9/11 on Film
Hey everyone,
Last week I watched two 9/11-related movies. The first was the much-discussed Path to 9/11 on ABC. The movie covers what happened from the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 to the attack on 9/11. It centers around John O'Neill who works at the FBI and spends years directing and participating in efforts to catch Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda until he finally gets fed up with the buearcrocy and inter-agency fighting and quits, only to start work at his new job on 9/11. And what was his new job? Head of security for the World Trade Center. Talk about unlucky. And right out of Shakespeare or a Greek tragedy. This is one of those situations where truth is indeed stranger than fiction. And that's the thing. The entire time I watched this excellently made mini-series, I kept thinking, if only this were just a movie. That it was instead, based on all too real events just kept breaking my heart. As for all the controversy, Path actually isn't political. If you want it to be, I'm sure you could find reasons to be mad about how Albright or Rice or someone was portrayed. But that's so not the point of this film. True, most of it is focused on events that occured during the Clinton administration for the simple reason of timing. He was in office for 8 years during these events, while Bush was in office for 9 months. Path doesn't spend much time slamming Bush or Clinton though. It instead focuses its attention on the FBI and the CIA. Here's who came out looking good:
John O'Neill and some other agents in the FBI
Richard Clarke
A Phillipina policewoman who helped capture one of the bombers in the 93 attack
A US Border Agent (another woman) on the Canada border who helped prevent the Y2K attacks
A CIA operative named "Kirk"
And most of all: Massoud, the "Lion of Panjshir", leader of the Afghan Northern Alliance who fought Al Qaeda. And as CIA op Kirk said, the US never had a truer ally. Unfortunately, shortly before 9/11 he ends up killed by two Al Qaeda pretending to be a reporter and cameraman.
Who looked bad:
The CIA in general and George Tenet (who served both admins) in particular
Madeline Albright and Sandy Berger of the Clinton admin
Our Ambassador to Yemen when the USS Cole was bombed
Condoleeza Rice of the Bush admin
A few negative remarks were made about Clinton, but he was rarely shown. A lot of attention was paid to Bush's absense when the 9/11 attacks happened and the lack of direction provided. But that was pretty much it.
Even if it is unfair here or there, the story more than makes up for it. The acting was spot on (special kudos to Harvey Keitel, Donnie Walberg and Stephen Root aka NewsRadio's hilarious Jimmy James), the production quality was flawless and the story was always informative and at times riveting. I can easily say that it was the best miniseries I've seen since Lonesome Dove. And that's saying something. My takeaway is that we are too caught up in procedure, political correctness and red tape to consider ourselves safe, be it 8 years ago or today. Luckily the movie also demonstrates that whatever mistakes any agency or administration made, the true enemy is Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Hopefully that's something all Americans regardless of their politics can keep in mind.
The second movie was United 93. After reading Creede's review, I ventured to my own version of Redbox at King Soopers and got the dvd. This film was much more condemning of the Bush administration because they were at the helm when 9/11 occurred. The FAA and the military were shown in a particularly damning light. In the first half of the movie they kept running around like chickens with their heads cut off, unable to believe what was happening - that this was a real life situation and not a test. The second half of the movie focuses on doomed flight 93 itself and that's the part that stood out for me. The realism was heart-wrenching. The plan devised by the passengers could have worked. And the tactics they employed to gain control of the cockpit were brutal but brilliant. It made me proud to know that there are still some people in this world who will put everything on the line, even when they shouldn't have to. I can only hope that every senator and congressman that we have remembers the sacrifice the United 93 passengers made to prevent that plane from crashing into the Capitol every time they debate a bill or cast a vote. Something tells me though, that this isn't the case.
Boulder Bumpersticker of the Day: Save an elk, shoot a land developer.
