I had mixed feelings about seeing United 93. On the one hand, I didn’t really know if it was worthwhile to support a commercialized, Hollywood-type dramatization of a real-life situation in which everyone knows the tragic end. On the other hand, I’m not one to judge a film before having seen it. So, I went to experience the film myself.

The storylines of United 93, written and directed by Paul Greengrass, who is British, alternate between what happened aboard that flight and, at the same time, what happened on the ground, the latter mostly from the perspectives of the Federal Aviation Administration and the US military. None of the other planes involved in the attacks of September 11, 2001, are shown in any kind of detail except for the well-known news footage of one of them crashing into the World Trade Center.

Wisely, Greengrass chose unknown actors to play the majority of the roles. This keeps the focus squarely on the story, and Hollywood-size egos out of the way. What’s more surprising is that five of the people in this film are playing themselves, which helps to re-create that time with startling realism and authenticity.

The story on the ground is fascinating, and United 93 effectively captures the confusion and astonishment that ensued as the attacks unfolded. We watch as the FAA tries to figure out what, exactly, is going on -- a hijacking hadn’t been seen in years, so no one suspected at first that that was what was happening. The military seems paralyzed, unable to come up with any type of defense quickly enough. And as if all that weren’t enough, there is the lack of communication between the FAA and the military, not to mention government officials at the very top, who took seemingly forever to respond. When all air traffic was halted (I remember it well -- I was in South America at the time, scheduled to fly home on September 12), the order came from the FAA. As I watched all of this played out onscreen, I realized that it was the right thing to do.

For the story on the ground, the filmmakers had plenty of hard information to go on; the facts about flight 93, however, aren’t so clear. No one survived that crash; what we know came mainly from cell-phone calls made by people on the plane to people on the ground. Greengrass had to create plausible scenarios for how the terrorists took over the plane, and for how the passengers banded together to retaliate and try to regain control.

It’s what he re-creates in the airplane’s cabin that makes this film take flight. There are no Hollywood heroics, no hammy actors going over the top trying to steal the spotlight. Instead, we’re presented with terrorists with a purpose in mind, but who are also human and terrified about what they’re about to do. We’re also shown a cabin full of everyday people pulled into a horrifying situation that few of us will ever encounter, let alone know how to react to. When the now-famous "Let’s roll" line is spoken, it isn’t shouted like the battle cry of good about to overtake evil; instead, it is delivered simply as a call to get a few people to do what they needed to do in order to survive in a life-or-death situation.

Now that the release of United 93 has successfully broken the de facto moratorium on films about 9/11, more will undoubtedly follow. However, I doubt that any future film will be made with the kind of restraint that has resulted in the level of onscreen realism seen in United 93. It is one of the best-made films I’ve seen in years.

• Go Back