kos and Atrios, et al.


by zappatero on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:37:40 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Disgusting.
- John McCain
by Bob Brigham on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:41:47 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

What a great post. I think the same thing whenever I cruise the blogosphere and only see ads on the righty blogs. Just goes to show you how effective Bush has been in claiming 9/11, and how ineffective Dems have been in asserting themselves.

The president is right when he says that 9/11 was the defining moment of his presidency. Unfortunately, it is not a very good definition. On that day, and the weeks following it, our country and our world was unified and resolute. The president, instead of building on this to combat an existential threat, used it to further his own agenda. Squandering the national and international unity that 9/11 fostered is this president's legacy.


"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America"- Bill Clinton
by bluenc on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 01:48:56 PM EST

United Flight 93 in New York (none / 0)

As a New Yorker, I'm not sure I want to see more advertising for the film.  Frankly, I wish it had never been made.  I went to see a different movie a few weeks ago and they played the trailer, which as you may know includes footage of the planes striking the World Trade Center.  The entire theater was aghast.  I don't know if people who didn't live here at the time understand how viscerally disgusting the idea of using that footage in an advertisement is to New Yorkers.  Obviously the people at Universal just don't get it.


by antidoto on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:10:02 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 in New York (none / 0)

This New Yorker isn't thrilled by it either.  I pretty much turn away when the commercials come on TV.  It's not that I don't think they should have made the film or anything - it's just difficult to deal with.

I walk by the WTC site all the time, just to reflect on it.  I don't have a problem dealing with the emotions and such inside the context of my own head.  But the personal details, the sad stories of the individuals - like the stuff we heard on the news for the last month during the Moussaoui hearing - it just makes me very sad.  I guess I'm very fortunate not to have lost anyone close to me on 9/11.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:45:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 in New York (none / 0)

I lived in NYC during 9/11, was suppose to work in the towers, and I find your post over the top. Frankly, if the families who had loved ones on Flight 93 have no problem with this film, then neither do I. Also, the film isn't about NYC- it's about DC considering that's where the plane was headed, and about the family members of those aboard the plane. The rest of us can have our views, but they, the families, are the first to decided how we should feel on the subject. When it comes to the specifics, they are the one's most affected by what happened on Flight 93, and we are all only secondary witnesses of their tragedy.


by bruh21 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:32:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 in New York (none / 0)

I was unclear and accidentally conflated two emotions.  On the one hand, I personally wish the movie had not been made, but I don't think the filmmakers were tasteless or immoral to do so.  It just upsets me.  I don't have a good reason.  I'm not going to see it, but I'm also not going to say much more about it.

My real objection was to the use of one specific bit of footage--of the second plane striking the Trade Center--in what is essentially an advertisement, the movie trailer.  


by antidoto on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 06:57:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Our Air America station here in San Diego (1360 KLSD) has been playing ads for the movie non-stop.  I think it is the first time I remember a movie being advertised there.

It would be interesting to get some comment from marketing people.  I know it was really important to the director that this be a movie for all Americans.  Some right wing bloggers were up in arms because the last frame of the movie was changed from "and thus began America's war on Terror" to "This film is dedicated to the victims of 9/11"  (something like that...) The director said it was because after seeing it he realized that it would divide the audience and he did not want the movie to be making some kind of statement about our war in Iraq.


by paida on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:15:47 PM EST

Some provocative thoughts... (3.00 / 0)

First, I must admit I have been baffled from some posts I saw at DailyKos and Salon.com, insistent that this film was a piece of right wing propaganda despite the director's apparent efforts at presumptive accuracy.  (Besides the posts of loony conspiracy freaks insisting this episode didn't happen.)  The antipathy I saw on the left was idiotic and somwhat  repulsive--that it couldn't be taken just as a film, based on history, aimed only at provoking thought and feeling (as well as making a few bucks--which is OK by me).

