Flight 93 (2006 TV Movie) User Reviews

Weak effort. Watch "United 93" instead

[I_am_RenegadeX · 5/10 · 9 January 2007]

The made-for-TV "Flight 93" was on A&E last night, so I watched it having recently been pleasantly impressed by the (similar/same) story of "United 93", which I rented on DVD just a few weeks ago.

Perhaps my opinion of "Flight" would be different if I had not seen "United" first, but I just didn't feel the power, emotion and anger that I'd felt while watching "United". "Flight" felt detached, poorly-acted and strangely 'calm', whereas "United" portrayed well the sense of in-credulousness of the situation as it unfolded and brought back the sick feeling we all had that day when it was realized what was actually going on. The air traffic controllers/airline people on the ground in "Flight" however seemed content to sit there serenely and simply wait for another opportunity to say, "There goes another one". And when one of the hijacked passengers uses his cell phone to give a sad farewell to his wife, she hangs up without even saying so much as "I love you".

Perhaps though my main problem with "Flight" is that it merely recreates what (is believed) to have happened, while "United" does the same while reminding us that procedures, organization & interaction on the ground were inexcusably poor, and that there are valuable lessons to be learned from this tragedy. By glossing over that aspect of the fateful day, "Flight 93" falls flat.

So if you've seen "United 93" already, don't waste your time with "Flight 93" - and if you haven't seen either but are interested in the story, make it "United".

Well done film focused on the people involved

[wrudd · 7/10 · 2 January 2007]

I believe this film accomplished what it set out to do. No big stars, no big special effects, it focused just on the ordinary people that got caught up in this event. The film "United 93" is quite good but that is told in close to real time and includes several air traffic controllers where as this movie mainly comes from the communications the people on board had with people on the ground.

I have read some reviews that were based on the politics of the situation, I won't comment on those. If you read the reviews that talk to the actual movie I think you will get a better idea of the actual merits of the film itself.

The no name cast did quite well. As I said the focus is on the communications between people on the ground and those in the air who could see they were going to die. I think it's a movie that will be rated higher as we move away from the actual events. As far as the reviews go that say it's not realistic because everyone involved has blonde hair and or has a baby is on par with the reviewers who knocked the Lord of the Rings because so many of the main characters had blue eyes.

We can never truly repay our fallen heroes, the least, we could do is honor them by telling their story. This movie was a soaring success.

[ironhorse_iv · 7/10 · 12 September 2018]

