United 93

During the film I was convinced of a final four-star rating (the confusion in the control centre was wonderfully directed, but wasn’t that much fun), but the last half hour is something so incredibly and brilliantly impressive that I’m giving it five stars without any remorse. I’ve never seen a stronger “historical” film. 93% (28/12/2008)

To put it in concentrated form: Paul Greengrass and the only logical reaction to a hitherto taboo topic – to keep your distance, not to judge, not to evaluate and, if possible, to present verified facts. If the filmmaker is strong and has well-mastered weapons such as a hand-held camera and a civilian-acting ensemble without stars, then the result cannot be anything other than absolutely suggestive, chilling, captivating. This is exactly what United 93 is like. The film does not spare the viewer in any way with reductions, drawing him into the center of events using all possible technical means, and it presents events with chilling authenticity and narrative distance. But the performance itself is literally devouring and fascination with the story, an unquenchable feeling of the unconstructed, and the absence of classic plot schemes - all this creates a space for a strong to horrible spectator experience. There is no moralizing at the end, an unshakable assurance that good can be delineated from evil, that the border is fixed and that crossing it will be punished. At the end we find out that victims and murderers are still and only human. The most chilling moment of the whole film for me was the prayer just before the inevitable catastrophe. At that moment, all the bizarreness and absurdity of today's world materialized aboard Greengrass's United 93. The value of such a film exceeds the prefabricated messages about real heroes a million times over, because it offers the viewer an intense experience without whispering. It's up to you how you evaluate it. (28/08/2006)

There were two ways this could have been filmed. Either as a hyper-pathetic monstrosity perceiving every Arab as a terrorist and every American as a patriot willing to die for his country... or the way in which it was filmed. Paul Greengrass doesn't dwell on any motives that led the terrorists to act, but rather portrays them only as people who are pursuing their goal with confidence, and instead views the passengers as a group of people who, in an extreme situation, were able to perform a single radically desperate act of defiance. It all happens in real-time, which is then transferred from the control room to the plane and captures the immediate action through a handheld camera, all without getting involved in creating psychology, relationships, or quick links. This makes the entire film feel much more believable and raw, and the final 10 minutes will forever go down in film history! For those who can sympathize with the plight of ordinary people, this film is the ultimate celebration of civilian heroism. Those looking for theories, politics, and social criticism should wait for Oliver Stone's World Trade Center. (13/06/2006)

Today it’s five years since “it" happened, but right now I feel like I just experienced it again. Just like being there. I don’t think I ever saw a more real-life movie. Greengrass captured the events of 9/11 brilliantly, at the same time erecting a movie memorial to all victims of those attacks. Powell’s music just goes to augment the whole situation and instills a storm of emotions inside you which you might not find pleasant at all. (12/09/2006)

Absolute experience that destroys viewers' senses. Greengrass's directing style brought to the highest level of tolerance through maximum authenticity and squeezing emotions in hectoliters. The second viewing, moreover, does not diminish the impression, on the contrary, it elevates it to the highest spheres. Those who haven't seen it have no chance of understanding the flood of praise. (30/08/2006)