I will need to see to see the movie before I can render an opinion on it. As for making movies on real-life diasters. That is nothing new. Movies have been made about Pearl Harbor, Titanic, The Holocaust and tv movies have been made about The Challenger explosion, the droping of the A-bombs on the Japan, and the 1st attack on the World Trade Center. There have been countless war movies. There have been movies and TV mini-series on slavery. I knew right from the start that their would be movies made about 911. I am sure their will be movies about the Columbia Shuttle diaster and the diaster in New Orleans the the attack on the trains in London. It what movie makers have always done. Now, if you don't like that and don't want to watch this 911 movie ok, but don't then sit down and watch Shindler's List. As for being too soon, just how long should we wait? 5 years? 10 years? 15? 100? How long? We will each have our own opinion on how long is the proper to wait, who decides? What if we set the number at 10 years and someone releases a movie exactly 9 years and 364 days after the event? What then? Do we boycott it for being released one day too soon? Deciding how long to wait to make a movie about 911 or othe tragedies is not an exact science. One last thing, how come I didn't see anyone complaining about Fahrenheit 911 being released too soon after the event? Don't think for one minute that Michael Moore wasn't in anyway motivated by money to make the movie(I am not saying that it was his only motivation).