Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

Clarissa Mora The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

leplatypus This documentary is perplexing: unlike books that can expose any views without offering no better proof than words, here, the message is often based upon footages. I know that a frame can be manipulated but the one used are actually from live TV network. And the results are shocking: all the four attacks of 9/11 have problems.Pentagone: where is the plane? Why no single capture of the crash? Why this plane can pass through 3 rings of wall whereas the NY planes got stuck inside the WTC?Flight93: where is the plane? No fire, no bodies? WTC: you see clearly that windows flash down while the towers collapse, especially the north tower? How a building collapse can melt basement?The thesis supported is frightening because it's not that government let terrorists act but it's rather the government as the terrorist and the mastermind behind the attacks.All those questions must be answered to honor the memory of all innocent people who died on this day. Actually, we still got not decisive answers.

dbborroughs As an evenings entertainment this film is intriguing viewing, as a valid look at what happened on 911 this film flounders in a mire of its own making.The point of the film is that something other than the official story occurred on 911. According to this film the planes that hit the World Trade Center were not the planes we were told, that a missile hit the Pentagon, flight 93 was shot down, that some or all of the planes were off loaded and the people may still be alive, the collapse of the twin towers was the work of demolition not the crashes, and that there is some grand conspiracy behind it all.Its an intriguing idea, or series of them. The problem is that not a great deal of it really hangs together, at least not in the way that is presented here. Could it be possible? yes, but not with what we are given as evidence.There is little real expert testimony. We only get snippets from other sources. No real expert in any field is interviewed. (which is important when it comes to construction of the Twin Towers since they were unlike any other building that they are compared to when they talk about fires in steel buildings) We are only given statements, usually one line from someone, we don't know anything about other than a title, about things they may or may not know about.Every person who saw anything is accorded equal weight (a woman who appears to be watching events from Brooklyn or lower Manhattan, far from the towers, is heard to say that the plane crashing into the tower isn't American so therefore its not American.) Everyone is seen to be telling the truth at all times. A miss quote of President Bush is seen as proof of something other than as a mistake. The filmmakers also take every news report as gospel truth with a report of the blowing up of one of the towers roofs being portrayed as true when the footage shows its not There is no room for any error in any news footage, its not an error but signs of the conspiracy.The evidence in one sequence of pictures is forgotten when discussing another so that the evidence of the planes that hit the towers being commercial airlines from some shots is dismissed because its not clear in others. (also the phone report of one eyewitness that is contradicted by photographic evidence is given a great deal of weight) And at times the film throws things out-like the off loading of passengers, but gives no evidence as to why this may have happened or what happened to the people. You can't make claims if you don't back them up. Likewise unexplained is talk of a conspiracy that it has no shred of evidence as to who or what is behind it. You need to tell me more than just "they are behind it". Tell me who "They" are It really annoys me because as long as you don't think about what the film is saying or the inconsistent stories its spinning this is a really well done piece of film making. Frankly I could almost believe its stories, except that none of them make any real sense when you stop to think about them.Worth a look, with a large grain of salt, simply because it lays out the alleged conspiracy many people feel is real. Fortunately or unfortunately it fails to make its case because its evidence is severely lacking.

shammuk The point here is not about if the this film proved anything or if there really is a conspiracy. I think what the filmmakers were trying to say is that why all the concealed evidence? If the gov't has got nothing to hide then why can't we see all the evidence that we the American public has a right to. So, I have to say it is very respectable of them to dedicate this film in memory of those perished in 9-11 because, the victims out of everyone has the right to know what really happened and to be honest the gov't haven't shown us everything.I can't say everything in this film made sense but at least, some of it is very convincing. This film has raised a lot of good questions. The American public has a right to know every answer to every question that this film has raised. Like why the small explosions in the Twin Towers after the planes have hit? I'd say that is pretty suspicious. Also, where are the bodies of the passengers for the other two planes? Why can't we hear the evidence from the black boxes on the planes? I'm not saying there is any conspiracy here but I think we have a right to know.For those of you who's seen Farenhite 911. I'd say these two films could be linked together. If you knew what the Bush family has invested in the middle east then you know that is a big enough motivation for them to kill anyone in this world. That's why the old Bush went to war in the middle east and then the young Bush went to war in the middle east. No other president in US history has gone to war in the middle east. Why? Use your brains people. Where does all of Bush's money come from? Not from US tax payers thats for sure. Their money comes from the Saudi Royal Family who just happens to be good friends with Bin Laden. Where does Dick Cheaney's money come from? His money comes from his company that invests in communications of the troops in the middle east and home. Every time there's a war his stocks go up. People kill for money. It's plain and simple. We see it everyday in the news around us. For those of you that don't believe someone in our gov't with power won't kill for money. Then I'd say you need get out of your fairytale world and wake up. If you can make a billion dollars and you need to kill 3000 people in order to do it and you had the power to cover it up and no one would ever find out it's you until your dead would you do it? I'd say a lot of people would. Those of you that say you wouldn't because you never had that kind of power. Power is corruption. Wake up people.Last but not least for those of you who is dissing this film I bet you don't know anyone that has died because of 9-11 and you don't have a son fighting in Iraq. Because if you do you wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this film. You would use your mind and heart and question if all this is worth my loved ones to die for. Is this all worth something? Just ask yourself that question.

Stibbert I'm a fan of both X-Files and 24 and I found this movie very entertaining. OK, sarcasm aside, I'm not saying these guys are wrong or right. I'm simply saying that as a documentary this film is sloppy and pretty much just propaganda.First I'd like to look at this film as a documentary and not involve the debate it's part of. To put it simple; it's propaganda. As a documentary this film is sloppy and bad. The film makers have one thing in mind; to present the fact as they see it suit their cause and try to convince and convert the viewer. Where as a real documentary would try to give a more objective presentation of all the facts, dig into the stuff and try to present various explanations and in cases of speculation leave that for the viewer to figure out. Loose Change does not at all present or theorize about any other number of plausible explanations for some of the phenomenas, but presents only one side of a story and does what it can to promote the film makers views and blacken the other side.So much for the way of presenting the facts, but the facts, or rather lack there of, they present is far from concrete nor convincing. Their conclusions are based on poor quality pictures and TV images (not necessarily poor as in bad quality, but poor as you don't really see anything) and witnesses (which is known to be very unreliable evidence) rather than any actual hard facts.It has some nice things to it too. There is a nice drive in the presentation and it keeps the viewer watching. The editing is nice enough, but over all is no technical wonder.All together it's a horrible flick and more or less just propaganda. It does not at all work well as a documentary and has an amateur feel to it. However, because it works really well as propaganda and I imagine has a lot of people will be convinced by it I'll give it two stars. Because I'm no fan of propaganda in general I would not recommend this movie and I would advise anyone who watches it to look at it with a critical eye.The only thing they actually manage to prove is that yes, the government is holding back information about certain parts of the events that took place, but that's not really breaking news. The only ones who are naive enough to believe blindly in the "evidence" presented in this "documentary" are the ones who are naive enough to believe the government would go public with everything. Of course the government will hold back information and details in a case like this. Not so much to keep it's own people from learning the truth, but to keep foreign and hostile intelligence from learning what they know.