-sunday
Last week I watched two 9/11-related movies. The first was the much-discussed Path to 9/11 on ABC. The movie covers what happened from the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 to the attack on 9/11. It centers around John O'Neill who works at the FBI and spends years directing and participating in efforts to catch Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda until he finally gets fed up with the buearcrocy and inter-agency fighting and quits, only to start work at his new job on 9/11. And what was his new job? Head of security for the World Trade Center. Talk about unlucky. And right out of Shakespeare or a Greek tragedy. This is one of those situations where truth is indeed stranger than fiction. And that's the thing. The entire time I watched this excellently made mini-series, I kept thinking, if only this were just a movie. That it was instead, based on all too real events just kept breaking my heart. As for all the controversy, Path actually isn't political. If you want it to be, I'm sure you could find reasons to be mad about how Albright or Rice or someone was portrayed. But that's so not the point of this film. True, most of it is focused on events that occured during the Clinton administration for the simple reason of timing. He was in office for 8 years during these events, while Bush was in office for 9 months. Path doesn't spend much time slamming Bush or Clinton though. It instead focuses its attention on the FBI and the CIA. Here's who came out looking good:
John O'Neill and some other agents in the FBI
Richard Clarke
A Phillipina policewoman who helped capture one of the bombers in the 93 attack
A US Border Agent (another woman) on the Canada border who helped prevent the Y2K attacks
A CIA operative named "Kirk"
And most of all: Massoud, the "Lion of Panjshir", leader of the Afghan Northern Alliance who fought Al Qaeda. And as CIA op Kirk said, the US never had a truer ally. Unfortunately, shortly before 9/11 he ends up killed by two Al Qaeda pretending to be a reporter and cameraman.
Who looked bad:
The CIA in general and George Tenet (who served both admins) in particular
Madeline Albright and Sandy Berger of the Clinton admin
Our Ambassador to Yemen when the USS Cole was bombed
Condoleeza Rice of the Bush admin
A few negative remarks were made about Clinton, but he was rarely shown. A lot of attention was paid to Bush's absense when the 9/11 attacks happened and the lack of direction provided. But that was pretty much it.
Even if it is unfair here or there, the story more than makes up for it. The acting was spot on (special kudos to Harvey Keitel, Donnie Walberg and Stephen Root aka NewsRadio's hilarious Jimmy James), the production quality was flawless and the story was always informative and at times riveting. I can easily say that it was the best miniseries I've seen since Lonesome Dove. And that's saying something. My takeaway is that we are too caught up in procedure, political correctness and red tape to consider ourselves safe, be it 8 years ago or today. Luckily the movie also demonstrates that whatever mistakes any agency or administration made, the true enemy is Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Hopefully that's something all Americans regardless of their politics can keep in mind.
The second movie was United 93. After reading Creede's review, I ventured to my own version of Redbox at King Soopers and got the dvd. This film was much more condemning of the Bush administration because they were at the helm when 9/11 occurred. The FAA and the military were shown in a particularly damning light. In the first half of the movie they kept running around like chickens with their heads cut off, unable to believe what was happening - that this was a real life situation and not a test. The second half of the movie focuses on doomed flight 93 itself and that's the part that stood out for me. The realism was heart-wrenching. The plan devised by the passengers could have worked. And the tactics they employed to gain control of the cockpit were brutal but brilliant. It made me proud to know that there are still some people in this world who will put everything on the line, even when they shouldn't have to. I can only hope that every senator and congressman that we have remembers the sacrifice the United 93 passengers made to prevent that plane from crashing into the Capitol every time they debate a bill or cast a vote. Something tells me though, that this isn't the case.
Boulder Bumpersticker of the Day: Save an elk, shoot a land developer.
-sunday
posted by Sunday at
2:45 PM
1 Comments:
I wholehearted agree with you on The Path To 9/11. I originally was going to shun all things 9/11 because it seems like it was yesterday to me and I didn't think I could stand a dramatization of it, but found myself able to sit through the first ten minutes of it so I kept going.
The show was well worth watching, and if anybody doesn't watch it because they think they're political side is going to be made to look bad, they shouldn't believe the hype. Government bureaucracy looks bad, that's about it.
You forgot to mention one thing I think is interesting. The writer wasn't a conservative (i.e. Republican) as widely reported. He's a Libertarian, which is neither a Democrat or a Republican. This makes him qualified to talk about Dems or Reps as far as I'm concerned.
-TC
By
Anonymous, at 10/22/2006 8:25 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home