Last October I hinted that I didn't agree with the general consensus of how United Airlines Flight 93 came to an end on 9/11. Since then the story of UA 93 has been made into a feature film, and a damn good one. Credit writer/director Paul Greengrass for keeping the drama in check, with just the right sense of urgency and deadly seriousness. When a director can take a story to which everyone more or less knows the ending and still manage to keep the audience riveted right up to the end, he knows what he's doing (see: James Cameron, Titanic, highest grossing film of all time).
United 93 has been widely praised, in large part for its faithful recreation of the day's events. And this is why I feel compelled to rant.
If you haven't done so already, check out the Complete 911 Timeline for United Airlines Flight 93. Specifically:
9:58 a.m.: Ed Felt Said to Describe Explosion and White Smoke from Bathroom Call
(Before 10:06 a.m.): Fighters Trailing Flight 93?
(Before 10:06 a.m.): Flight 93 Breaks Up Prior to Crash?
These details have been reported by multiple respected news outlets. I can personally remember hearing reports of these events on television in the hours after the attacks.
It seems most people have either forgotten about these reported events, or made up their minds that they never happened.
At the end of the film, which reviewers have praised for its fidelity, it states that no fighter jets were within 100 miles of Flight 93 at the time of the crash. At no point during the final action sequence could I hear an explosion or see white smoke out the plane window. Now, I have absolutely no problem with a filmmaker saying, "This is what I think happened, so I'm telling the story this way." The problem I have is that almost every single reviewer says something to the effect of, "this is the closest you will get to an actual account of exactly what happened," as if the film represented real-life video evidence.
I'd like to think that people are smart enough and independent enough to know the difference. I'm just not hearing that so far....
1 comment:
You're not alone in your assessment. I'm on board, 100%. And honestly, I believe that it's all tied in to the military's control over media communications, as first referenced in "Why We Fight".
This isn't a conspiracy theory, people. It's the truth, and the facts are right in front of our faces. We are way, way too complacent.
Post a Comment