Thoughts on United 93
which I saw last night. Many have questioned whether it is too soon to have a movie on these events. Before seeing the movie, I also wondered if it was too soon. However, during the movie and since, that thought never crossed my mind. The only impact of the currency of the movie, for me, was that I remember the events more clearly than if it had been twenty years ago. Although on second thought, I doubt those memories will ever fade.
A few things that struck me about the movie though:
1) I did not like how the movie followed the terrorists preparations for the day. Granted it was not extensive, but I was shocked and disgusted to feel a non-negative emotional connection with the terrorists, in the way that Hitchcock got the audience to connect with Norman Bates such that when Bates tried to dispose of the body in the car the audience almost rooted for the car to sink. The movie should have followed the day-to-day activities of the innocent vicitms. We only learn sparce details from conversations and that failed to create the appropriate emotional connection.
2) The movie made me see 9/11 through new eyes. I had lived it with fear from my safe mid-western home, and had pondered the emotions of the victims, as well as those who lost family and friends, or who were in the New York and D.C. areas and while not direct victims suffered the reality much more than I had. However, this movie made me realize the utter fear and helplessness the air traffic controllers, NORAD and military personel encountered that day. I thought that an important insight.
3) The movie also made me realize how impossible it is to keep us safe, and reminded me of all the ways in which we are suspectible.
4) I found disturbing the way the movie showed both the terrorists and the victims sincerely praying as the end approached. Watching terrorists pray for such evil evoked the same stomach-churning emotion as hearing of a story of the desecration of the Holy Eucharist.
5) Finally, I wondered early on how the “politically correct” society would view the movie’s portrayal of Muslims. You cannot present United 93 without showing the religious views of the terrorists, but I wondered if the movie would be condemned as hostile to Muslims. I did not see it that way, but a friend of mine said that there were two young men in the bathroom who made comments along the lines of “I hate Muslims” after the movie. I was shocked to tears to hear this.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:25 am
Don’t you think that one of the great strengths of movies like this is that they can take you inside the mind of people doing terrible things and so help you understand how they could do these things while still being human? As far as I can see, that is the best way possible to combat evil - to understand the thought processes and to combat the causes of such horrific viewpoints.
Just an opinion.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:36 am
Pejar,
Did you see the movie? I’m not asking snarkily–but to explain my points more fully to you, I need to reference scenes in the movie and how the movie handled things. In my opinion it did not do what you are suggesting. I do combat evil you sometimes need to understand it, but the movie did not show that. If anything, the only “explanation” that the movie implied was that they were religious Muslims–and that to me is an offensive explanation. Also, given the clear good v. evil, the movie should have focused on connecting the audience to the passengers, and I felt less of that conneciton to them as individuals–couldn’t really tell you much about any one specific person–as opposed to the terrorists.
If you have seen, let me know and I’ll try to make my point more specifically.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Um you cried because someone said that they hated Muslims? Do you weep every time the President of Iran opens his mouth? Do you burst into tears every time Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson appear on the tv screen? Im really not trying to be impolite here but come on. To watch the news in the world we live in is to see far worse expressions of hate every day.
April 30th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
Dear Richard,
I did not say I burst into tears. But I am rather sensitive and do get teary eyed over quite a few horrible things. The first time I heard Iran’s president say that about Israel, I seem to recall tearing up too. Watching the procession of police officers honoring a fallen officer this week, also brought tears to my eyes. As did the story of the people who called the family of a fallen soldier saying they were glad he was killed. (Although I can only laugh at Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.) And having just left a movie that showed the absolute horror of 9-11, and having had a good cry inside, I was probably a little more senstive to tearing up when I heard something that ruined the heroism the movie sought to show. Sorry I don’t meet your standards of stoicism.
April 30th, 2006 at 6:28 pm
I haven’t seen the movie, but I have to say while I understand and sympathize with your being upset that the movie’s only explanation for why the hijackers was that “they were religious Muslims,” having read up on the men and even read their own words, that seems like a fairly accurate though arguably incomplete answer. Those men weren’t motivated by poverty; they all came from fairly well-off families. They weren’t illiterates who were ignorant of the West; all had college diplomas, most had graduate degrees and all had spent years living in the West. They weren’t, by any rational standard, victims of colonialism; most were from Saudi Arabia a country which had never been conquered or brutalized by Europeans and whose people had never enslaved by evil Americans. They weren’t by any stretch of the imagination prudes; many drank alcohol, several others visited nightclubs and discoes, and some apparently even recieved lap dances at strip clubs.
However, what is true of all of them is they spent there entire lives reading from a book that they believe was dictated by the creator of the universe. A book that repeatedly, on almost every single page talked of how evil unbelievers were, called for their death, encouraged all believers to “lop off the heads of the unbelievers,” and “fight against them wherever you find them,” and that fighting unbelievers is the most sacred duty of all true believers. Moreover, according to this book, most believers when they die have to wait in the ground untill Judgement Day and then have to undergo a long interrogation by some stern angels before it is determined if they are worthy or not of entering paradise. However, this say book, supposedly dictated by the God, repeatedly promises that those who die while killing infidels will actually get to cut in line and immediately be transported to paradise where, amongst other things, they will be greeted by seventy virgins who will spend eternity ravaging them. (Incidentally, I am not bringing up the virgins to titilate or insult, but because in his final note Muhammad Atta, the leader of the hijackers, reminded his men, “the women of paradise are waiting, calling out, ‘Come hither, friend of God.’”)
