The worst terrorist attack in Hollywood history.

Rating: 4/10 (11 March 2008)

It seems that Oliver Stone's patriotism is too much for him to objectively helm a story like World Trade Center, which focuses on two firefighters trapped in the rubble of the twin towers after the September 11th attacks. The problem with the movie is that it is simultaneously trying to be a memorial to those killed in the attacks (and particularly honor the bravery of the firefighters) and still retain some realism. As a memorial it is successful, although pretty cloying at times, but the realism fails completely. If, in fact, there was any intention towards realism at all.
In the latter point, it may very well be that Stone was not going for realism. I am no expert on the logistics of collapsing buildings, but I have read extensively on the subject of the attacks, as I imagine most Americans have, and I've seen a lot of pictures as Ground Zero was being cleared of the bottom floors of the towers. In one picture, I remember seeing a messy wall of material that looked as solid as a rock which was about 10-12 feet high, which was described as 15-20 floors compressed together. The idea that two firefighters are caught underneath the 100+ floors of collapsing towers is laughable, and this, my friends, is not a comedy.
Then again, I think the focus of the film is on the breed of suffering and heroism involved in the rescue efforts just after the attacks, and the plight of the firefighters' families and their loved husbands and fathers and brothers and sons rushed off into what looked so much like certain death. This is the most heroic thing that many Americans have ever seen, certainly for me. And while the film succeeds at telling these stories and at moving the audience (really, the 9-11 attacks are so engrained in the American mind that it's impossible not to be moved), although it is definitely guilty of trumping up the Hollywood bravado to an almost unbearable degree at times.
Because of this, a lot of the movie comes across as contrived, which is too bad, because when you watch something as important to America as this, you don't want to ever feel like you're looking at a sound stage, you don't ever want to feel like you can sense the crew standing just a few feet away from the action on screen, sipping nonfat caramel macchiattoes and flipping through the latest shooting script, wondering if they can squeeze in any more heroic one liners. But you can here. A lot.
There has been some talk about the irony of Oliver Stone, not exactly popular with the conservative crowd, making a film that is described by many right-wingers as the most "pro- American, pro-family, pro-faith, pro-male, flag-waving, God Bless America films you will ever see." It also mentions a connection between the attacks to the war in Iraq. I had been under the impression that such a connection had long since been discredited, but no matter.
It is a difficult situation that the two main characters are trapped and almost completely unable to move for about half the movie, and it's unfortunate that, to keep the action moving, we see some of those deadpan emotional flashbacks of the guys with their wives and kids, which just strikes me as something that should never be in a film like this, if only because it is such weak screen writing. Remember that slow motion scene in Top Gun showing Goose with his wife and kid? They may as well add a subtitle saying he's gonna die soon.
There is another film about the 9-11 attacks, United 93, which is vastly superior to this one. It has been criticized for having too little emotion which, interestingly, is exactly what this movie needed. The emotions involved with the September 11th attacks are strong and universal, we don't need a movie to hold our hand and lead us through them. United 93 succeeded because it presented the facts in an almost documentary style, allowing the audience to feel their own emotions. Not this movie, and it's too bad.
There is one rather bizarre looking character, Dave Karnes (based on a real man), who saw the attacks on TV and immediately knew that the country was at war. He rushed to Ground Zero and managed to help the two heroes escape from the rubble, and then the film closes with a title card that mentions that he went on to serve two tours of duty in Iraq. Nothing is mentioned about the fact that Iraq was not involved in the attacks, but the focus is on the patriotism, not fighting the right battle.
Stone has been justifiably criticized for this connection, similar to the conspiracy theories that he presented in JFK. I'm normally a big fan, but this goes down as one of the great many movies that SHOULD have been a great, important American film, and just isn't.