There’s a sense that with the 10th anniversary of September 11, 2001 it would be of very bad taste to say anything even remotely negative or critical. There’s also the sense that such a national tragedy could not possibly be emotionally manipulative, and yet I wonder if “9/11” crosses the line ever so slightly.
Let me preface this review by saying that “9/11,” a documentary shot the day of the attacks in New York, has its impressive moments and a worthy place in history. What’s more, this film sets out to commemorate the efforts of the firefighters who lost their lives that day trying to save others and honors them in spades.
Two amateur French filmmakers, Jules and Gedeon Naudet, direct the documentary, and they were lucky enough, or unlucky enough more accurately, to be in New York on 9/11 as they were filming another documentary about a young probationary firefighter. Their story changed dramatically in the course of filming, as is typical of many great documentaries.
And their made for TV documentary includes the only known footage of a plane hitting the first tower, and further the only known footage from inside the tower as it was burning, under attack and collapsing.
This is remarkable yes, and many news outlets used this exact footage when compiling their coverage of the terrorist attacks.
The difference I’d like to point out is that much of the footage is remarkable merely because it exists. Errol Morris was not the documentarian trapped amidst all the rubble and chaos, and it shows. The footage, about all of it captured on low quality handheld cams, is about as great as an amateur filmmaker could hope for.
Granted, there are powerfully evocative moments that look strong enough on film. The first notable moment is when one Naudet brother ever so quickly sees the first plane crashing into tower one. Another moment is when Naudet walks out of the first crumbled tower into what looks like an apocalyptic movie set. And perhaps the most intense is a crouched POV shot behind a car as dust careens in their direction as the second tower falls.
Many of the other moments do not share the same clarity or variety. The editing lingers on more uncertain moments in the action, the foreign score seems inappropriately uncharacteristic of the day’s drama, and the filmmakers insertion of themselves into their own film is all too strong.
It’s hurt even more by the cloyingly melodramatic, phoned in and overdone narration by a New York firefighter and non-actor. He gives in great detail the story behind the initial documentary, which in reality is not all that interesting.
And in these early scenes, the characters may not know 9/11 is on the way, but the film sure does. It beats you over the head with the ominous approach and for some of the film parrots catch phrases cycled endlessly in the media.
I admired the film most when I actually learned something new about the tragedy rather than just relived it. The confusion of the firefighters in tower one before and after the second plane hit gives a neat insight into what could and couldn’t have been done to save lives. The film also wisely doesn’t end as the tragedy does and devotes a whole third act to the clean up of Ground Zero, moments and footage that were of course heavily publicized, but not to the extent of the planes actually demolishing the towers.
It’s difficult to write a review like this under these circumstances. The audience I saw the film with was peppered with more than a few sniffles, and rightly so, but this audience wasn’t necessarily being critical. There are a handful of documentaries and narrative features that depict the horror and sadness much more tenderly, and yet this is the film we must never forget.
3 stars