This chilling account on the men who carried out the 9/11 attacks is a poignant, harrowing look at the events prior to the most barbaric act of terrorism in United States soil. Director Antonia Bird bravely conducts this film as a docudrama, not taking sides and showing the terrorists as human beings who strongly believed in what they were up to carry on. By following Ziad Jarrah's later years, Bird shows us how it was easy for radical Islamic fundamentalists to brainwash a weak, vulnerable young boy and turn him into a war machine capable of piloting a 747 that was to crash on the capitol. The scary anger the most radical Islamics have towards the United States is shown early on, and The Hamburg Cell will surely upset a lot of people, since it proves clearly that months, even years prior to 9/11 it was well-known fact for the CIA that Al Qaeda had plans for terrorist attacks on American soil and these attacks would be carried on through hijacked commercial airlines.Scarier than the attack itself is how Bird portrays the transformation that goes on with Ziad Jarrah,a good-looking boy coming from a traditional rich Lebanese family who came to Hamburg, Germany,to study, circa 1996, and how he fell under the spell of radical Islamics that already through the early nineties had plans for a major strike against the Ocidental World.The acting is great: Karim Sallah shows so much just with his troubled eyes!you see the inner turmoil happening inside his soul as he is put upon a terrible task and must choose between what he believes as right (giving his life in the name of Islamic cause) and a life of happiness with the woman he loves, Aysel.Director Antonia Bird has great sense of atmosphere, and although The Hamburg Cell revolves around the events prior to 9/11, it is a tense, nerve-wrecking countdown journey that will leave you breathless. The film culminates on a hair-raising sequence that is scarier than any horror movie,as the Hamburg terrorists makes their way to the respective airports, a moment carried with a sense of dread and death punctuated by a thrilling soundtrack that evokes what it must have been to the terrorists and the innocent passengers that fateful morning. The last image is a haunting look at how little we know about the people surrounding us, as a terrified Aysel watches through TV, along with the rest of the world, the day that we definitely entered in a era of horror and uncertainty, not knowing yet that the man she believed she knew was one of the people behind this holocaust of deaths and suffering. Ziad Jarrah was the pilot aboard United 93, the flight that didn't reach its target. It was the last plane supposed to be thrown against its target (the Capitol). As the world watched the towers and the Pentagon burning, United 93 was still on the air. However, when passengers phoned their loved ones and were informed about the events on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, they realized that if they didn't take matters on their own hands, they were going to be killed. So, the passengers got together and stood up against the terrorists. Fight ensued on board, and although not taking over the control of the plane, the brave passengers fought bravely the terrorists and stopped them reaching the Capitol. The plane crashed in the woods near Shanksville.This event is masterfully, beautifully shown in Paul Greengrass's United 93. Jarrah wrote a day prior to the flight a letter destined to Aysel, latter intercepted by the FBI, in which he clearly said good bye to her. Although Jarrah's family latter claimed that they were sure that their son was just a passenger and never a terrorist aboard the fateful flight, investigations proved undoubtedly that Ziad was the pilot of United 93 and one of the Hamburg Cell members. This film is a though-provoking, harrowing account on the scariest terrorist attack ever, and the last scene, Ziad Jarrah walking through the white corridors to the plane, will forever live as one of the most chilling movie moments ever.Also recommended: United 93, The Path to 9/11, Inside the Twin Towers.