On the morning of September 11, 2001, one of the deadliest attacks in U.S. history took place when four commercial airliners were hijacked by members of the Islamic terrorism group, al-Qaeda. The first two planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, were flown into the two towers of the World Trade Center in New York City. A third plane, American Airlines Flight 77, hit the western side of the Pentagon, just outside Washington, D.C. The fourth hijacked plane, United Airlines Flight 93 was the only flight, never to reach its intended target, because its crew and passengers fought back. This TV Movie directed by Peter Markle & aired on the A&E Network in 2006, tells the story of how they were able to prevent the terrorists, from carrying out their mission to use the aircraft as an airborne weapon, and how their noble courage and sacrifice, save the lives of countless Americans on that day. Without spoiling the film, too much, the movie didn't stir jingoism or xenophobia to the point that it got annoying. It was not too propaganda or shallow. As for the religionist overtones. Besides the lord prayer scene, religion wasn't the main focus of the film. 'Flight 93' was not promoting a stereotypical Christian or Muslim agenda, at all. If anything, it was too 'on the nose' on the value of loving others rather than faith. A good example of this, was all those repetitive mawkish shots of domestic members holding babies, while, ignoring children, run around; while the events play out. We get it, childhood's innocence was indeed lost that day. We didn't need all those shots of children to get, that the victims had families. The phone calls with the wives, husbands, and parents were strong enough. There was considerable intensity, especially in the passengers and their families realizing that death is inevitable & a choice to stop the terrorist had to be made. This is a complex and loaded dilemma, dealing with self-sacrifice and mortality that really made the movie's moral message, sophistical. All those highly sensitive moments made the victims & their families really stand out. However, some of those sequences were so badly acted by the supporting cast, that the emotional felt tacky at times. While, the movie might seem exploitation by showing these sequences, the film was made with the cooperation of all of the passengers' families with their blessing. Still, I believe that this film along with the others of a similar subject in 2006, were greenlight, a little too soon. After all, the movie was made only 5 years since those tragic events. No matter how solemn or respectful, the film made seem. It still inky to see it, being played out in any media. At least, it's not as exploited, as other films on the same subject. After all, director Paul Greengrass's movie 'United 93' was played in movie theaters for money; while, this low budget TV Movie was played in its whole runtime on a smaller network, without much interruption of commercials or ads when it first aired. It's a big different. However, I do agree that this movie lack meticulous, compare to the cinematic version hyper realism portrayal of 'United 93'. There were a lot of historic inaccurate things to nitpick about, like the clothing, the look of the actors chosen to portray the passengers, and the surroundings. Nevertheless, it didn't felt too distracting to the point, that it took me, out of the movie. In fairness, the film really does tries hard to dramatically reenact what happened on the doomed flight as historical accuracy, as it can; using recreate of audio from cellular phone calls and control-tower transmissions and not from nut jobs Sept. 11 conspiracy theorists. A good example of this, was the scene where the pilots of the commercial aircraft had received a warning against possible cockpit intrusion, but chose to open the door anyway. This was omitted in the cinematic version. Another approach that I like, about this film is the way, it's shot. We got to see, more with the surroundings & how the flight from hell might have been for those who were up there to witness it. The use of quick cuts of the footage of the CGI plane model sped up, made the surroundings with the actors seem like they were going in a fast motion. It was well play; despite the low budget. As for action scenes. I like how the filmmakers weren't relaying too much on shaky cam. You can honest see, what's happening here, lending to its legitimacy. While, some of the shots might not be as cathartic as 'United 93'. It was still a gripping watch. Composer, Velton Ray Bunch's musical score heighten both the suspense and the emotion. This was really something missing from Greengrass version. It's just too bad, that the bittersweet ending of the film of people searching the wreck was not as powerful as 'United 93'. Despite that, I can understand, the daunting challenge of retelling the events of the titular flight with a cautious, apolitical tone. In the end, I can't say, the movie is entertaining. It's really upsetting to watch, no matter, how many times, you watch it. The movie only serves as somewhat a curiosity memorial, but at least, this TV Movie wasn't deem terribly an insensitive plane crash; hatred by most viewers like the 2017's Martin Guigui's movie or 2003's Brian Trenchard-Smith's film. Overall: 'Flight 93' serves a powerful, poignant reminder that freedom is not free and everyday life is a gifted, not to be wasted. It's a film need to be seen. Let's not forgot, the tragedies that happen on that day.

Wow.

[specklescit · 7/10 · 3 February 2006]

This is a very emotionally sirring movie. THat's really all there is to it. THe people on FLight 93 were courageous in their efforts to keep their plane from destroying another building and killing more people. THe poster before me criticised the movie for being faulty in dialogue, effects, etc., but without any first-hand accounts to go on concerning what happened on the plane, I think this film was excellent. As far as the effects go, it's a TV movie... What do you expect?? I feel for all people who lost someone that day, not only on Flight 93, but also in New York and in Washington. I pray that this movie does the victims and their families justice.

not bad

[mattkratz · 29 June 2006]

This was a decent film that might actually have portrayed the events on United Flight 93 on September 11. I think that it is comparable to United 93, the other film about the same subject, and I liked both movies about the same. This film captured the obvious fear the passengers felt on that day, and goes into more detail with the phone calls they made to their loved ones telling them what was happening. The suspense in the movie was kept high despite the fact that you knew what was going to happen. The cockpit-charging scene was the highlight of the film, in my opinion. You learn a little bit more about some of the passengers than in the other movie. If you have an interest in 9/11 and would like to see a movie about the heroes on that day, this movie might be for you.

**1/2 out of ****

The Day the World Changed

[claudio_carvalho · 6/10 · 24 February 2007]

On September, 11th 2001, four domestic flights are hijacked by terrorist in United States of America. After the collision of three against selected targets, the passengers and crew of United Airlines Flight 93 fight against four terrorists to take back the control of the airplane.

