The Path to 9/11

I watched the first segment. For a TV movie, it's pretty good. I'm amazed by the scope of the project. They start way back in 1993 and really develop the Ramzi Yousef character, chasing him all around the world from NY to Pakistan to the Philipines and back to Pakistan.

They also develop the Massoud character, the Northern Alliance Commander allied with the United States, a military legend assassinated by Al Queda on September 9, 2001.

The acting and story telling is up and down. Many of scenes Clinton and company are worried about are the poorer scenes in the movie. The Harvey Keitel character, John O'Neill and a bunch of the FBI and CIA guys who are running around Pakistan and Afghanistan trying to capture the Al Queda guys, are all pretty awesome.

It's a little weird seeing the dad from Wonder Years playing Sander Berger and a Seinfeld reoccuring character playing Richard Clarke. So much for mistaking the dramatization for a documentary.

The filmmaking is all hand held, JJ Abrams and 24 style TV. Okay, nothing amazing.

They are showing the movie without commericals. Awesome. How are they making money, I wonder?

As far as all the political controversy and blah, blah, blah, here's the thing - the movie's basic point of view is that we blew it prior to 9/11. There were a lot of dedicated law enforcement people and spies on the front lines ready to strike some serious blows to Bin Laden and Al Queda, but they were held up by legal and diplomatic pressures. Clinton and company get the treatment because, well, they were the ones in office during the time of the movie. I don't imagine a Republican would have done any better in the same circumstance.

Anyhow, a round up from Instapundit.