(The winner is Greengrass).This film to me just didn't work overall it didn't really give to much emotion through the movie and to much of the movie was about the family worrying and the people trying to find the two men. But when it came to the men below the rubble it seemed like no more then 10 minutes was used there.And when the men were under the rubble their was no character development amongst them, but rather flashbacks of their family and the two men talking about their family. And i have the utmost respect to all of the firemen,police and paramedics that were there that day and to all the victims that died that day but when the men were under the rubble and being rescued i just did not have to much emotion going on. And i think what the problem could have been was the PG 13 rating so much was toned down and i think that was a major flaw because what happened on September the 11th was rated R many people died and the things the rescuers saw was not PG 13 things and the dialog between the rescuers would not of been "fricken" but the other word and it just sounded un natural, if you think you should see a film about 9/11 i think Flight 93 was much better (which was rated R). Also i don't think this is an Oliver Stone film this just isn't his line of work he is a brilliant filmmaker and one of the best but this is more Spielberg or Ridley Scott. In Greengrass's film he portrayed so much more emotion i knew the outcome at the end of Flight 93 as i did in World Trade Center one i was biting my nails and shed a tear or two and the other i watched as a regular movie,Greengrass gave it a true tone World Trade Center just seemed like a movie. But i do give it a 4 for the performances from everyone from underrated actor Michael Shannon to Cage and everyone in between.
Review of World Trade Center