I also have a theory--which is mine (Python reference)--about why this story is so compelling.  In my heart of hearts, I know it appeals to me because it satisfies a certain fantasy that many Americans have--that under duress, with nothing to lose, that we would have the capacity, and the passion, to be aggressive AND heroic.  I know the phrase, "Let's roll", has a visceral appeal to me--I KNOW that if I were in the same fix I would have gone after the SOBs, with relish, knowing that since I'm probably dead anyway I would at least have the satisfaction of kicking some terrorist ass on the way down.  You know, like the end of "Gladiator", when Maximus is going down and he knows it, but he's damn sure going to take the Commodus with him...or Slim Pickens riding the bomb down at the end of "Dr. Strangelove"....      


by paul minot on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:19:38 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Beautifully said, Chris. Your impassioned thoughts brought tears to the eyes of this New Yorker.
by Athenawise on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:27:47 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

If the liberal advertising network is being intentionally ignored, it is no doubt because marketers are subject to the same preconceived notions about patriotism and Red-statism as everyone else.  Yet this is odd because the current wave of puerile flag-waving is a product of those very same marketers.  (You would think they would be immune to this sort of thing.)  It is a pre-conceived notion to think that hollywood is liberal.  It is not.  

Anyway, this could be as simple as what some marketing executive had in their current database of advertising networks.  Some more investigation of this would be nice, though.  


Andy
by andrethgiant on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:32:18 PM EST

Interesting perspective (none / 0)

Chris seems to have an interesting view here, and unlike Scott Shields or Jerome Armstrong  - its not anywhere near airtight.

What he's saying is, that advertising something makes it somehow real. In other words the dyed-in-the-wool liberals who would give everything including their sons and daughters, down to the very last rivet, victory garden and war bond - the same pennsylvania liberals who bonded together and threw their entire soul into a blind attack on the armed enemy -

That they don't exist because they , too, didn't advertise on some network somewhere?

In other words - pay for play, right chris? I'll tell you what: maybe the studio decided that conservative blogs are populated with people who would see it even if the critics panned it, so they thought that they could make it a safe haven for seeing the movie as a part of their identity.

What that says about liberals is that if you want to win a war, get them in play. But if you want a country that loses wars, but has some great shopping and super duper ticket sales, put a guy like George Bush in charge, he'll pay you 100.00 dollars and then make sure the oil companies get off scot free for their billions.  

If anything, the idea that advertising has anything to do with anything is part of the problem not the solution.


by turnerbroadcasting on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 02:53:03 PM EST

Re: Interesting perspective (none / 0)

Huh. I tried, I really did, but I don't understand what you're trying to say.  Dead people not advertising? Get liberals in play? Not only are these phrases confusing, I can't detect a connection to Chris's issue with the movie's promoters.


Tim Wolfe

John McCain is not pro-choice!

by bruorton on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:29:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What? (none / 0)

This makes no sense. Very Joe Klein-ish.


TAKE BACK OUR PARTY: Democracy Bonds
by LiberalFromPA on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:51:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

I don't agree with the making of the 'movie' at all.

Too soon, too raw. I won't be a ticket buyer.

Perhaps it feels like poor taste, no matter how well executed in it's production.

It was these horrors that gave W the ability to politically bulldoze both houses, while the American Public hungered for revenge, and enter Iraq. We need not relive those horrors again and enflame those same unthinking emotions in some people.

I'm proud of those that did what needed to be done!

I'd like to think I'd have been there with them. A person, until confronted with their own imminent death, never knows how they will respond. And this was a scenario that had never played out before...it wasn't like anything in anyone's experience.

Yet I've flown enougn in the past years to always have a plan in the back of my mind. I've been close a few times on the ground. But thank anything you hold holy...never in the air.

Do I want to remember in detail the horror of that day? NO. Do I want any filmmaker, no matter how pure his reasoning, to enflame the Right yet again? NO. Do I want us to feel the pain all over again? NO.

I honor those families whose loved ones were lost. They have a hole in their hearts that may never fully heal.

At least we know, without the help of any movie, that the Americans on Flight 93, as has happened so many times throughout our history, went down fighting. And there is honor in that action.

