Best movie of this year hands down!

Sorry, this movie sucks

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

The 9/11 Commission Report (2006) * (out of 4) The Asylum, the studio best known for really bad and really cheap "mockbusters" decided to deliver something straight in this docudrama based on the commission report that was released on the September 11, 2001 attacks. Leigh Scott wrote and directed this picture and I think the majority of the blame has to go to the screenplay. I'm really not sure what type of story they were trying to get across but it's an incredible mess that never makes too much sense. Trying to get all of the pre-9/11 stuff into a low-budget, 84-minute movie was probably a bad idea to begin with but it certainly doesn't help that the execution is so poor. The story is pretty much impossible to follow but even worse is the really bad dialogue. As bad as the dialogue is, it doesn't help that the performances range from bland to bad. I mean, the story is bad, the dialogue is bad and the performances are bad so with all of this considered it's really easy to see why the film tanked. Whenever you're trying to deliver a political thriller, having all of those elements not work is just leading to a disaster. I can't say how many times we were supposed to be caught up in this tense political thriller yet the dialogue they were saying seemed to have been written by a ten-year-old and the performances saying it appeared to be from a high school play. There's just no way around the fact that this film really shouldn't have been made or at least not in the fashion that it was. The "Jason Bourne" style of filmmaking with the camera just sliding around everywhere also doesn't work here. I'm sure it was meant to draw us into the action but it fails. In the end, this film is just bad all around and if you're going to watch something bad from The Asylum then it's best to get something that's also campy.

Despite what the other commentors have said, I felt that this was a very well done independent film. It was also quite informative and found a dramatic way to capture the ultimately dull and boring 9/11 Commission Report. I wasn't bothered by the camera work at all, and thought it was an interesting choice to be a "fly on the wall" rather than use more subjective framing and lighting. I also had no problems with the audio in my 5.1 surround system, although I did notice a couple of places where things seemed a tad out of sync. The acting in this film was exceptional, especially the character of "Mike" played by Rhett Giles. It was a very magnetic and moving performance. I also liked the actors in the Minnesota sequences, as they all felt very real and natural in their dialogue. Perhaps some viewers are bothered by what is clearly a more neutral or almost conservative viewpoint on world events. I found it to be a breath of fresh air, as everything coming out of Hollywood, studio or independent, seems to be obsessed with liberalism and liberal ideology.As a side note, I watched another film by the same company with a lot of the same actors. It was really strange to see actors in such a serious work, then in a complete piece of fluff!

This documentary was very amateurish. It could have been made by college students. Assuming that it was, my grading is as follows. Content : C, Sound Quality : F ,Cinematography : F ,Acting : D, Soundtrack : F, Casting : C, Boobshot : A ......Overall Grade :DI found myself getting seasick as we walked down the streets with the characters,bobbing up and down with each move of the cameraman'step.My mother-in-law even changed the batteries in her miracle ear and she could not hear the muffled dialog. Extensive post production editing and CGI would not help this bomb. These students would "barely" pass my course.My advise...don't waste your time or money for the one "A".

When you see the cover of this DVD it would appear to be a big time picture, but looks can be deceiving. Here are some gripes I had about this film:1) The video quality appears to be something from an entry level consumer video camera. 2) Shots taken on the streets have massive camera bobbing and make you feel sick and unable to focus. 3)The audio almost never syncs with the video. In fact sometimes it's a full second off. 4) The volume must often be turned way up to hear certain scenes. 5) The actors dialog always seems muffled. 6) There are no subtitles to understand extremely muffled scenes which makes it hard to follow the plot. 7) Even shots taken from a stationary point have an unsteady camera view. They never bothered buying a tripod I suppose.As for the quality of the story... I really can't give that an honest opinion because I simply couldn't catch it all due to the above technical flaws. I really wish it had subtitles it would be possible to follow.All-in-all: Rent something else. This is too difficult to watch. The parts you can actually hear seem interesting, but you just can't follow most of it without subtitles --which aren't present.