The Path to 9/11 : Season 1

  • Network: ABC
  • Series Premiere Date: Sep 10, 2006
User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 84 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 84
  2. Negative: 37 out of 84

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. LewR
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Compelling, well acted. a story that demands to be told.
  2. MikeE
    Sep 13, 2006
    2
    Um, many of the crucial scenes in the film....never happened. Like when Osama is surrounded in Afghanistan and the Clinton administration didn't move on it. Never happened. How can made up facts about 9/11 get a good review? Easy, people still don't know the facts.
  3. JH
    Sep 7, 2006
    0
    Insulting.
  4. [Anonymous]
    Sep 10, 2006
    0
    Utterly discusting and shameful. This movie is a new low in television propaganda. It does not get any terrible then this. BS leads the way. Skip this one for your own good.
  5. DaveM
    Sep 10, 2006
    0
    Fantastically terrible. Truely is a new low
  6. ibrodsky
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    It's unfortunate that there is so much controversy about how the Clinton administration is portrayed. Path to 9/11 shows we have been at war since the early 1990s. Our leaders did not understand then, nor do they fully understand now. I don't know how anyone can dismiss the drama or relevance of this film based on blind political allegiances.
  7. KateL
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Excellent. Loved the line "why is it always women who notice?" The movie gave me a much better appreiciation for the Afgan allies, espeically the informant who was killed on Sept.9. God Bless
  8. StuartS
    Sep 11, 2006
    0
    It's all Clinton's penis' fault. How thoughtful of korporate America to produce a steaming pile of repiglican propaganda for joe slackjaw's consumption. And then dump it on us two months before the midterm election that could precipitate actual investigations of government as criminal enterprise aka the W administration. Harvey, we hardley knew ye.
  9. CaptainWacky
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Haven't seen part two yet, but the first part was well-made and very absorbing. Yes, it did seem biased against the Clinton administration, but the first part ended while they were still in office. If the second episode is comparably unforgiving to the Bush administration, it will emerge with its dignity intact. Not really worth at 10, but I've given it one to counterbalance Haven't seen part two yet, but the first part was well-made and very absorbing. Yes, it did seem biased against the Clinton administration, but the first part ended while they were still in office. If the second episode is comparably unforgiving to the Bush administration, it will emerge with its dignity intact. Not really worth at 10, but I've given it one to counterbalance those dopey enough to think giving it a 0 is a wortwhile way of venting their political opinions. Expand
  10. Andrew
    Sep 11, 2006
    0
    Propaganda.
  11. GriffinW
    Sep 12, 2006
    9
    It showed neither Dems or Reps in a positive light. A good summary of the build up to 9/11. Amazing number of reviewer panned it without having seen it. The truth is not always what we want to hear, but this dramatization is as close to accurate as it could be.
  12. NancyR.
    Sep 10, 2006
    8
    Decent film. Just to comment on the controversy: This DocuDRAMA has brought out all the liberal protests, yet Michael Moore's political DocuMENTARY as widely supported by that same community. The irony is rich.
  13. AnnB
    Sep 10, 2006
    0
    i feel like throwing up...that stupid hand-held camera even when the subject matter is quiet; distortions; bad music; subject matter too important for a hack director like Cunningham.
  14. TLongino
    Sep 10, 2006
    0
    Shamefully irresponsible and unbalanced depiction. Completely insulting to viewers. Give us all a little credit ABC... we're not idiots. Just give us the facts, we can assign blame on our own.
  15. LS
    Sep 13, 2006
    0
    I took the time to watch the whole thing. BTW I'm not registered as a dem or a rep. I can't believe people are defending this thing as historically accurate. Try reading up on it. No not some slanted account, multiple sources that are recognized as being accurate. It's really quite bad as entertainment too. It's mawkish, hammy and condescending.
  16. JohnE
    Sep 13, 2006
    0
    It was extremely sad and disgusting to sit through this piece of propanda. This docutrash makes a mockery of the 9/11 Commission Report and is an insult to our intelligence. Shame on ABC/Disney and to the FCC for allowing this distortion to go over our airwaves.
