CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Thoughts on UNITED 93
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Thoughts on UNITED 93

post #1 of 59
4/25/06 at 2:41am
Thread Starter 
http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=news&id=6508

My non review.
Reply
post #2 of 59
4/25/06 at 6:02am
Well, that was easily the best thing I've read on this site for a while.

I'd love to see more of these essay-like pieces. I found that really satisfying in a way that I would not expect a review to be able to achieve.

That article could really be a calling-card piece for the site and your writing. I hope the rest of the internet film community (such as it is) responds to it.

Really, just superb.
Reply
post #3 of 59
4/25/06 at 6:40am
Damn, Devin. Just damn.

I can't see how anyone can criticize his writing contributions to the site. Great stuff.
Reply
post #4 of 59
4/25/06 at 7:55am
"Art isn’t about letting you know how it felt – art is about letting you feel how it felt."

Fucking exceptional.
Reply
post #5 of 59
4/25/06 at 8:07am
great great writing
kudos to you my friend

bloody sunday was a catharsis for a lot of people over here
hope united 93 does the same for you guys over there
Reply
post #6 of 59
4/25/06 at 8:29am
Once again, Mr Faraci, you have proved your mettle and skill in tackling the issues and films that you care about. By far, one of the best writers of your sort on that there interweb. I, for one, am glad that you only do these editorials every few weeks or months. It keeps them special and you are rarely less than exemplary.
Reply
post #7 of 59
4/25/06 at 9:42am
Fine work, Devin. Your coverage of this film should earn some kind of internet-journalism Pulitzer.
Reply
post #8 of 59
4/25/06 at 10:05am
Excellent writing, Devin. This is gonna be a tough film to watch.
Reply
post #9 of 59
4/25/06 at 10:46am
Yeah. Really fucking great, Devin. I love it when you write things like this.
Reply
post #10 of 59
4/25/06 at 11:11am
Again, Dev, your coverage on United 93 is absolutely aces. This piece is the very peak.

I still have no desire to see the film, but damn if I'm not loving your extensive coverage.
Reply
post #11 of 59
4/25/06 at 11:23am
Well done. Hopefully there'll be more opportunities for essays of this quality in the future.
Reply
post #12 of 59
4/25/06 at 11:57am
Stuff like this is why you get paid the big bucks, man. Nice.
Reply
post #13 of 59
4/25/06 at 11:59am
Thread Starter 
Thanks guys. I'm actually hoping to convert at least some of the naysayers - hopefully this coverage will get a couple of people into theaters.

I was discussing the film with another writer last night and we both came to the conclusion that this is an honest to god important movie. I think it could have had an Oscar shot had it been released in the season.
Reply
post #14 of 59
4/25/06 at 12:11pm
This is a bit of a bizarre request, but is there anyway you can link to 102 Minutes in your thoughts. I've been buying most of my stuff on Amazon through you guys lately and since you recomended it, I figured you guys should get a bit of the commission.

Those are some truely profound thoughts btw. I didn't read all of it as I like to see the movie first, form my own opinion and than compare it to those of others later on, but I have been really touched by most of what I have read so far (both on this page and on other articles about this film). Fantastic job all around.

On another side note, I think one thing Universal could do in order to stop ALL naysayers about the film is that when it starts to turn a profit, they should donate the rest of the money to a 9/11 charity. Or might they already be doing this?
Reply
post #15 of 59
4/25/06 at 12:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf
Thanks guys. I'm actually hoping to convert at least some of the naysayers - hopefully this coverage will get a couple of people into theaters.
I wasn't a naysayer, but you've convinced me to check it out when I wansn't even going to give it a chance before. Excellent non review- as people have said- we definitely need more of these essay-type articles. Really great stuff, Devin.
Reply
post #16 of 59
4/25/06 at 12:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordling
"Art isn’t about letting you know how it felt – art is about letting you feel how it felt."

Fucking exceptional.
My thoughts exactly. Great write-up Dev. I'm curious to read Russ' take on the film as well, but this coverage has been truly great.
Reply
post #17 of 59
4/25/06 at 12:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert_Squirrel
On another side note, I think one thing Universal could do in order to stop ALL naysayers about the film is that when it starts to turn a profit, they should donate the rest of the money to a 9/11 charity. Or might they already be doing this?
I believe Devin said that Universal was donating 10% of the opening weekend box office returns to the Flight 93 Memorial Fund.
Reply
post #18 of 59
4/25/06 at 12:57pm
I was never a naysayer neither, in fact, this has been one my most anticipated films for a few months now. But, looking at the big films coming out in May in the UK (Da Vinci, X3, M:i:III), this is the one UNMISSABLE film on my list now. I can't wait to hear some of the arguments people are gonna have and I can't wait to be amongst them.
Reply
post #19 of 59
4/25/06 at 4:30pm
Thanks for your thoughts Devin, very well said.

