Why Watch United 93?
Here's a terrific review in the Sunday (London) Telegraph:
Although they fail, at least their efforts mean it crashes in a field rather than into its intended target, the Capitol building. And yet such is the film's pacing, such is the director Paul Greengrass's craft, that, at its conclusion, even the most jaded of cinema-goers is left open-mouthed in astonishment.
The reviewer gives a nice thumb in the eye to the Loosers and Truthers:
But that is not the reason why everyone should see this film when it opens here next week. For those of us who believe that history is governed by cock-up, the biggest service it provides is the way in which it subverts 9/11 conspiracy theories.
These began to circulate even as the Twin Towers still smoked. There were dozens of them: that this was the work of Mossad, that the planes were never hijacked at all, that the World Trade Centre was blown up by rogue elements in government. Channel 5's schedules have been furred up with such nonsense for the past four years.
Even some who accept the logic of the suicide mission still question the involvement of the military on the day. It is almost common currency that United 93 did not crash as a result of a disturbance in the cockpit, but was shot down by the US Air Force to prevent it reaching Washington.
The truth, as the film recognises, is that human organisation works on precedent rather than foresight. Thus, on September 11, when the unexpected happened, there was no procedure in place to counteract it. In its scenes of panicked confusion in control rooms and flight towers, the film shows that no one knew what to do: their systems had failed them. Indeed, such was the fuzziness of lines of command that the military did not even learn United 93 had been hijacked until four minutes after it crashed.
Those of you who've listened to the podcast interview know that it was Loose Change enthusiasts spamming posts on United 93 that first drew my attention to LC.