  17. Rob
    Sep 10, 2006
    10
    The Clinton administration was in power for 8 years prior, ergo they must take the lion's share of the blame for any intelligence faults which led to 9/11. Indeed, the WTC was attacked on Clinton's watch once before in 1993. However, ultimately the blame lies with the Islamic terrorists who committed the heinous act in the first place. And no amount of partisan muck-throwing The Clinton administration was in power for 8 years prior, ergo they must take the lion's share of the blame for any intelligence faults which led to 9/11. Indeed, the WTC was attacked on Clinton's watch once before in 1993. However, ultimately the blame lies with the Islamic terrorists who committed the heinous act in the first place. And no amount of partisan muck-throwing will change that fact. Expand
  18. kater
    Sep 26, 2006
    10
    truly excellent. Both parties look bad, but still most reviews are political.
  19. LucyR
    Sep 8, 2006
    0
    Boring, way too long, simplistic and stupid.
  20. EvanS
    Sep 8, 2006
    0
    It's appropriate (and intensely frightening) that Walt Disney - parent company of ABC and the arbiter of fantasy - broadcasts a skewed portrayal of the events leading to 9/11. Harvey Keitel and Amy Madigan (!). Shame on you for participating in this agitprop. I'm sure Walt Disney is spinning in his grave, Really, where are we going?
  21. C.S.Strowbridge
    Sep 9, 2006
    0
    It's political propaganda made by a Republican activist and if ABC shows it, they should lose their broadcast license as well as get sued by everyone they defamed.
  22. BobS
    Sep 9, 2006
    9
    I'm sure the "critics" who gave this a 0 or low score have no political bias and are in no way lowering their score just to show how outraged they are about this miniseries. You'd think these guys would learn how to think for themeselves and top voting movies up and down based on their political leanings.
  23. LL
    Sep 9, 2006
    5
    Feel free to provide facts that were falsely shown in the movie.
  24. michael
    Sep 9, 2006
    10
    Typical liberal whining and hypocricy...rating this a zero before you view it? Yeah, you are all about free speech.
  25. MauriceF
    Sep 9, 2006
    10
    "The Path to 9/11" is the best made-for-TV movie in years. It's the dullest, worst-shot TV movie so far since ABC's disastrous "Ten Commandments" remake. But hey, a work as shapely as it is sprawling -- no small trick -- it renders the complex history that led to 9/11 with a ripping power that can at times feel overwhelming.
  26. MattN
    Dec 26, 2006
    10
    This excellent portrayal of the events leading up to the horrible, predictable, preventable events of 9/11, should be seen by everyone. See how officials fight each other instead of the countries enemies.
  27. DJAdequate
    Sep 11, 2006
    1
    Let's see. They misspelled Scty. Albrights name. They got the wrong Airline, confusing American with United. They mixed up the Washington Post with the Washington Time. They couldn't even bother to get the simple things right. Lazy, mixed up, and slanted. Also, boring.
  28. CarsonF.
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Outstanding.
  29. bobj
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Very well done - thought provoking!
  30. SirPatrick
    Sep 10, 2006
    10
    The scenes I have seen on the internet make this a MUST see documentary . The Lefts apoplexy of hypocrisy (see F/911 , CBS' Reagan) only adds to my enjoyment..... Yes I am referring to you Seattle Post-Intelligencer's Melanie McFarland!!
  31. tonyc
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    bet it wouldhave been better unedited for the libby whiners
  32. Yawn...
    Sep 11, 2006
    4
    Meh, it's just o.k. at best. The dialog is wooden and I've seen better camera work at YouTube. I could care less about the politics, the shoddy craftsmanship makes this is a stinker from any cinematic point of view.