On the day that the world changed, about forty two passengers and crew of United Flight 93 become aware that the four terrorists that hijacked their plane are in a suicidal mission, after the collisions of three other airplanes. Through the testimony of their phone calls, this movie reconstitutes and dramatizes the moments of despair of some of them. The story is very sad and touching, since they are common people like you and me in a flight. It is impossible not projecting ourselves in the tragic situation that might have happened to either of us and feel a great sympathy for the victims. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Vôo 93 – O Fime" ("Flight 93 – The Movie")

well made TV movie of intense real life drama

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 11 September 2015]

It's September 11, 2001. United Airlines Flight 93 departs from Newark International Airport on its way to San Francisco. Almost at the same time, the first plane is crashed into the World Trade Center. Four hijackers take over United 93 as confusion reins back in the air and on the ground. The passengers calling from the plane surmises the hijackers' plan and try to retake the aircraft.

It's a made-for-TV movie on the A&E Network. It's relatively well-made movie with a few recognizable faces among the crowd. It is a lower level of production than United 93. The real life and death struggle still resonates. The battle for the plane is still intense despite the foregone conclusion. The calls home are as heart wrenching as ever. The intense real drama has not been diminished by this movie production.

A Dreadfully Melodramatic Spin on a Real Tragedy

[ejavignon · 2/10 · 1 February 2006]

Saw it on A&E last night and the only thing that drew me in was the curiosity of how much worse it might get. All the shots of innocent children playing were gratuitous and emotionally manipulative. The opening scenes of the baggage inspectors being so thorough was a bit contrived (apparently they were doing a better job back then than they do now). I got the sense that one of the goals of this film was to exculpate the federal government for its complacency, which after all is almost as much to blame for 9/11 as the hijackers. The hijackers were one-dimensional characters, almost like video game characters. There is no effort to show what their motives might have been, or to show that actual people did these things. I might be accused of sympathizing with the terrorists, but the fact is that they had a rationale (twisted as it was) for doing what they did, and if we are to end terrorism, we need to know and understand why it happens. I also couldn't identify with any of the passengers. Perhaps if the film makers spent less effort portraying the idyllic lives they lost (beautiful homes, beautiful children--did they really all live in tree-lined mansions in the countryside with angelic children) and spent more time on character development, it would have brought the pathos home. The Lord's Prayer sequence was particularly crass. If this wasn't based on a real event, it would simply have been an utterly forgettable B disaster movie not worth commenting on. As it is, this movie is a poor tribute to those who died that day, and a ghoulish attempt to satisfy our curiosity for what it might have been like to be on the plane that day rather than help us understand what happened and why.

Never cried as much in my life

[Calios · 10/10 · 30 January 2006]

This was very well done despite being on a small budget. I was shaking through most of it as I was reliving the experience through the actors and events. The acting and writing was excellent and though the real people surely looked different this movie put faces with the names. The characterizations were done very convincingly and I now want to see photos of the real people to see how well the casting was. I know I will never take for granted my next flight and will be aware of those around me and what they are doing. I found myself wondering during the movie, why hasn't more been done to avenge this day as I still have a empty feeling that those that would attack our country have not been hurt enough for what happened on this day so that they or their children won't attack again. There can be no secret of what happens in the end, but it was very interesting how they figured out what the overheard "Let's roll" quote was for. This movie did make me totally forget everything and I was glued to the television. The "I love you" scenes were nicely done. The movie was not boring, though it could have easily have been. But like the movie "Blackhawk Down" it's a very powerful emotional movie and seeing it more than once can be exhausting, but it's a valuable and enlightening movie and needs to be seen by those that can handle it.

Nice but another A&E shaky production

[Bbrian012 · 7/10 · 30 April 2006]

Honestly I think the acting was pretty forced in some scenes. Admitedly I did not see the whole movie as I came in late and was busy at the time. It was fairly good though, as far as A&E movies go. Drama, emotion, fear, hope, pretty much the full gambit. My Dad literally cheered when they rammed the cockpit door. It reminded me honestly, of the hatchet job that A&E did on the movie they made based on the life of John Denver. They found the GOONIEST guy, made him stick out like a sore thumb, couldn't act, couldn't sing, and the actors around him also had such exaggerated emotions. ANYWAY, getting back to the movie. I would recommend this movie for those seeking a tale of heroism. A fight for survival that ended up in sacrificing a number of innocent lives to save thousands more. For that I give it a 7, several points deducted for some of the exaggerated acting. But that is just my opinion. Read other comments and see the movie, make your own opinions.

