Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

Hattie I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

GloriousGooner I've never seen the original Loose Change, but after hearing so much about it and having seen Zeitgeist, The Power Of Nightmares and Freedom To Fascism i figured it was about time i gave the big one a whirl.This "Final Cut" seems like half a film. It's a well organised, neatly structured pseudo-documentary that effectively breaks down the events of September 11th 2001 into easily digestible nuggets of information. Many many fingers are pointed at the 9/11 Commission's official report and the questions that were, or were not in most cases, asked of key witnesses. Important stuff indeed for good investigative journalism is one of the keystones of a free democratic society, able to challenge its rulers on the balance of probabilities and reasonable doubt. In fact, coming away from this film one is puzzled at why the official explanation is still trumpeted around as a gospel account of the tragedy. Undeniably convincing, cannily constructed, this really puts the administration under an uncomfortable spotlight. So why did I only give it 2 out of 10? The reason is simple. All the mud is hurled across the fence, all the holes pointed out and many reasoned logical arguments are deployed in debunking the commission's account of events. But not one alternative is presented. This would be bad enough alone but further than this there are no attempts made to suggest why such a conspiracy could or would exist. There're the usual collection of experts and statistics, but in a film hoping to be taken seriously this seems little more than cheap gimmickry utilised in the hope of enforcing the shakiest of arguments. Aspersions are cast as to credibility, but the frightening prospect of the inside job, oft hinted at, is unsatisfactorily left hanging in the air without following it to its own damning conclusions.Ultimately the hole in this argument is context. No context is given to the intelligence that was or was not ignored and no context is really given to the circumstances the administration and/or the FAA and FBI were operating under.I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying that the polarised, one-dimensional presentation so totally devoid of context severely undermines most if not all of what is trying to be said.

loleralacartelort7890 The movie Loose change tries to prove that George Bush planned 9/11. But all the claims in this movie have been debunked. Sorry fantasy-lovers, there is no conspiracy about 9/11. This movie has been debunked by Popular mechanics, BBC, History Channel and many others. Let me mention some of them.Dylan Avery (director of Loose Change) claims that airplanes could not have brought down the WTC. Avery claims that controlled demolition brought down the towers. But this is simply not true. It is true that fire from airplane fuel does not burn hot enough to melt the steel of the World Trade Center. But that is not a valid claim. Any Structural engineer would tell you that fire does not have to melt steel, to make the building collapse. It only has to weaken the steel so much, that the building gives in, and collapses. Steel weakens and losses half its strength at 600 degrees Celsius. Fire from Jet-fuel burn at 1000 degrees Celsius – do your own math, of course that building collapsed because of the fire from jet-fuel. It burned even hotter than the 1000 degrees Celsius, because the fire also consumed plastics, paper and wood, so that the fire got even hotter. All the metal-cabinets and other metal in the building melted from the intense heat, which resulted in the melted steel you see in some footage. Also: if explosives where used, then they would have been registered in the seismic recorders in the city – but they weren't, because no explosives where used. That been debunked, next myth.The movie Loose change very arrogantly claims that all calls made from the airplanes used by terrorists on 9/11, all where faked by the Government, using voice-modulators. This claim not only insults the people who lost loved ones on the airplanes, but it is also a false claim. Dylan Avery Claims that, Cellular Phones in 2001 could not possibly have made such calls from that altitude, thereby "proving" a government conspiracy. But the thing is that almost all calls made from the airplanes on 9/11 where all made from air-phones, NOT Cellular Phones. Dylan Avery either is too incompetent to mention this fact, or he deliberately lied about it. Air-phones are connected by wire to the airplanes communication – which is reliable. That is one of the main claims of Loose Change, and yet it is so easily debunked. The few calls, from cell-phones, that were made, where also very quickly cut off. And anyone who believes this cell-phone theory really lacks common sense: if the government had planned all that, and did modulate the victims' voices, then the Government would have had to spy on the victims, for weeks before 9/11 - to get their voices recorded. The Government also had to use really good actors to listen and play the victims over the voice-modulators, because a family-member would know, if the family member on the airplane did not use the same manner of speaking as before 9/11. This voice-modulating conspiracy theory is simply so stupid and false, that I can't understand why people would believe such nonsense. But then again: people do like X-files. That been debunked, next myth. Another claim of Loose change is that World Trade Center 7 was also brought down by explosives. The reason that this conspiracy theory exist, is that a TV-station filmed WTC7 collapsing from a great distance. From a great distance it actually looks like a controlled demolition, but it just weren't. Loose Change claims that WTC7 was used by CIA as a control-centre or bunker, to control 9/11-attacks on New York. And that the Government afterwards destroyed WTC7 to cover up its involvement. This is the most stupid claim ever made by any conspiracy theorists. If the government did have a control-centre in WTC7, then it would be really stupid, no: RETARDED, to blow up the building in front of the world. Any commander in the world world not blow something like WTC7 in front of the world, when you had just carried out the biggest terror attack in history – you had just gotten away with it, the most stupid thing you could do was to blow up the building. If there was something in WTC7 that could prove a Government conspiracy, then they would just simply remove it. Also: WTC7 was on FIRE. It was hit by debris from when WTC1 and WTC2 fell. There are tones of photos that show WTC7 on fire. Also: almost all of the buildings around WTC1+2 where damaged on 9/11. Almost all of them where removed or was destroyed. WTC7 was not destroyed by CIA. Stop spreading these false conspiracy claims. They have all been debunked by big media-concerns like BBC, History Channel and Popular Mechanics. Also Tieck out: 911myths.com and loosechangeguide.com There is no conspiracy about 9/11 – get on with your lives!

digitalWarp I watched the first part of this before my Interwebs died on me, but it was enough to get a distinct feel that it is much different than the previous 2 versions. I have also watched Screw Loose Change, and perused other sites dedicated to debunking the film(s). Now, my official stance on 9/11 is that something stinks, and everyone knows it only some people are unwilling to admit it. Also there is no such thing as a 9/11 Denier as that is a logical fallacy and an ad hominem attack used in an attempt to discredit anyone who's opinion and perspective is different from those who believe the events as they were presented by the main stream media. The purpose of Loose Change: Final Cut is to open peoples eyes to a possible truth, and to raise questions that need to be answered. This it does using new footage, and new information that the previous films did not have, and by removing information that wasn't sound as any decent film maker should do.The movie should be seen by everyone if only so that everyone has a chance to see that there are problems with the official story. The film might be biased in one direction, but that doesn't mean it doesn't merit a once over since it's not the same as the first two.

mrminnman I've seen the first two versions of LooseChange and I loved them dearly. The fairest factual question about this film, I think, is: "whose conspiracy theory do you believe, the governments or this one?" I hope you enjoy it as much as I did!The most compelling evidence, so far, has been the molten metal and the plane/missle hit on the pentagon. I don't think the debunkers have come close to explaining how jet fuel can melt metal in the basement or how a plane can hit the pentagon without leaving plane engines or wings laying around.Overall, I think the movies have been very professional and fair.