I'm a little stunned, frankly.

Rating: 5/10 (27 January 2007)

I actually generally like Oliver Stone as a filmmaker, or at least give him some begrudging respect for taking on the political moments of our time. He did a good job with Platoon and Salvador, at minimum.
I think this film was a travesty, under the title of "World Trade Center." Although the film itself was really quite touching, in the sphere of the tragedy that it touched (i.e. the impact upon first responders, and the successful rescue of two of them), I think it demeaned the entire experience of everyone involved to title it "World Trade Center," and I also think that, because of the title, and the notoriety of the director, that the "take" on the tragedy was made needlessly narrow.
Basically, Oliver Stone turned one of the tragedies of the ages into a movie of the week.
I'm thankful that the story of the men who gave their fortitude and courage was told to the public.
But otherwise, I found the basics of the movie lacking in a big way. It was NOT the story of the time, day, period, or otherwise. It gives no insight. It simply tells a story of heroism and rescue. You'd barely even know the context if the movie weren't titled "World Trade Center," and that context doesn't really play into the telling of the rescue story.
I was disappointed in a major way. I think because I expected a broader story.