As one commenter suggested I checked out the google video. 1hr and 21 minutes long. Other than that he had nothing to contribute to the movie other than it was 100% a lie. The video he referenced any idiot can tell is a far-left demagoguery that highlights CERTAIN aspects and not others that could prove 9/11, this movie makes it out to be a government plot, cover-up, and that there were no "terrorists" from Al Qaeda and that those people in all 4 flights were killed to cover up dirty paperwork and other anti-American propaganda. IMDb doesn't even have an entry for this BS-tripe. It looks at things that sound scientific and plausible enough, however if you listen closely and observe it's clear they're leaving out key pieces both in conditions as well as taking sentences from interviews and articles out of context. As well as making loads of assumptions, such as that as the towers collapsed juts of smoke blowing out windows were more bombs. Not even touching the fact that the air in the collapsing floors above was being filled and would be pushing the fire and smoke to the lower floors and the pressure from that could blow out some of the windows causing these and indeed make a sound similar to an explosion.

At 81 minutes long it's a large file to load. If you want a laugh, or see how desperate some jaded college group is to blame the Bush administration for fabricating 100% of 9/11, go for it. You couldn't set something like this up in the few months that he was in office by the time of the attacks, especially not with all the hell he was putting up with with the couple of obstructionistic democrats stalling his establishment of his cabinet(that every president sets up), along with locating G, W and B keys for all of the keyboards in the White House offices, remember that Clinton's staff broke all of those keys out of the keyboards. I wonder how much replacing them cost the taxpayers? Besides, how would a president who looks like a chimp come up with something like that? (I voted for him so I can make that jest.:P) Besides, wasn't it the Dem's saying how utterly stupid he was for all those years? Another point that the BUsh administration couldn't have plotted this.

I could poke more holes into that fraud, but look up the comment and be the judge. You can tell the commenter is a Bush-hater. Frankly I 'm getting sick of both parties.

I'm looking forward to seeing UNITED 93, the big-screen movie version that was signed off on by ALL the families who lost loved ones on Flight 93. From what I've seen and heard of it so far, it may very well get a higher rating than this. Version of the story did.

REMEMBER!!!! If you see United 93 the first weekend it's out, part of your ticket price will go for the memorial for the passengers and crew who gave their lives to protect the Capital. They deserve it IMHO, for doing what they could.

Unbelievably...

[mattmoore90 · 1/10 · 13 February 2008]

awful, i was forced to watch this unrealistic account of the events of 9/11 for part of my media course and by the end, i wanted to quit my media course and move to Tibet to become a Buddhist monk leaving behind what i believe to be the end of Western Civilization. The characters are unbelievably patriotic and wooden. Especially the man who tried to stand up to the terrorists in his unrealistic, calm, America idealistic manner and in return got stabbed, if i was on that plane and witnessed that, it wouldn't be the terrorists stabbing him, it would be me. Now in the real events i have researched what happened and found that poor man was stabbed without knowing what was going on. Now being an American production they felt the unnecessary need of presenting him as an American hero that stood up to the terrorists. It's pathetic, Americans once again trying to rewrite history so its looks as though they have gained a victory from the tragic events, you lost, accept it as a tragedy please.

What a movie

[b_chocolate_2004 · 9/10 · 30 January 2006]

I guess I don't know what I was expecting, but this movie went above and beyond what I thought it was going to be. I am not very good when it comes to actually judging how good or bad a movie is, but I gave this movie a 9 because it absolutely broke my heart. On Sept. 11 2001, I was in high school watching everything happen on TV and I guess I didn't cry then or at all because I was so shocked and didn't understand. This movie made me realize how terrible this event really was, and for the first time, I shed tears. This movie was a good movie to give you an idea of what it was really like for those people and what their families went through and what they knew. I am truly sorry that people feel that they need to do this and this movie has made me feel awful, but it did a very good job of making you feel the way you should feel when you think about these types of things.

Random comments on a tragic event.

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 29 April 2006]

If you're going to assess the movie AS a movie, you have to try to separate it from the events it purports to describe. The events are far too horrible for us to grasp fully, but the movie is accessible to us, fully formed, financed, edited, and marketed for our enlightenment. I guess that doesn't really make it easy to make judgments about the film, because there is still so much emotional baggage in tow.