I've been waiting for this movie ever since I read the 9/11 commission report (non conspiracy-theory version). If anyone is wondering what is actually known about what happened on United 93, check out the section entitled The Battle for United 93 here (pdf).

After reading The Battle for United 93 I knew there would be a movie. I had hoped that it would honor the passengers without exploiting them, and it sounds like this movie has done that. I'll be there when the movie opens opening night, I think because I feel I need to honor the victims and their memory (the families being behind the movie helps here) and also reach some sort of internal catharsis about what happened that day.

If anyone doubts "what really happened" on United 93 I suggest they read that section of the 9/11 report.
Reply
post #20 of 59
4/25/06 at 4:31pm
That may be a non-review but I doubt I'll see any review that comes close to the quality of that piece. I was planning to see this but now I think I'll be there Friday.

Devin, your work is pure gold in the treasure chest that is CHUD.com
Reply
post #21 of 59
4/25/06 at 7:41pm
THX Devin, this was a well written piece and definitely the most convincing one then every reviews i've read so far on the Internet. Oh and btw to everyone who hasn't seen BloodySunday yet. Highly recommended and if you get the chance just watch it before you go to see United 93.
Reply
post #22 of 59
4/25/06 at 8:08pm
Yet another great little piece of writing there dev and obviously one from the heart.

I must admit - between being a huge fan of Bloody Sunday (my god that film kicked my arse around the street) and you're piece there I think Im going to have to give this a look really.

Not sure of its Australian release date tho.
Reply
post #23 of 59
4/25/06 at 11:08pm
Haven't read Dev's piece yet, but have just come back from the film and it's very much something to see. It's riveting.
Reply
post #24 of 59
4/25/06 at 11:26pm
I'm one of those that feels that while the movie should be made I just don't know if I could sit thru it in a theater and had planned on getting it on DVD.

Then I read Devin's article.....and let me just say that It was without question the best article I have read about this movie.

I'm definatly now going to see it opening weekend.
Reply
post #25 of 59
4/26/06 at 12:09am
So ... how was that not a film review?

Regardless, it was great writing. I'm definitely looking forward to this movie.
Reply
post #26 of 59
4/26/06 at 2:20am
Excellent work Devin. CHUD is easily the best film site on the Net and I think that articles like this are a large chunk of the reason why. I will definitely be seeing this movie when it arrives.
Reply
post #27 of 59
4/26/06 at 4:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sackley
I was never a naysayer neither, in fact, this has been one my most anticipated films for a few months now. But, looking at the big films coming out in May in the UK (Da Vinci, X3, M:i:III), this is the one UNMISSABLE film on my list now. I can't wait to hear some of the arguments people are gonna have and I can't wait to be amongst them.
Unfortunately it appears as though this has been pushed back to a September release over here. I can see the logic behind it-Universal probably want to see what kind of reception/uproar it gets in the States well in advance so they can tailor their approach for the other major foreign markets-but it's still incredibly frustrating.

Excellent article, Devin. If only this kind of thinking towards this film, and cinema in general, were a more regular occurence amongst the general public.
Reply
post #28 of 59
4/26/06 at 6:54am
I did wonder why we hadn't seen any ads yet. Ach well, I just hope I'm not burned out on the film by the time it arrives...
Reply
post #29 of 59
4/26/06 at 2:03pm
Thread Starter 
Russ, very excited to read your review.
Reply
post #30 of 59
4/26/06 at 2:19pm
Thread Starter 
http://filmcritic1963.typepad.com/re...nited_93_.html

I had a very long phone argument with Cole on Saturday morning about this film in which he dismissed my personal anecdote of receiving a cell call on a plane in flight when I had forgotten to switch off my phone.

This, to me, is the epitome of a bad review, as it's a screed about the day and not the film - and a poorly researched screed as well, including such nonsense tropes as "no bodies were found."

Please: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true
Reply
post #31 of 59
4/26/06 at 2:25pm
Excellent writing, Dev.

I'm wondering...is Greengrass's Watchmen now destined to replace Gilliam's Watchmen in geek folklore?
Reply
post #32 of 59
4/26/06 at 2:34pm
Great article Devin. It's rare to find film critics that can verbalise the emotional impact that films can have on an audience in such an effective manner.
Reply
post #33 of 59
4/26/06 at 3:05pm
That's the best anything I've ever read by you.
Reply
post #34 of 59
4/26/06 at 3:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf
http://filmcritic1963.typepad.com/re...nited_93_.html

I had a very long phone argument with Cole on Saturday morning about this film in which he dismissed my personal anecdote of receiving a cell call on a plane in flight when I had forgotten to switch off my phone.

This, to me, is the epitome of a bad review, as it's a screed about the day and not the film - and a poorly researched screed as well, including such nonsense tropes as "no bodies were found."
That's a fucking toolshed review.

But one thing this film will be good for is showing how people believe the infrastrucutre of this country operates. (Well, operated.)

