As the chilling, soul-wrenching, and unglamorously heroic events play out, the controversy that has surrounded the film -- is it too soon? is it exploitative? -- seems ludicrous. Too soon? It's been nearly five years since the terrorist attacks. Exploitative? What is exploitative is the way the events of 9/11 have consistently been exploited for political purposes. In fact, the film comes across as determinedly unexploitative.

I was referring to politically exploitive. I see all the consevative blogs USING it to remind the masses, to bring a little fear back. I find that offensive but not surprising. I didn't mean to imply that you thought it was commercially or finacially exploitive.

point that I failed to address in the body of my post.

...audio tapes of that flight were played for the first time for the public during the Zacarias Moussaoui trial. But I guess a lot of interviews were done with family who received phone calls from people on the plane and what ever available material that was made public about the flight was gone over. Still a lot of guess work though.

I don't really have an interest in seeing the movie. From the previews I've seen, it just doesn't look that great as a film that's supposed to tell such a dramatic, relevant event. Does anyone know if profits from the movie are going to charity?

I just heard today that Oliver Stone is making a 9/11 film about the WTC. We've all seen the conspiracy theorists websites where all sorts of tripe is being passed off evidence of government involvement and cover-up. I certainly hope that Stone isn't fool enough follow his usual script and portray the events in a manner that makes the whole thing susceptible to these kinds of interpretations. That would be a grave disservice to the survivors, the memories of the dead and their families.

in the local papers today.

- Rick
_{"Free your mind, and your ass will follow" - George Clinton}