Can anyone still believe the official version?
I don't have really have an hour and 45 minutes to waste without a brief summary of what I'm going to see -- namely, which aspects of "the official version" does it actually challenge? The brief reviews I've been able to find are long on "glittering generalities" about not buying into everything we're told by Government and Big Corporate Interests, without offering much information about what sort of alternative hypotheses the film is actually putting forward.

I mean, does the film mostly argue that the Bush Administration lied and lied after the 9/11 attacks, in order to politically-spin the event for its own purposes? That's an argument worth making, IMHO. But the argument that Bush and/or the CIA actually planned and perpetrated the attacks is a far more extraordinary claim requiring proportionately more extraordinary evidence.
And some arguments that some people have made about 9/11 were never worth making at all (e.g., that the Pentagon was hit by a remote-controlled missile, because AA Flight 77 and the people on it didn't exist, and there were in fact only three airplanes).

Remarkably, this "Pentagon hit by a missile" notion has been defended by self-described skeptics who would never dream of arguing that the Universe is only 6000 years old, or that the Sun and the other planets orbit the Earth, or that a 1:10^400 diluted extract of duck liver will cure influenza -- and, correspondingly, a massive worldwide secret cabal of atheistic scientists and/or Big Corporate Interests must be conspiring to Hide The Truth about Creation Science, about Ptolemaic Geocentrism, about Homeopathy.

Yet some people who are too educated to believe THOSE idiocies will eagerly brag about being "9/11 Skeptics," and will scold others for being "credulous sheeple."

So, that's why I'd like to know before watching it: what is this 105-minute documentary actually selling, Marcus?