world trade center Photo

World Trade Center

Starring: Nicolas Cage, Michael Pena, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Maria Bello, Gary Stretch

Directed by: Oliver Stone

RS: 3of 4 Stars Average User Rating: 3of 4 Stars

2006 Paramount Pictures Drama

Oliver Stone has made a cautious, earnestly factual and emotionally unassailable film about two Port Authority cops, Will Jimeno (Michael Pena) and John McLoughlin (Nicolas Cage), who were among the last of the twenty survivors pulled from the rubble of the World Trade Center on 9/11. What he has not made is an Oliver Stone movie.

Good news for those opposed to seeing an inspiring true story in the hands of a nut-job conspiracy theorist (JFK, Nixon). But for those of us who recognize the rigorous talent in Stone (Platoon, Salvador) as well as his reckless abuse of it (Natural Born Killers, Alexander), there's little joy in seeing him morph into Ron Howard to play it safe at the box office.

Much has already been made of the fact that Paramount, the studio releasing World Trade Center, has hired Creative Response Concepts to curry favor for the film among conservatives and the Christian right. It seems to be working. Bad boy Stone is earning raves from right-wing pundits who once would have merrily burned him at the stake.

Is Stone going soft to revive his flagging career? Only in the sense that there's no politics in World Trade Center, except for the marketing, and that the trapped cops never curse their fates, and every American on view behaves honorably.

Though Stone has cleaned up his act, there is still a fire in him to italicize the profound significance of this intimate story. In one of the film's rare showoff shots, Stone and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (The Hours) have the camera rise from the rubble to take in the Manhattan skyline and then up and up till it reaches a satellite beaming the news that will shake the world.

Still, it's in the smaller moments that the film shines. Stone's focus on the men in the rubble is characteristically intense. And the actors perform beyond the call of duty. Cage is riveting and resonant as Sgt. McLoughlin , a veteran cop who has spent a dozen years patrolling the towers, though nothing, not even the 1993 bombing, has prepped him for this. He and his team of four volunteers, including Jimeno -- Pena delivers on his breakthrough in Crash with a performance of grit and grace -- are there to help. But how?

The question becomes moot when both are trapped under an avalanche of concrete and steel, barely able to move in a confined space. Lesser actors would be daunted by the task of conveying emotional nuance in the dark, immobile and covered with ash. But Cage and Pena rise to the challenge as McLoughlin and Jimeno keep themselves awake -- sleep could lead to coma and death -- by trading stories even as the hope of rescue fades. Jimeno, who has visions of Jesus, tells of wanting to be a cop since he was a kid watching Starsky and Hutch on the tube. Later, both men hum the show's jaunty theme to break the tension. The telling details -- McLoughlin's tardiness in building a kitchen for his wife, Donna (a quietly devastating Maria Bello), Jimeno arguing about baby names with his pregnant wife, Allison (a tightly wound Maggie Gyllenhaal) -- become a lifeline. Stone cuts from the men to their families at home, waiting for news, any news.

This material could have played like a by-the-numbers docudrama. But the script, by newcomer Andrea Berloff, who worked with both couples to get the details right, has the sting of reality to work against any sugarcoating. For the rescue (the set was built in Playa Vista, California), Stone used medics and firefighters who were actually on the scene.

Among the actors, Stephen Dorff scores as EMS officer Scott Strauss. And Michael Shannon is indelible in the incredible role of Staff Sgt. David Karnes, a former Marine who quits his accounting job on a call from God to head for Ground Zero. If Stone overdoes the rah-rah, it's hard to blame him. The film is a salute to heroes who could have easily walked away. Unlike Paul Greengrass' piercing United 93, which detailed the events of 9/11 with potent provocation, World Trade Center takes the point of view of two men with no clear idea of what's going on. "What happened to the buildings?" asks Jimeno when his rescuers lift him out of the hole. The deeper implications of those words raise hot-button issues that Stone has tabled for now. His film is undeniably affecting, but you leave it wanting more.

PETER TRAVERS

(Posted: Aug 3, 2006)

Your Turn

Give us your review of
World Trade Center

Review 1 of 12

3of 4 Stars

I really wanted to like this movie more but I just couln't get into it. I really preferred Paul Greengrasses film "United 93" so much better. Maggie Gyllenhaal and Maria Bello gave noteworthy performances.

Aug 31, 2007 14:06:52

Review 2 of 12

Not Rated

I would just like to inform readers of this forum that a film can be "decent" but it can never be "descent". Multiple contributors made this mistake- 3 in a row at one point I believe. Anyway, this is clearly 'Stone lite' which is not to say it's a poor movie. Stone however is nothing if not a provocateur and his style of film making clearly gave way to his reverance for the subject matter. This has resulted in a well made but somewhat sanitized (for Stone particularly) version of the events. What a film like this needed was a David Fincher dose of realism (or drama, honestly). The events of 9/11 couldn't be more dramatic but aside from the fabulous (and Stone like) buildup of the fist half hour or so, we're left with some soap operaesque pabulum that has you checking your watch. Stone plays it timid when he should have stepped on the gas.