  33. MattS
    Sep 10, 2006
    9
    I thought this was a brilliantly shot, gritty and fascinating insight into the run up to the disaster. keitel lends a steady slightly hawkish quality to his role and some of the battle sequences are brilliantly shot. I find the partisan criticisms of it all to familiar. Clinton has made a fool of himself by asking it to be pulled, and I'm a fan of Clinton, it's ment to be a I thought this was a brilliantly shot, gritty and fascinating insight into the run up to the disaster. keitel lends a steady slightly hawkish quality to his role and some of the battle sequences are brilliantly shot. I find the partisan criticisms of it all to familiar. Clinton has made a fool of himself by asking it to be pulled, and I'm a fan of Clinton, it's ment to be a Democracy Bill! I'm no surporter of Bush, but Clinton was in office when the 9/11 attacks were planed and in that respect must be complicit through bad leadership. This drama is highlighting that fact, to ignore it is just plane ignorance. Expand
  34. Doug
    Sep 11, 2006
    8
    It looks like a lot of those who voted 0 didn't see the movie. The first part was a riveting, artistically well done film. I wish it were a documentary rather than a docudrama, but the compilation of events was pretty accurate- it capured the overal tone. In fact it could have shown much more.
  35. JeffA
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Accurately depicts the inaction of the Clinton Administration, and how it cost thousands of American lives.
  36. AWalker
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    I don't know why the liberals in this country are upset. All of their hate-America talking points were well represented in the terrorist's dialog. Plus, now they have an upcoming film depicting the assassination of Bush to salivate over. I suggest that those who consider this a propaganda piece report for duty at their local mosque; I understand that they are looking for recruits.
  37. tomr
    Sep 12, 2006
    0
    yawn
  38. MikeD
    Sep 10, 2006
    9
    This miniseries is damn good for network TV! I saw the first part of it tonight while channel surfing and it brings you right into the story. The only down side is that it was edited b/c of the Clinton administration to make him look less guilty for not getting Bin Laden when we had the chance. The second part looks just as good as the first. It does a real good job at bringing together This miniseries is damn good for network TV! I saw the first part of it tonight while channel surfing and it brings you right into the story. The only down side is that it was edited b/c of the Clinton administration to make him look less guilty for not getting Bin Laden when we had the chance. The second part looks just as good as the first. It does a real good job at bringing together the whole storyline from the 93 WTC bombing to 9/11. Well done ABC but next time, please no bowing down to censorship. Expand
  39. NMcCord
    Sep 12, 2006
    10
    Excellent. Made both parties look very bad. Well researched because it relied upon interviews with hthose who were there and had no political agenda and not on the 9/11 report exclusively.
  40. MitchS
    Sep 10, 2006
    9
    The first night was excellent. I have no idea what the critic from the Sun-Times was watching. Perhaps he's merely a supporter of big-government beaurocracy which was responsible for missing Bin Laden during the Clinton Era. Donnie Whalberg, Amy Madigan, Harvey Keitel and the wonderful arab actors were tremendous. This film can be mentioned in the same sentence as "Syrianna" and The first night was excellent. I have no idea what the critic from the Sun-Times was watching. Perhaps he's merely a supporter of big-government beaurocracy which was responsible for missing Bin Laden during the Clinton Era. Donnie Whalberg, Amy Madigan, Harvey Keitel and the wonderful arab actors were tremendous. This film can be mentioned in the same sentence as "Syrianna" and "Traffic." I'm a little shocked that it's a disney movie. I'm eager to see part II. Expand
  41. anup
    Sep 12, 2006
    10
    it was very thought proking and very well made
  42. BobW
    Sep 13, 2006
    4
    I'm kind of stunned that so many people can't see where this is slanted. Are they off, or am I? That aside, it's mostly fairly boring and pretentious -- at least an hour too long, and pretty erratic.And what's with the lady playing Madeleine Albright? She sounded like one of the those characters June Foray voiced on Jay Ward cartoons.
  43. AnthonyO
    Sep 22, 2006
    10
    They pegged Madeline Albright on looks and attitude. Over all, it was good. I hope someone continues the story with "Post 9/11", I'd watch it. I want this one for my DVD collection.
