Isaiah Z. Sterrett
United 93
By Isaiah Z. Sterrett
For too long our culture has said, "If it feels good, do it." Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: "Let's roll." In the sacrifice of soldiers, the fierce brotherhood of firefighters, and the bravery and generosity of ordinary citizens, we have glimpsed what a new culture of responsibility could look like. We want to be a nation that serves goals larger than self. We've been offered a unique opportunity, and we must not let this moment pass.
— George W. Bush, State of the Union, 2002
I RAVED about Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby," but conservatives yelled at me, preposterously arguing that it stood for euthanasia.
One year later, I scolded the right and the left for childishly scorning "Brokeback Mountain," a film which remains etched in the minds of those mature enough to actually watch it.
So it's nice, as I write today, to praise a film which is — for once! — praised by conservatives and liberals alike: "United 93."
Some have compared "United" to "Schindler's List," but this is simplistic. True, they both explore human conflict and the manifestation of evil, but so do many movies. "Schindler's List," unlike "United 93," however, is both perfect cinema — perfect art — as well as one of film history's most gut-wrenching historical epics. "United 93" is not an epic. It is an excellent film that everyone — including schoolchildren and people afraid of flying — should see. But whereas "Schindler's List" practically defines artistry in film, there is nothing at all artistic about "United." It is a movie made like a documentary — with actors stepping in for the real-life heroes and heroines on United 93.
Indeed, the film's greatest attribute is that it has no agenda or faux intellectual theme. Imagine what it would be like to see videotape of what happened in air traffic control centers up and down the Eastern Seaboard on September 11, and on United 93 itself. That's what the film seeks to show. Writer/director Paul Greengrass deserves tremendous credit for creating the movie as realistically as possible. We should all consider ourselves lucky that the first 9/11 movie was not directed, written, or produced by Barbra Streisand.
"United 93" was not made, as some have said, "too soon." On the contrary, it is long overdue. Disrespect to the victims — or to the United States — would have been greeted with overwhelming disapproval, and of course I would join that sentiment. But "United" peddles no particular belief — disrespect or otherwise. That's the point. It is utterly without controversy — unless you happen to be a member of al Qaeda, in which case you should not see it.
In the end, no movie can evoke in audiences the terror of September 11. You had to live through it to understand it. But if a movie was going to be made, I'm glad "United 93" was the result. It is gripping, emotionally draining, perfectly acted, and stunningly realistic. See it.
© Isaiah Z. Sterrett
For too long our culture has said, "If it feels good, do it." Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: "Let's roll." In the sacrifice of soldiers, the fierce brotherhood of firefighters, and the bravery and generosity of ordinary citizens, we have glimpsed what a new culture of responsibility could look like. We want to be a nation that serves goals larger than self. We've been offered a unique opportunity, and we must not let this moment pass.
— George W. Bush, State of the Union, 2002
I RAVED about Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby," but conservatives yelled at me, preposterously arguing that it stood for euthanasia.
One year later, I scolded the right and the left for childishly scorning "Brokeback Mountain," a film which remains etched in the minds of those mature enough to actually watch it.
So it's nice, as I write today, to praise a film which is — for once! — praised by conservatives and liberals alike: "United 93."
Some have compared "United" to "Schindler's List," but this is simplistic. True, they both explore human conflict and the manifestation of evil, but so do many movies. "Schindler's List," unlike "United 93," however, is both perfect cinema — perfect art — as well as one of film history's most gut-wrenching historical epics. "United 93" is not an epic. It is an excellent film that everyone — including schoolchildren and people afraid of flying — should see. But whereas "Schindler's List" practically defines artistry in film, there is nothing at all artistic about "United." It is a movie made like a documentary — with actors stepping in for the real-life heroes and heroines on United 93.
Indeed, the film's greatest attribute is that it has no agenda or faux intellectual theme. Imagine what it would be like to see videotape of what happened in air traffic control centers up and down the Eastern Seaboard on September 11, and on United 93 itself. That's what the film seeks to show. Writer/director Paul Greengrass deserves tremendous credit for creating the movie as realistically as possible. We should all consider ourselves lucky that the first 9/11 movie was not directed, written, or produced by Barbra Streisand.
"United 93" was not made, as some have said, "too soon." On the contrary, it is long overdue. Disrespect to the victims — or to the United States — would have been greeted with overwhelming disapproval, and of course I would join that sentiment. But "United" peddles no particular belief — disrespect or otherwise. That's the point. It is utterly without controversy — unless you happen to be a member of al Qaeda, in which case you should not see it.
In the end, no movie can evoke in audiences the terror of September 11. You had to live through it to understand it. But if a movie was going to be made, I'm glad "United 93" was the result. It is gripping, emotionally draining, perfectly acted, and stunningly realistic. See it.
© Isaiah Z. Sterrett
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