I saw 'The Hamburg Cell' for the third time a few days ago and read all the 20 comments written so far. What struck me the most is that the comments on this film (I will use the term 'film' because the term 'made-for-TV movie' seems a bit pejorative to me in this case)are, in my opinion mostly (though not all) polarized around two things: the film is considered either as biased or as underdeveloped, bringing nothing new. I will try to show that it is neither biased nor simplistic. First, a few words about director Antonia Bird: as everyone can see from her complete filmography available on IMDb, she is not a 'Michael Moore-type' director specialized in political films, nor is she known to be affiliated to any radical group whatsoever. Now, if we examine the film closer, although it immerses us in the intimacy of the terrorists, it can definitely not be argued that it shows sympathy towards them: with the exception of Ziad Jarrah, (to whom I will come later) all of them are portrayed as intolerant, full of hatred and completely fanatic, which is what they were, because it must not be forgotten that their way of thinking is considered extremist by the vast majority of the Muslims themselves. For example, at one moment in the film, Mohammed Atta, when discussing with two young Muslims who accuse him of using the same hateful words against the Jews as the Nazis, replies: 'Well, it might be true that they have been slaughtered by the Nazis, but finally, it was to their advantage, they gained a lot out of it!!!' Or later in the film, when he is giving instructions for his funeral, he insists that no woman be allowed to come to visit his grave. Portraying such an individual hating and despising everyone (including women) who is not a Muslim thinking like him and his fellow fanatics, is definitely not showing sympathy towards him. Now, for what affects Ziad Jarrah's depiction, it is true that he is portrayed as more human and much less fanatic than the others, what he indeed was at the start. Here comes, in my opinion, the most frightening element of the film: this man underwent a virtually complete lobotomy from part of his 'fellows': I'm using the term 'lobotomy' on purpose, because contrarily to brainwashing,which consists of making you accept everything a given 'leader' says without discussion, lobotomy only targets a portion of the brain, the one needed, while still giving you the illusion of free choice. How is this lobotomy performed? Gradually, in a very insidious way: if we examine the film carefully, we can see that Ziad Jarrah is not sent to Afghanistan training camps straight away, but that he first starts doing some charity work, dispatching food to Palestinian children from Germany. Here, they have touched his 'sensitive string'(According to numerous sources, he was involved in several social welfare programs in Lebanon prior to coming to Germany,a fact certainly known to Al-Qaida members). Moreover, at several moments during the film, Mohammed Atta says: 'Ziad is not ready yet'So, by showing him the 'positive' aspects of their work, they gradually persuade him that he could do 'more for the Muslim cause'. This is how you turn a basically good-hearted man into a terrorist. He feels 'he has to do it' as he writes to his wife just before the 11th of September 2001. Now, for those who might think that the film is one-sided, it must be also underlined that 'The Hamburg Cell' is no way tender with W's administration. While carefully avoiding any allusion to alleged acquaintances between it and the terrorists or people supporting them,which would be a new, but unverified element, it thoroughly enumerates various facts which have been well known: apart from some famous purposefully ignored memos, it mentions various reports made to Condoleeza Rice, meetings of high ranking CIA officials with the White House Staff giving warnings that civil aircraft may be used as weapons, and the presence on U.S. Soil of Cheikh Mohammed, Al-Qaida's chief of operations, several times during the year 2001, all known to W's administration, with always the same answer: no action to be undertaken. So, why set up a complicated 'conspiracy'when you already have a band of crazy fanatics ready to 'do the job' for you? Just do NOTHING and both sides will be satisfied. The first one will promote and glorify its so-called 'holy war', the second one will promote and glorify its so-called 'war on terror'. And, seriously, what do the lives of more than 3000 innocent people mean to crazy fanatics or cynical calculators? Nothing. This is why this film is so disturbing to many people...

I was waiting for a public service announcement at the end saying, "Terrorists- they are not bad people, just mis-informed". Ugh. You know, I am a well educated person; I am in no way "close-minded". Don't serve me a platter full of dung and tell me it is actually desert. I don't like it when writers and/or directors pull the emo trip on their audience, especially with this particular subject. Hitler was a bad guy, I don't see any films about him being mis-understood.These terrorists (and don't forget to call them what they were) were not mis-informed. Nor was this something that they did out of panic, instinct, or defense. This was one of the most well planned, and yes, thought out, murders in history. There's more blame insinuated on the American leaders then the terrorist (who are indeed made out to be martyrs). For a film maker to put out such a piece of propaganda, in hopes to make people understand what these poor mis-guided people had to go through, reminds me of why I own a DVD player- I don't have to worry about crap like this coming through my video monitor.On a technical level this film worked. In fact, if this tragedy had not happened, and this was just a story it probably wouldn't have bothered me as much. But I know the reality of this, and unfortunately there are people who are actually forgetting the truth and reality behind it. Film can do that. Which, is why i'll stick to my own viewing collection. What's on tonight's list...I think i'll watch "Cannibal Holocaust"...

I am surprised at some of the negative comments made about this movie. I didn't see anything controversial in its handling of the 9/11 Bombings. People who opposed the Points of View expressed in "Hamburg Plot" were probably the same people who felt that Osama Bin Laden shouldn't have been Time Magazine's Man of the Year (when he clearly should have been). America believes in dissent and the characters in the "Hamburg Cell" expressively portrayed a certain point of View. I agree overall with the rating of 6/7 Given the movie. This was a good movie that showed a different point of View. I especially liked the Male and Female Leads.