If this were entirely fictional, I'd say it was about average for a TV movie, may a bit less.

I expect that men and women will respond differently to it. Most of the footage seems taken up with phone calls between the victims and their families or agents on the ground. This ought to appeal disproportionately to women. Nothing sexist is meant by that. It's just a scientific observation as well as an everyday one. As an example, a few years ago a young woman was driving her car across some railroad tracks and a locomotive smashed into the car. As the monstrous engine pushed the car along the track for a quarter of a mile or so before finally coming to a stop, the woman was frantically working at her cell phone, trying to call her mother.

Men will respond more to the instrumental activities on the ground and aboard the doomed flight. What did they DO? What did they plan to do with the airplane if they succeeded? Did any of them know anything about flying a huge aircraft? I wouldn't argue that the instrumental concerns were more important than the expressive ones in this instance. The passengers and the hijackers were dead the moment the pilot and copilot were killed. If I had a last phone call to make, it might well be to a family member.

Yet the film seems to pander to common sensibilities. Do ALL of the victim's families have to be so pure and middle class? Were all of the loved ones really blond? Why do we see so MANY kids? And why are they thrust in our faces? The first family member to receive an alarming phone call from her husband is simultaneously watching television, trying to cope with three noisy young children, and understand what her husband is trying to tell her. The kids are all cute as buttons but they keep getting underfoot and interrupting her -- "Who's dead, Mommy?" And the movie -- understandably -- must take dramatic license. But in doing so, in fabricating conversations and events aboard the plane, in concentrating on isolated phone calls home, it loses something of real importance -- how did the passengers get to know each other well enough to bond together and combat a common enemy? Nobody seems to discuss their takeover plans with anyone else. It seems to come out of the blue.

The film raises questions about the truth value of some of the things we see on screen too. How did one of the fruitcakes manage to get on board with a simulated bomb strapped around his waist? My impression is that the interceptors were nowhere near the hijacked airplane, so why the agonized speculation about whether they should shoot it down or just ram it? And did anyone really say, "Let's roll"? I know Bruce Willis would have said it, but did anyone in real life? I don't want to carp on this any longer because the attacks are still painfully clear in our memories. But although this movie isn't actually insulting, it needs to show more respect for the victims and for the audience as well. When catastrophes are bent and reshaped into typical movie fare, the events and the victims are both cheapened. Tears are easy. Handle with care.

Comedy Gold.

[ratiocinator · 1/10 · 7 August 2006]

I just watched the laugh-fest that is 'Flight 93'.

The most hilarious thing about that BS was the fact that just about all of the relatives receiving phone calls were holding small babies when they took the calls! I was just thinking 'bloody hell, how many more of these people are going to be holding babies?' when the Mark Bingham call was made. The next scene was at the Bingham's residence, and they were all holding babies! Not just one, but about three or four; fμck!ng hell, I lost count there were so many! Still laughing now! But the clincher was when that light aircraft was reporting a visual sighting of flight 93. "Take evasive action" ground control radioed to the GA pilot. Then the light plane flew right around and over flight 93, as it was in a 450kt+ decent! I nearly pi$$ed myself! What a fantastic movie! You do believe me, don't you? lol.

Emotional movie

[rick-fonseca · 15 February 2006]

Its sad to read comments like " the government is to blame just like the terrorist or I mad because they were praying" People Americans die that day in the towers and in the planes. They were white, black, brown, yellow, Christians,Hindus, Jew's, Etc. This murders did not care about any one.

This movie showed us the courage that this people had and we should respect them for what the when thru. How dare you speak about this if you don't have a clue what this people when thru in their last hours on this earth.

We need to all respect this great hero's and their families and stop blaming others like our government. The guilty party was the terrorist!!!!!

A&E's Flight 93 is required viewing

[rwb14 · 7/10 · 18 February 2006]

Shortly after we witnessed the horrific events of the terrorist's attacks there was an overwhelming consensus that Hollywood should stay way from this. The pain was too strong. It would disrespect the families and it would be a cheap endeavor to make a movie about something so terrible.

Five years later, there have been several documentaries and now filmmakers are staging to release motion pictures on 9/11. While I'm not ready to see what Oliver Stone has to offer, A&E's Flight 93 is the first dramatization of 9/11 that I've seen.