Now, obviously, this book says other things. It specifically condemns the killing of innocents, explicitly states that Jihad can only be in defense, proclaims, “God does not love aggressors,” and wars it’s people, “Do not destroy yourselves.” Also, most people who read this book do not attempt to murder those who don’t and don’t seem ready to immolate themselves along with thousands of their fellow citizens. Moreover, the fact that Muhammad Atta apparently downed several shots of vodka at the airport bar before getting on the plane with which he immolated himself indicates that he did not follow all of the Prophet’s commands. However, in the end, I think all reasonable people would have to agree that the people who took over United 93 did so because they took the tenets of their faith seriously and they believed the promises their book made. As Muhammad Atta said in his letter, “It is enough for us that[the Koran's verses] are the words of the Creator of the Earth and the planets.” I don’t know if the movie shows it, but as the hijackers died, they were chanting “Allah is the greatest” over and over. Can anyone doubt their sincerity? Does anyone think for one second those men weren’t absolutely certain that immediately after their plane slammed into the ground they wouldn’t be transported to paradise? We shouldn’t be afraid to call a spade a spade or a believing Muslim and believing Muslim, even if not all believing Muslims agree with him.
April 30th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
Dear Bowmanguy,
I don’t disagree with what you wrote. I was responding to an earlier comment, explaining that the movie did not purport to explain why these people were evil. All they showed was that they were religious muslims. But that does not explain what distinguishes between religious muslims who are not terrorists and those who are.
Do you have a good source for what you wrote, as I was saying pretty much the same thing to a friend, but wanted to be able to share something on that other than my two cents. Thanks,
April 30th, 2006 at 8:48 pm
Verity,
I am not trying to be snarky, but doesn’t the fact that the movie shows these Muslim men preparing to, and ultimately succeeding in, crashing a plane full of innocent people provide a sufficient explanation as to why these men were evil? They purposely used innocent men, women, and children as a weapon for the purpose of attempting to kill other innocent men, women, and children. No other fact is needed in order to accurately label these men as evil.
April 30th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
Dear Joel,
I wasn’t looking for an explanation as to why these men were evil. I completely agree they were evil and that no further explanation was necessary in the movie. If you re-read my post and then the comments, you’ll see that my comments were in response to others comments, not based on my desire for the movie to explain why there were evil. But if there is something I wrote unclear, I’d be happy to clarify.
April 30th, 2006 at 9:45 pm
Dear Verity,
Thanks for your kind words. If you want a really thorough in-depth examination of 9/11 hijackers I’d recommend “Perfect Warriors, the 9/11 Hijackers: Who They Where, Whey They Did What They Did,” by Timothy McDermont, a reporter for the LA Times. I should also add that my own musings about the motivations for the hijackers was largely inspired by a book I just finished, “The End of Faith” by Sam Harris, and specifically chapter four, “The Problem With Islam.” I should add that I don’t agree with everything Harris says, but he does do a very good job of pointing out if you truely claim that every word in the Koran is the literal word of God exactly what you must, if you take the tenets of your faith seriously, believe. However, if you want a fair, balanced, non-polemical, relatively critical look at Islam, I would recommend Karen Armstrong’s “A Short History of Islam,” and her biography of Muhammad.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:03 pm
Yikes! I need to be careful about posting when I’m tired. I didn’t mean to recommend Armstrong’s book on Islam. I meant to recomend John Esposito’s “The Straight Path.” I don’t agree with everything he says, but he is quite good and very readable.
May 1st, 2006 at 12:12 am
I’ll see United 93 when it comes on pay cable TV. (Although this movie does seem to demand a large-screen viewing.) I think I need to watch it in private.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:07 am
I would add a plug for Roxanne Euben’s Enemy in the Mirror. Perhaps its my political theory interest, but I found this to be the most thought provoking and deep examination of terrorist/islamo-fascist thought that I have read. I dont necessarily agree with everything, but its well researched and thought out.
May 1st, 2006 at 6:34 am
Thanks so much for the recommendations!
Does anyone know of a work that argues the contrary?
May 1st, 2006 at 8:20 am
sometimes people who are less gifted with the english tounge can find no other words to express their disgust…i have said in the past that i hate just about everything and everyone under the sun..and this is because i have been brought up in a very simple manner that teaches you to get to the point..i hate mondays, i hate work, i hate “must see tv” hate is not such a powerful word among us
May 1st, 2006 at 9:37 am
“Does anyone know of a work that argues the contrary”?
I’m not sure what you mean by that, but if you mean, as I suspect you do, a book that argues that the hijackers weren’t true Muslims and gives a positive spin on Islam without degenerating into propoganda, then I’d recommend Reza Aslan’s “No God but God.” I disagree with many of his ideas and found his explanation of Jihad and the treatment of non-Muslims in Muslim countries sorely lacking, but he is a fantastic and does an excellent job at promoting his own interpretations of his faith.
May 1st, 2006 at 9:39 am
Dear Bowmanguy,
Yes, that is exactly what I meant. I like to inform myself of diverse viewpoints to make sure I am not misguided/uninformed in my own views.