Cole was utterly dismissive of the inability to get planes scambled; to me, that seemed so frighteningly real. I'm far more ready to believe that the individual arms of our government were unable to communicate and coordinate than I would be to accept that we instantly targeted hijacked planes and shot fighters to their exact position.
Reply
post #35 of 59
4/28/06 at 12:51am
Not getting my money, I could have happily gone another twenty years without seeing a movie about that fucking day.
Reply
post #36 of 59
4/28/06 at 1:24am
Yup, great write up Devin. It needs to get reprinted on some political sites. Seems like the film is not only about an important event, but also is an interesting formal solution to a filmic problem. Down to its own film movement name.

Are there any non-terrorist Muslims on the flight/in the movie? Just curious because you point out the cross-cutting at the end with the praying...
Reply
post #37 of 59
4/28/06 at 4:23am
Thread Starter 
I don't know if there's any interest on these boards in discussing my concept of "neo-factualism," but I think it's interesting to consider how Michael Winterbottom's magnificent IN THIS WORLD (which I wasn't thinking about when I wrote this piece) or his new ROAD TO GUANTANAMO (which I haven't seen yet, but will see Monday) fits in with that "movement."
Reply
post #38 of 59
4/28/06 at 4:44am
Ah, am I looking at that poster the wrong way, or is there a plane heading toward two smoking towers?
Reply
post #39 of 59
4/28/06 at 4:53am
Also, how is "neo-factualism" different from what every other filmmaker who is more interested in the facts of an event than a narrative has made, like America's most wanted or Discovery channel reinactments? Greengrass is probably much more skilled at it, but still.
Reply
post #40 of 59
4/28/06 at 5:03am
Thread Starter 
He's not more interested in the facts than the narrative. He merges them. It's different because it still has the emotional impact of a great standard narrative.
Reply
post #41 of 59
4/28/06 at 5:51am
Alright, "has meticulous historical accuracy as one of their central goals." I'm quite sure the Discovery guys, etc, attempt at and would love their work to have the emotional impact of a great standard narrative as well. Although maybe not for the same reasons as Greengrass. Hell, some of the better ones even come close.

Okay, not really. But they do try.
Reply
post #42 of 59
4/28/06 at 5:53am
Thread Starter 
Those guys would tell you they're making documentaries.
Reply
post #43 of 59
4/28/06 at 6:30am
Of course, but now we're talking about how a filmaker wishes their work to be perceived, and not the structure of the work itself. In my experience, as intent and acheivement are two seperate entities, this can be one of the most superficial parts of the filmmaking process.
Reply
post #44 of 59
4/28/06 at 1:14pm
http://chud.com/reviews/6540
Reply
post #45 of 59
4/28/06 at 5:32pm
Really solid flick. It wasn't too soon, as it turns out.
Reply
post #46 of 59
4/28/06 at 7:33pm
So would The Battle of Algiers be considered a neo-factual film? Triump of Will? Elephant? All those films by Miklos Jancso? What exactly separates neo-factual films from neorealist or docudrama ones besides a preponderance of historical events? hUH?
Reply
post #47 of 59
4/28/06 at 8:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf
I don't know if there's any interest on these boards in discussing my concept of "neo-factualism," but I think it's interesting to consider how Michael Winterbottom's magnificent IN THIS WORLD (which I wasn't thinking about when I wrote this piece) or his new ROAD TO GUANTANAMO (which I haven't seen yet, but will see Monday) fits in with that "movement."

The write ups for In This World are confusing. Netflix is calling it a documentary but the NY Times review says there is a screenplay. Ebert says that its based on real life events, people and situations (staged as some of those elements occasionally might be) but its not a documentary.

I guess what we're seeing here is a genre of film that cannot easily be classified as fiction or non-fiction, or perhaps what we're seeing is a genre where those terms are purposefully rendered as irrelevant as possible.
Reply
post #48 of 59
4/28/06 at 8:10pm
It's Devin's term, so I won't speak for him.

But from my perspective, Triumph of the Will - no. Documentary. Elephant - no, because he deliberately creates a separation between the film and reality.

I'm not familiar enough with Jansco to say.

Algiers would be the closest, though the dichotomy of immediacy and remove that Greengrass' camera creates is a big part of what makes his films stand out from other recreations. I don't recall Algiers having the same feel, but it's been a loooong time. The Criterion DVD sits on my shelf unwatched, mocking me.
Reply
post #49 of 59
4/28/06 at 8:18pm
I just saw Algiers last week. It struck me as a very kindred film to United 93 somehow, even though I haven't seen Greengrass' film. Aesthetically, Algiers is more of a locked down camera deal, but who knows what kind of decisions would have been made had the steadi-cam been around in the mid '60s.
Reply
post #50 of 59
4/28/06 at 8:46pm
So its just a matter of style. Huh.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Thoughts on UNITED 93