I don't need to relive it in color. It's in my head.


just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg frontpaging at The Democratic Daily...
by BigDog on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 03:01:17 PM EST

Kick ass job, Chris. n/t (none / 0)


by Meteor Blades on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 03:42:30 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Not to detract from your main point here, but when you say "Our economy was sent into an immediate recession" on September 11, 2001, I think you are encouraging the misconception that the sluggish economy of 2001 and 2002 can be blamed on the 9/11 attacks. That's what George W. Bush wants you to think. If there was a recession in 2001-2002(and I am not sure there was one, technically), most of it happened before September 11.

I know some people in the airline industry did get laid off as a result of the 9/11 attacks, but that industry had its problems anyway. Overall, I doubt 9/11 was a drag on the economy. Certainly it was a shot in the arm for security and defense industries.


by Whick on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 03:53:18 PM EST

Nov. 7, 2000 ... (none / 0)

more tragic and cost more lives.


by tuffie on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:27:41 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

(Ignoring your update, which makes this all moot) there are plenty of reasons why the leftie blogs might be being left out at this pt.  It could be a staged marketing roll out, that targets some demos before others in order to maximize the generation of buzz.  It could be that their initial leftie marketing didn't test well, and they had to go back and revise it.  It could be that the movie itself didn't test well with the left (I have to say that I am less than excited -- make that nauseated -- about seeing 9/11 turned into largely fictional cheap entertainment).  

Those are just a few off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are many other possibilities -- none that require spinning conspiracy theories about hollywood teaming up with the wingnuts -- but as I said, it is all moot now.

Good job using your megaphone to goose the marketers into buying your product.


by Disputo on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 04:39:46 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Could this be part of the problem:

I just got back from the theater. I saw the first showing, opening day. Four words:

Go. See. It. Now.

Not a whisper of liberal hand-wringing, no "Islam is a religion of peace" disclaimers, nothing about poor, oppressed, marginalized, disenfranchised, disempowered little brown Muslims, and no crying about all those poor homicide-bomber Palestinians. I won't give any details, other than that everybody was silent leaving the theater.

I wouldn't take small children. It hasn't been sanitized -- and that's exactly as it should be. Teenagers, however, should see this movie. Every American should see this movie. My only criticism is that it's about four years late..."

Visit this enlightening site here: http://rightwingnation.com/index.php/200 6/04/28/1357/

"


Andy
by andrethgiant on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 05:09:24 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Really.

How about this wingnut redmeat from the movie:

Other scenes appear to be wholly invented. In one, a passenger who argued for cooperating with the hijackers is restrained by others as the counterattack begins. In another, the passengers are shown overwhelming two hijackers and apparently killing them. Both depictions might be dramatically satisfying, but there's no evidence that either of those events occurred.

So, the writers added fictional scenes that could have been written by Rove?  Nice....

I think I'll pass.

source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2006/04/27/AR2006042702509. html


by Disputo on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 05:41:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

You have to explain to me what is partisan about these scenes.  Okay, so they're made-up - lots of stuff is made up without being politically slanted.  Why is it a pro-Republican viewpoint to claim that the passengers fought back?


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 06:48:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

I think what you are seeing here in some of the posters is an indication of the fact that the left has no better grip on reality than the right. You ask the right question- why are the facts of this flight (or dramatization of what we think were the facts of the flight) so threatening to some people? Does it make  Iraq okay? I don't think so. The only thing I can see is that somehow by stirring up emotions related to 9/11 that means that they think some people will see everything that happened afterwards as necessary. To that- all one has to say is two wrongs (the terrorists attacking us and Bush's subsequence response) do not make a right. But, that doesn't take away from the fact that these people did fight back or that they were doing something that I frankly cant begin to understand.


by bruh21 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 08:29:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

You're kidding me, right?