Forget about its TV budget, the acting or any other faults the movie may have. This is a simple yet sustaining movie that will pull you from the heart. This movie depicts with profound reverence a brave group of souls who knew they were going to die. And, that the instrument of their deaths could not be used to kill other innocent people. It's a movie about people and their families. It's about strangers united, bravery and determination. I want to see this movie again and share it with others.

Thank you A&E for producing a respectful, illuminating film.

Good TV Movie

[killbill_28 · 6/10 · 2 July 2006]

This TV movie is about United Flight 93 that was the fourth plane hijacked on Sepember 11th 2001 and the passengers fight to take the plane back over and stop it from hitting its target. The drama is a little poor but the action is great. Some characters names were changed and some scenes were created for dramatic purposes but overall the movie is very actuate. The special effects are mostly CGI and look pretty dual sometimes. But which it for the story not for the effects as we will never know what really happened on Flight 93. This is the first movie based on the tragedy, the another film based on this is called United 93 which is due out some time this year.

Peter Markle shot Flight 93 in High Definition and it looks great. The DVD release of the film is great too with the movie complete in widescreen and 5.1 Dolby Digital.

gets off to VERY bad start

[cornsaladisgood · 6/10 · 9 October 2006]

Believe me when i say that i wish this was better. It wasn't bad, but it definitely wasn't good. Im not sure what it is exactly that i didn't like about the movie, but to be perfectly honest, i watched it the day after seeing "UNITED 93" and that was most likely a major factor in my disappointment. I'll give some credit to the film makers for a couple of reasons; first of which is the most obvious. Being a made for T.V. movie, the budget was obviously very small and there were also obvious restrictions put on the making of the film (I.E. language, length...) and in this case, i believe it truly did have an effect on the quality. The nest is that I'm sure if the film makers wanted to make it a feature film they could have but i hope that they had chosen not to in order not to profit from the movie (might be wishful thinking, might not be). Lastly, my biggest complaint is the fact that the mood of the film was consistently ruined by commercial breaks. it bugged the hell out of me and frankly, it ruined the entire experience for me.

Disappointing ending

[kurisu-4 · 5/10 · 3 April 2006]

This movie depicted a lot of the tension people must have felt on Flight 93. For a TV movie, A&E's "Flight 93" had a subtle horror about it; it wasn't Earth shatteringly fearsome, but as we all know how it ends it had an ominous feel to it. Then the final scenes came. This is where the film went south.

The last scenes of this film played this event like a natural disaster. Flight 93 wasn't Hurricane Katrina where there was no way to prevent it; people were murdered on 9/11. None of the anger that was felt nationwide was depicted. It was played as though this was nothing more than a tragic plane crash. The fact is that people weren't just angry about this blatant act of terrorism; they were floored like no other event in US history.

The film didn't need to show people taking to the streets in anger per se, but the depressing music at the end and the families crying made it seem as though they were just mourning their loved ones. That's not what happened. Those families were justifiably more furious than anybody, and to not show that is to show a watered down version of the events.

Close, but no cigar

Lower budget video version actually better than big budget film version.

[revere-7 · 8/10 · 8 October 2009]

Flight 93

Last month, in recognition of the 8th anniversary of 9/11, I reviewed the film United 93. As good as that film is, it's not the only movie about that fateful flight, nor in my opinion, is it the best.

These days it seems that the best crews are actually working in television, and the made for TV movie Flight 93, a joint production of A&E and FOX is a good example. It tells the exact same story as United 93 taken from the same sources, and also told in a dramatic narrative style, but with a bit more impact. It's a shame that far fewer people have actually seen this TV version of the story.

As I've said, both are good "films", but Flight 93, which is technically not a film because it was shot on HD Video instead of 35mm Film like United 93, has more dynamic camera work. Perhaps it's the size difference between the film camera and the HD camera, but even though both were shot primarily hand held, the angles, tight shots and pans are more daring and interesting in Flight.

Additionally creative choices and edits were a bit sharper with Flight. For example, within the first few minutes of the film we know the names of the hijackers, and most of the key passengers, thanks to the great idea to include a series of tight shots on the boarding passes as passengers boarded the plane.

