Flight 93: Somebody SAW it like I hoped he would.

In a comment to a post in BAGnewsNotes: "Flight 93 Crashes In ... New York?", somebody who calls him (or her) self "black dog barking", says the thing, I hoped the movie would inspire:

" Saw the film last night. It's about people, not institutions or ideologies. It's about people we don't know suddenly confronted with problems for which there is no solution and no way out. No heroes, no martyrs. People.

I walked out with a much better picture of what might have happened. Looking at the inside of real flight decks, real air traffic control centers, looking at real people doing the same things to start that morning they did every other morning is illuminating, quietly and effectively. Good use of the tools of film-making.

[..]

The film's violence is organic, not exploitive. This film is *not* entertaining. It looks into shadows.

The excellent "Bagnews Notes" blog, maintained by Michael Shaw, is "a progressive blog, dedicated to the discussion and analysis of news images". The main post criticises the excessive use of WTC-images in the publicity and the trailer for the movie. In this, it is absolutely right: See the trailer at the movie company site (you need QuickTime). The hiding of the Pentagon impact and the monumentless Pennsylvania plain, has much to do with spinning, I believe. The commenter sees the New York images as shadowy symbols, but is more impressed by what the movie shows on the doings of the men and women who happened to be on that flight. The miracle, that people like you and me made a community and acted. More efficiently than every Homeland Security moloch ever could imagine.