I have to explain to you how an invented scene about how one of the passengers who wanted to, shall we say, "engage in diplomacy with the terrorists" had to be restrained by the other passengers who, shall we say, "wanted to go to war with the terrorists" is going to be used by freepers to validate their "you're either with us or you're against us" world view?


by Disputo on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 09:41:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

That's your whole point?  Seriously, who cares what some crazy freeper is going to think?

Fighting back against terrorists who have just hijacked your airplane is not the "conservative" response.  Do you think most liberals who watch this movie will say, "Gee, they should have listened to the guy who wanted to negotiate"?

The fact that diplomacy is generally appropriate when dealing with sovereign states, and not appropriate when a terrorist has just hijacked your plane, is not a nuance that is lost on most Americans.  Millions of people are not going to watch this movie and become brainwashed into nuking Iran.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 01:22:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

So you are blaming a movie because someone chooses to ignore that the movie isn't about politics at all- but about what happened at a specific time for specific people without regard to the politics that later developed around it? Your approach is just as heavy headed and manipulative as their side on this issue.


by bruh21 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 08:24:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

On there now, under Harris Miller ad. (none / 0)


by Demrock6 on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 05:12:22 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Why isn't Universal advertising on liberal blogs?  Could it be because said blogs (all right...said blog) doesn't seem to be able to get it clear that the name of the film is "United 93," NOT "United Flight 93," "Untied 93," or "Untied Flight 93"...?

Although I guess that, if they advertised here, maybe you could use the ad revenue to hire a copy editor.


by JDWalley on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 05:23:11 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Wow Chris, are you guys that desperate for cash?

Even if that wasn't your initial motivation, you arne't much of a political operator if you can't see that that's how this post is going to be taken.

Blgo ads are part of a huge marketing campaign. I think its a big stretch to impute evil motivations on the part of movie execs.

And as the comment from Rowenna suggests, there's a sizable minority in the liberal blogosphere that thinks this movie shouldn't have been made. Skipping the liberal blogopshere might jsut be a smart marketing move.


by dantheman on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 05:24:47 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

I hadn't thought of it that way, but yeah, saying "I'm going to boycott your movie because you didn't advertise on my liberal blog network" comes across as very petty.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 06:50:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Just so everyone knows, the money involved never acutally occurred to me until well after the facr. when I wrote this, I didn't care about the money involved. for me, this was culture an ideology. This afternoon, I thought about how this might be seen as purely an advertising money grab, and it worried me. My notivations wre entirely cultural and ideological. I really don't care if MyDD has one more ad or not. I just couldn't stand to see consevatives "owning" 9/11 any longer.
by Chris Bowers on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 09:06:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

It may have something to do with the way they, themselves, view the film.


by akhenaten on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 05:31:15 PM EST

Not sure about this (none / 0)

"They were the first to defend. Honor them."

So, if I don't go see the movie, am I dishonoring them?

If I do go see the movie, am I honoring them?

This just doesn't feel right. I know you need to market everything, but "honor them" is in the offensive category to me. Honor them by remembering who allowed this to happen, then used their deaths to get us into a war of choice, killing more innocent people, then working to see they are voted OUT of office. That's honoring them.


Witty comment goes here...
by michael in chicago on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:34:52 PM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

But where do you suppose the writers gathered enough verified facts to make a full-length movie?  A black box was recovered and some passengers made phone calls, but those don't seem enough to patch together a movie re-creation of events.

Some "facts" as we know them are disputed.  For example, one of the men alleged to have been a hijacker on that flight has said he continues to be alive and well and has not been in America since many years before 9/11.  The administration admits it may not be 100% with its 19 hijacker ID, yet it's sticking to its story.

So my worry is that we'll all become indoctrinated with a fictional account, or one that is inadequately authenticated.  I'm not a fan of the genre that convolutes fiction and fact.  I think it's dangerous, a subversive propagandist tool, no matter what agenda.

