Watch Flight 93 For Free

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

This film seems to be unfairly regarded as the poor relation, just because it was made for TV. If so, it's snobbery. Flight 93 focuses much more on the humanity of the event, on the passengers and their families. This gives us the chance to empathize with them and feel for them as they meet their fate.United 93 focuses more on the technical aspects. It fails to distinguish the passengers from each other and does not name them. I know this was done at the request of the families, so as not to single anyone out (not that this stopped the film makers from unjustly stigmatizing the German passenger as a wimp!).I admit that Flight 93 perhaps goes too far in its depiction of endless phone calls. We wondered when the passengers were ever going to find time to take on the hijackers!

I watched this on 'More4' on Friday 2009-09-04, thinking that it was the work of Paul Greengrass, the genius behind 'Bloody Sunday'. One hundred and ten tedious minutes later, I thought 'he's lost it'. I didn't realise that I was confusing 'Flight 93' with 'United 93' which I've just finished watching on 'ITV1' on Sunday 2009-09-06.(Why did I include a spoiler alert? Well, I am assuming that in a few years' time, there will be visitors to this site who will not have heard about what happened in the USA on 2001-09-11 or, at the very least, will not remember what was special about United Airlines flight 93. For those future generations wanting an idea about what happened that day, stay away from this patronising slush.) A hijacked airliner in itself makes for an interesting story, but the makers of this tat appear to have assumed that everyone watching was fully aware of the context and the ultimately fatal crashes of this plane and three others. Instead, it chose to focus on several conversations between the passengers in the air and their beautiful wives and parents at home in their beautiful houses. For an hour and a half, sweet syrupy goo oozed from the screen. 'Look!' say the film-makers, 'these nasty men killed beautiful loving American people.' What idiot script-writer feels the need to point out that most people are nice, and have others around them whom they love and who love them back? This insults the viewer, and what's worse, insults the memory of real people who died in that crash.

Firstly I really enjoyed the beginning of this film. I thought the tension of boarding the flight was built up really realistically. Maybe someone can clarify this, but I thought maybe all the phone calls were actually the real conversations that the families had on 9/11. I do remember the line 'you do believe me don't you?' on the loose change documentary. I thought there were bits of bad acting, very bad music at the end (reminded me of 'Titanic') and it was too soppy for my liking. I do however think that when you know you're going to die, you are liable to become over sentimental or say things you would normally not. Someone mentioned that they didn't like the one-dimensional portrayal of the hijackers, but to be honest I don't think the terrorists would have shown much of themselves whilst on the plane. They were to carry out a job involving killing themselves and many others, letting themselves be seen for who they are would be a weakness that could have ruined their mission. Wasn't a bad Movie, but I wouldn't watch it again or recommend it to my friends.

I've just read through some of the reviews and am quite surprised at the number of people who feel this film was contrived or heavy-handed in its emotional manipulation. Having worked on the film, I can say with some authority that everyone involved, especially Peter Markle, tried very hard to keep the story as authentic as possible. Conversations were taken verbatim, transcripts from 9/11 were painstakingly researched and family members of the passengers were consulted. In my own opinion, I think the terrorists were portrayed with more sensitivity than in United 93...meaning they seemed more like misguided human beings than monsters. Though having said that, United 93 focused more on the event and Flight 93 spends more time with the passengers and families.Even in post-production copious jokes were made about a son giving his full name to his mother, but that in and of itself is a testament to the desire of the producer and directors to stay as true-to-life as possible. They could have simply rewritten the line but in the end decided not to.I don't know how to say whether this film is "good" or "bad." I think it tries to be a fairly even-handed account of a devastating event and for the most part succeeds.