  44. ChrisT
    Sep 8, 2006
    0
    I don't think a movie on such a serious subject should be done without facts and only facts...To imply that a previous administration is responsible is outragious especailly considering the damage the current administration has done to our country. Stick to the facts...
  45. JoeG
    Sep 9, 2006
    1
    One word: booooooooooooooring. BTW, the handheld camera technique was kind of groundbreaking......in 1993. Now it's just lazy. People who want an INTERESTING movie about 9/11 should either rent "United 93." Better yet, tune into CNN, they're rerunning their 9/11 broadcast all day. If you still want more, watch a Frontline special, or look for a book on Amazon. But don't One word: booooooooooooooring. BTW, the handheld camera technique was kind of groundbreaking......in 1993. Now it's just lazy. People who want an INTERESTING movie about 9/11 should either rent "United 93." Better yet, tune into CNN, they're rerunning their 9/11 broadcast all day. If you still want more, watch a Frontline special, or look for a book on Amazon. But don't waste 5 hours on this. As drama, it's not compelling; as art, it's slick and dumbed down; and ABC's statement that it's "just a movie, not a documentary" raises doubts on whether it's even educational. Expand
  46. BizT
    Jan 3, 2007
    10
    Fantastic! The only doubt I have is that Richard Clarke truly understood the threat from al-Qaeda and least of all that he was the only one who did. Although Stephen Root does a good job capturing the arrogance and phony humility Richard Clarke showed in his testimony before the 9/11 commission.
  47. peter
    Sep 11, 2006
    0
    just more propaganda to reinforce the "official" report. do some research for yourself and come to your own conclusion.
  48. IndePendant
    Sep 11, 2006
    6
    Oooh boy who are the users reviewing this!! You guys giving 0's and 10's should be ashamed of yourselves. The story...6 (sorry democrats but Clinton does play a part in our current terrorist crisis). The action...5 (forced, hard to follow, too cocky crime drama-ish with short words and macho talk. There are some very good scenes though like Kenya). The acting...6 (some good, Oooh boy who are the users reviewing this!! You guys giving 0's and 10's should be ashamed of yourselves. The story...6 (sorry democrats but Clinton does play a part in our current terrorist crisis). The action...5 (forced, hard to follow, too cocky crime drama-ish with short words and macho talk. There are some very good scenes though like Kenya). The acting...6 (some good, some cliched, with too much Tom Clancy wannabe machoism at times). Political Propaganda? Maybe some of it, but all the past presidents since the 1970's are responsible for the crisis we now face, not just Bush and not just Clinton. I hate to say it but the American people are the real ones to blame for letting presidents get off the hook. Bush is taking some deserved heat, but Clinton deserves a good cooking too. Really though, people trying to blame a president for all the terrorism are idiots, this is a cultural war. This TV show doesn't prove this, it is just a snapshot that tries to simplify a complex issue that has gone on since the Middle Ages. Expand
  49. JackL
    Sep 11, 2006
    0
    This is the most transparent piece of propoganda I"ve ever seen. and I"m not even that political! When during one scene they cut to new footage of Monica Lewinsky and then Harvey Keitel's character bad mouths Bill Clinton, completely out of context with the rest of the story it lost all credibility. I'd expect this to have aired on Fox News or be produced by the Republican This is the most transparent piece of propoganda I"ve ever seen. and I"m not even that political! When during one scene they cut to new footage of Monica Lewinsky and then Harvey Keitel's character bad mouths Bill Clinton, completely out of context with the rest of the story it lost all credibility. I'd expect this to have aired on Fox News or be produced by the Republican National Committee. And I"d add that the acting is in many places very amateurish. Expand
  50. SethS
    Sep 11, 2006
    0
    ABC should have not showed this movie. It is fiction and should not be shown around 9/11
  51. JL
    Sep 11, 2006
    10
    Gut-Wrenching. Felt like I was re-living the events of 9/11 especially towards the end when the events of the very day were depicted. Excellent acting by Harvey Keitel, Donnie Wahlberg and the rest of the cast. Probably the best "docudrama" mini-series mad for TV in recent history. The hand-held camera work gives it a feeling of being there.