And, btw, whoever commented "if the families aren't complaining ..."  I don't know they aren't, do you?  I haven't read any media, credible or otherwise, having interviewed any of them on the movie, have you?  Serious question.  I'd like to know the full facts.


by kathyhhh on Fri Apr 28, 2006 at 10:59:25 PM EST

Review (none / 0)

I highly recommend Walter Chaw's review of this film at http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/screenre views/united93.htm/.  From what he says, it's a long, long way from being any kind of right-wing propaganda piece, although most of the knuckle-draggers in over in freeperville are no doubt too dim to recognize the criticisms of our current leadership Chaw points out.  An excerpt:

United 93 is a deeply divisive, deeply political picture that, in portraying the "facts" as we either know them or want to know them or want to deny them, paints a portrait of an administration so unprepared for the possibility of a full-scale terrorist attack on American soil that the only person with the authority to set the rules of engagement in that situation for a military response to the immediate threat was unavailable for those precious minutes at the beginning of the crisis, where it could have made a difference. Greengrass is fairly unapologetic as far as Bush Jr.'s conspicuous absence is concerned, and during the height of the crisis as it's portrayed, the frustration of military and civilian leaders waiting for a word from on-high is a key component of the tension.

I haven't decided yet whether I'll see this movie -- as others have said, the memories are still pretty raw -- but this review has certainly increased the odds that I will.
Later,
Alex


Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama for President! Beat McCain!
by Alex on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:40:42 AM EST

Corrected link (none / 0)

http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/screenre views/united93.htm

I've never seen a link where adding a closing / kept the browser from finding it before, but apparently in this case it does.


Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama for President! Beat McCain!
by Alex on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 12:43:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Review (none / 0)

I haven't seen the movie, but on Chicago WLS Eileen Byrne said it was "too political," "too much Bush-bashing."  Passengers were shown saying "Where is the President?  Where is the Vice-President?"  "The film "sneakily" lured the viewers into the drama, and then hit them with all this Bush-bashing."  She further goes on to say, in an aggrieved tone, "Everybody keeps saying it's such a good film.  Roger Ebert gave it four stars.  I feel bad, because I seem to be the only one who didn't like it.  Is there something wrong with me?...BUT IT WAS TOO POLITICAL!!"  She then invited the audience to phone in with their views after the commercial, but after the commercial didn't take any calls and went on to something else.                              


by Baltimore on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 01:24:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

Right-wing propaganda can come in many forms. One would be offering a fiction piece that hid or obscured holes in the true narrative, but in such a way that it felt "unbiased," thus helping to cement an untrue story that might prevent others from asking questions that need to be asked. This "true" story being obscured  (which may or may not involve a ten-foot hole that a huge plane disappears into with hardly a trace) could point at a horrific and devious agenda by the Right wing (or the Neocons, or BUSH, et. al.), and thus a safe film that smacks the hands of the Govt in the context of a "non-fiction" story, instead of suggesting investigations to discover the truth would, indeed, be a form of Right Wing Propaganda.

Food for thought.


by akhenaten on Sat Apr 29, 2006 at 07:18:54 AM EST

Re: United Flight 93 (none / 0)

I just happened upon this site and just could not resist posting since I am a republican...Some of you just don't get it! You say it is to soon to see movies about 9/11, some of you lived thru 9/11 and my heart goes out to you! What  you don't get is, the 40 people on flight 93 are even today saving american lives! How? When americans tried to take the plane back!!!Terrorist everywhere know that never again will americans sit in our seats while they try to take over the cockpit. It doesn't matter if they were trying to save DC, people on the ground or just themselves..they fought and though they did not survive, they did a great service for this country. If all four attacks had been successful, do you think that the terrorist would not feel empowered and try it again? See the movie even if it makes you uncomfortable, sad, angry or depressed...We owe it to our heroes!

As far as one of the posts here...Europe has no love for the US...and hasnt in a very long time. Bush is only a symptom to the problem but he is not the problem..There are various reasons why Europe is unhappy. Unemployment, failure of the EU, failure to integrate the muslim population, extreme racism, powerful unions and lets not forget Kyoto!


by jes on Sun Apr 30, 2006 at 11:10:21 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.