Flight 93 also includes lots of details throughout that weren't shown in United 93, including some that were perhaps whitewashed from United (whether this was intentional to avoid controversy, lawsuit, for creative reasons, or to lionize all the innocents, or just an accident of choice in the editing room, it still has an impact) for example, the fact that the pilots of the commercial aircraft had received a warning against possible cockpit intrusion, but chose to open the door anyway.

While none of these little things – a shot here, a detail there – makes much of a difference on it's own, taken together, they add up to a more dramatic story.

If you're the type that views only movies shot on film as "quality", and eschew anything video – yeah, you'll probably like United 93 better. But if you can enjoy HD video just as much (and with a story this engaging, how couldn't you?) I'd recommend Flight 93 between the two.

Well done, but not enough description

[bachwiz18 · 7/10 · 20 October 2006]

I think that Flight 93 was a great movie despite the low budget, but it had its flaws. Half of the movie is the passengers talking on the phone, and while that is important, it wears itself out eventually. It shows one or two news clips, while I think there should have been more. The ending, after the crash, was a bit short. The slow music in the background and little dialogue was powerful at the end, but there should have been at least one more scene with dialogue. Parts of the movie seemed fake, such as the sequences with the 757 going at high speeds and the giant mushroom cloud at the crash site, which seemed too dark black. Overall, though, the movie was well done, and the actors did a great job. I would not recommend it to the weak-at-heart, as parts can be intense, but it does a great job of depicting the horror of that dreadful Tuesday.

Insulting Mawkfest

[dieBaumfabrik · 3/10 · 6 September 2009]

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.

Great Movie

[Christmas-Reviewer · 8/10 · 30 January 2006]

This is a movie that is hard to watch because you know how it's going to end. Seeing this movie just brings back emotions about 9/11.

I was very impressed with this movie. We see the hijacking of flight 93 thru the passenger eyes. We see and feel the hell that they were going through on that fatal flight. We also happen to witness the families pain! In case you didn't know many passengers were able to call on the airplane phones during that flight.

This movie is not only a history lesson but its a very emotional experience. I am sure that the producers took some liberties but most films based on true stories do.

I highly recommend this. I can't see a better being made about these heroes of "Flight 93"

Its also a reminder how the events of 9/11 has re-shaped the United States and the middle east

I would argue against this version having no impact.

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 12 February 2024]

'Flight 93' is a very sobering slice of modern American history, as the heroic passengers & crew of United Airlines Flight 93 fought back at the terrorists who had seized control of their aircraft. By forcing the plane to crash in a Pennsylvania field, away from more densely populated areas, they saved the plane from reaching its likely target, either the White House or Capitol Building in Washington, D. C.

One of two versions of this intense true story (the other being the theatrical release "United 93"), I felt that this was reasonably involving, provoking the viewer into pondering how they would have reacted and acted in such a dangerous, untenable situation. While it does deliver some good scenes of tension, it doesn't forget to include the much-needed element of *humanity*, as various passengers get in touch with their loved ones & friends (and others as well) on the ground, either saying their goodbyes, or receiving words of encouragement, as characters like Tom Burnett (Jeffrey Nordling, '24', 'Big Little Lies') decide that they will rush the cockpit.

Granted, this probably does come off as more nondescript than "United 93" (which I still need to watch), given that it was made for the medium of television, but to say that there's little to no impact when all is said & done is just wrong. The only thing I'd have to say is that in a film of this kind (it runs 90 minutes without commercials), we don't exactly get to know any of the characters that well.

But it's still suitably interesting, and well directed by veteran journeyman director Peter Markle ("Youngblood", "Bat*21"). It DID give A & E the largest audience in the history of the network.

Seven out of 10.

What is this?

[soadnirvana · 3/10 · 21 July 2007]

I am currently watching this film as we speak. It has a very trivial plot line. The whole film involves 4 terrorists, who look like fashion models sitting in the cockpit of the plane with Ninja Turtle like scarfs on their foreheads. The whole film is nothing but the victims calling their families over and over. Nothing more. It is very poorly constructed and directed. I am going to view the film version and then formulate an opinion. I just didn't enjoy this film very much. The filming quality even is mediocre because it looks like it was shot in the 1980s. It confused my husband and myself into believing that this was the actual film version. It is not. I did not like how they made it seem like they were using cell phones in mid-air. Everyone knows that this is not at all possible.