  52. DG
    Sep 11, 2006
    8
    It's about time a movie this compelling and challenging for so many to watch comes out on the eve of 9/11. How many of you even took the time to watch this. You get heated up b/c some loose nut politician denouced this. Free speech please! Diversity of opinion please! Hypocrisy and intolerance, thanks.
  53. T.J.B.
    Sep 12, 2006
    9
    There's nothing like connecting the dots to help us know just how serious the terrorist problem is. This movie revealed hatred in all it's forms and I hope it woke America up again. As for the edgy style that others think is amatuerish, well, there's all kinds of different tastes in music too, and that doesn't mean rap is better than rock. So much interference from There's nothing like connecting the dots to help us know just how serious the terrorist problem is. This movie revealed hatred in all it's forms and I hope it woke America up again. As for the edgy style that others think is amatuerish, well, there's all kinds of different tastes in music too, and that doesn't mean rap is better than rock. So much interference from poliical correctess had the effect of stopping a agent that is trying to conduct a murder investigation. Isn't staying alive and keeping attacks from happening more important than offending someone's feelings? Expand
  54. JonR
    Sep 12, 2006
    2
    The major premise was based on something that never happened, i.e., that the CIA and the Afghans had Bin Laden in their sights but let him go because the Clinton adminitstration wouldn't pull the trigger. None of it was true but it's in the movie anyway, so you've got to call it propaganda. As drama it was pretty weak, which is probably why it failed to get a big audience The major premise was based on something that never happened, i.e., that the CIA and the Afghans had Bin Laden in their sights but let him go because the Clinton adminitstration wouldn't pull the trigger. None of it was true but it's in the movie anyway, so you've got to call it propaganda. As drama it was pretty weak, which is probably why it failed to get a big audience share. ABC really stumbled on this one. Expand
  55. ThomasDuck
    Sep 19, 2006
    0
    It's nice of ABC to be looking out for the general viewing public, in terms of content and stance on overeditorializing a drama based on loosely gathered facts that do nothing but condemn previous administrations and regale the current administration.
  56. SSantitoro
    Sep 21, 2006
    1
    I THINK Americans are starting to recognize these pseudo-reenactments for the propaganda that they are. On the other hand, we have a LOT of honest-to-God stupidity to overcome out there before the hyperCorporate Republicans can be trusted to care about documented truth... Why, on why doesn't ANYONE remember that when Osama was anywhere NEAR "in the crosshairs" of our fire power, it I THINK Americans are starting to recognize these pseudo-reenactments for the propaganda that they are. On the other hand, we have a LOT of honest-to-God stupidity to overcome out there before the hyperCorporate Republicans can be trusted to care about documented truth... Why, on why doesn't ANYONE remember that when Osama was anywhere NEAR "in the crosshairs" of our fire power, it was completely ILLEGAL to kill him???!!! Timing, people.... the TRUTH is in the Timing! Does anyone feel ashamed yet for the crucification of Clinton during his presidency? ...anyone? ...anyone? Admitting it WILL make you feel better and might help us move toward positive growth again. Isn't THAT our moral responsibility? Isn't THAT our Patiotic Duty? Let's start caring about TRUTH again -- or at least the honest pursuit of Truth). Expand
Metascore
52

Mixed or average reviews - based on 18 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 18
  2. Negative: 6 out of 18
  1. 40
    The six-hour film plays like a 9/11 version of "Syriana" or "Traffic," replete with ultra-close-ups and so much shaky, hand-held footage it can feel like being led around the world, half-drunk and half-blind.
  2. 80
    It is intensely serious, and seriously well done.
  3. Entertainment Weekly
    Reviewed by: Ken Tucker
    33
    The results strain so hard to be objective and evenhanded that they're useless as drama. [8 Sep 2006, p.149]