Aug 2, 2007 12:07:23

Review 3 of 12

2of 4 Stars

"World Trade Center." Better known as the "tamed" 9/11 flick of 2006. Now don't get me wrong, I have respect for the victims of 9/11 and their families. But this isn't how you make a movie about the tragic event. But what can you expect out of Oliver Stone these days. His Oscar winning career has been going down the drain recently. Just look at "Alexander." But you have to remember his better days, "Natural Born Killers," "The Doors," "JFK," and "Platoon." I don't know what Stone was trying to accomplish here, but it wasn't much. The film gets your heart pumping the first twenty-five minutes and then the highspeed racer slams on its breaks and just stops. After that, it's basically just mourning and flashbacks. Now for those who haven't seen this movie yet. If you have forced yourself to limit down to only one 9/11 feature to watch, let it be Paul Greengrass' "United 93." A film that doesn't worry about being offensive to the audience because it isn't. It respects the victims of that tragic day and for those who say it doesn't are fucking blind, or didn't stay for the tragic and/or inspiring ending. Damn, here I am rambling on about a feature worth watching when I'm supposed to be talking to you about this fairly descent film that you want to turn off after half an hour. Nicholas Cage is playing in the feat, now what does that tell ya? He seems to fall off the wagon recently, especially with "The Wicker Man." Michael Pena on the other hand, even if he is starring in this film is a fine actor with a promising future. I'm sorry I have to be so blunt with this film, but thats what you do when you review a movie. Point out all the problems. And I assure you, after you see this project, another one of those huge budget, keeps you at ease with tameness, flash in the pan invention by the Hollywood cookie cutter, you will notice how talented Paul Greengrass is. If you can't get enough courage to even watch "United 93." Which is solemn and tight, instead of worrying about not going too far with the subject.

Jan 6, 2007 15:40:18

Review 4 of 12

3of 4 Stars

The film begins to build you up with excitement. From the first scene when Nicolas Cage hits his alarm clock to get up for work on September 11, 2001. As him and Michael Pena go through they're early morning routine, you can't wait to see what happens next, after the planes hit. As Michael Pena out doing his morning route, you see the shadow of the first plane about to go into contact with the towers. After that, they're off, you think your going to see one of the best films of the year. But when the towers fall on Cage, Pena, and they're team, nothing happens. The fast, exciting, keep you on the edge of your seat flick, becomes slow, boring, and time wasting. I liked the film as far as it went, but the film becomes slow and stays that way for the rest of the movie. As you flip back and forth from the two heroes trapped underneath the rubble of the towers to the wives waiting at home for news about they're husbands. And close to the end Dorff comes in as a former Military soldier who heads to Ground Zero to help pull the remaining survivors. The film is descent at the beginning and the end, but as for the middle, the film is nothing special. The film is supposed to honor all the victims of Ground Zero, and in a way it does, but the flick is nothing. It seems since Stone's 1994 Natural Born Killer, he seems to be getting worse (Alexander!) this film shows a little healing. But remember, Stone has done some good flicks before (Platoon, The Doors), so maybe he can get back on track once more, maybe.

Oct 23, 2006 05:48:05

Review 5 of 12

Not Rated

2.5 of 4 stars. Starts out with a smooth pace, ends up slow and pointless! Desent, but doesn't hold up to Greengrass' United 93!

Oct 20, 2006 18:23:53

Review 6 of 12

4of 4 Stars

I have to give this film the top rating. It was the least offensive thing I have ever seen. While everyone or at least the majority thought it was going to be a death for profit making film, it was absolutely not. I normally am not Nicholas Cage's biggest fan but I have to say he was truly belivievable in this epic (He also donated his entire salary for the film to the 9/11 fund). Oliver Stone has directed some faux pais in his time, namely Alexander.
However I think he got it right this time. I went to see it with my friend who is from New York and was there during those atrocities. He agreed that it wasn't in the least bit offensive to those who suffered in this disaster.

What I would slant it for however was its pathetic attempts at humor and the fact that it did NOT focus on any of the unfortunate people in the planes or any one in the towers.

Perhaps that would have been too offensive?

Anyone who wants to know the whole story should read "101 minutes" it tells the harrowing story of people trapped in the towers ( both those who survived and those who did not) and those poor creatures who boarded the flights and never landed.

MYKL

Oct 9, 2006 03:53:29

Review 7 of 12

1of 4 Stars

This movie should not have been made for another 10 years in respect for the families of those killed in the WTC attacks. The fact that this film was made during the same decade as the event itself is almost as shameful as the fact that already rich people are making money from its proceeds.

Aug 19, 2006 13:44:17

Review 8 of 12

4of 4 Stars

I saw this film this afternoon, and was taken back 5 years ago to the emotions I felt on that horrible day. Oliver Stone did the event justice -- it is an extremely powerful and emotional movie. The scene that impacted me the most was the shot from down below, where the two men were trapped, to the upward travel -- through the wreckage, to the horrible destruction above, to the satelite howering above. I was very emotional affected 5 years ago, but always wondered what the underground wreckage looked like -- as well as how high the debris of the towers actually was. Mr. Stone did a fabulous job of "taking" us there -- but, I'm not sure I was really ready for it. How can any American be ready to go back, and see how it was for those thousands of people that perished in the rumble? How many died, while awaiting rescue? It is unconceivable and of course, will never be known. I live in North Carolina, and last year we took a family trip to New England. We did stop in New York, and took the subway to Staten Island. The subway does not stop any longer at the World Trade Center site -- but I saw a very spine-tinkling view of a stairway that led up to the concourse of the WTC site. It was still lit --but, of course, deserted. It was very creepy, and unsettling. Prior to 9/11, I had visited NYC over a half dozen times, and always went to the top of the towers. I loved those towers. I have a fear of heights, so they always challenged me. When I saw them implode 5 years ago, my heart broke. My heart broke again, today, in seeing this movie. Yes, it was an extremely horrible happening, 9/11. But I believe that Mr. Stone brought it home to us, and reminds us that "we never forget".

Aug 17, 2006 16:58:21

Previous Next