To be honest, this film should be very sensational and touching. Even without the unforgettable human tragedy of the 9/11 incident as a background, it is worth telling and listening as a story of survival in a difficult situation. But the handling of this film is confusing. Where is the emotional appeal of the film? If it is to show the bravery of several police protagonists and the heroic sacrifice of life to save people, but there are not many writings in the film, but it gives people the feeling of being reckless and acting rashly. If it is to show the tenacity of people and the strong will to survive in difficult and dangerous situations, there is no focus on this aspect in the film, and there are only two survivors shouting to each other and thinking about their families. If you still want to show the pressure and pain that the hero’s family is endured, the film is also very common. Everything shown in the film is nothing new. It just keeps making it clear to the audience that this is the biggest disaster that the United States has encountered. You should be moved by them. Unfortunately, I didn't feel it at all after watching it. To be honest, the newsreel interspersed in the film documenting the collapse of the Twin Towers is even more shocking. Compared with another "Flight 93" that positively tells about 911, this film is deliberate but not flattering!
As for why this blunt name was chosen, this is what I see as Director Stone (Stone) wants to play with sensationalism, but did not want to be swayed by the tenderness of the water, and the "Stone" style is no longer.
View more about World Trade Center reviews
