|
|
Post by kims on Aug 10, 2023 22:16:30 GMT
I watched THE CROWDED SKY this morning. Lots of characters, lots of back stories w/flashbacks. Early entry in the genre including the Airport films and TOWERING INFERNO, where the disaster is the star of the film, not an event in the film. I consider SAN FRANCISCO and THE RAINS CAME as films that the disaster is an event not the star of the film.
What was the first we could call a Disaster Film?
|
|
|
|
Post by Broadway on Aug 12, 2023 0:16:48 GMT
While I am not a disaster film fan in general, I did rather enjoy Five Came Back (1939). It's not the highest quality movie, but it has some interesting characters and unexpected moments.
|
|
|
|
Post by kims on Aug 12, 2023 20:40:27 GMT
I looked up FIVE CAME BACK on Wiki when I watched BACK FROM ETERNITY which ran on TCM on Robert Ryan's day. Wiki says FIVE CAME BACK is the precursor of disaster films. Good call Broadway. Both films used much of the same elements and both are good. Lucille Ball in FIVE shows she could act and in BACK, Rod Steiger shows he can be the bad guy, not with a heart of gold, but influenced by the kindness of the Prof Spangler couple (Beulah Bondi plays the wife) to do something compassionate.
Another disaster film I like is A NIGHT TO REMEMBER. Of the Titanic films I've seen, it's the only one I'd call a disaster film. The others are stories about specific people who happened to be on the Titanic.
What I like about the older disaster films was their casts were actors popular in earlier days. In most of those films, their acting chops was the only reason the films weren't too fantastic to believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Aug 12, 2023 20:49:01 GMT
⇧ This is an enjoyable discussion. I've seen and liked all the movies mentioned so far. I don't know what the definition of a disaster movie is - would an ape getting loose in a city, as in "King Kong" from 1933, qualify? Another early one that has, at least, disaster elements (and that is a heck of a good movie) is 1937s "The Hurricane."
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 12, 2023 21:44:58 GMT
If we're talking about airline disaster films, there were two in the late 50s that predate THE CROWDED SKY. One is Columbia's B-thriller CRASH LANDING (1958) which features Nancy Davis/Reagan in her final movie role. And another one is ZERO HOUR! (1957) a production released through Paramount that was the 'basis' for AIRPLANE! (1980).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hour!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_Landing_(1958_film)
|
|
|
|
Post by kims on Aug 13, 2023 22:48:48 GMT
Defining what is a disaster film-wow, am I no pro. For me the films I've called disaster films seem to have multiple personal stories, but the disaster is the star. Using AIRPORT as an example and my memory may fail me- the screenplay development is about the disaster-which in AIRPORT is the bomb so in the beginning the story is about the suspicious behavior of a passenger, next is the suspense will the bomb go off, which it does and then is surviving the disaster. I'm embarrassed here because most of you are better articulating this stuff.
In a disaster film there are multiple character stories, many unrelated to each other. In AIRPORT, Lancaster is more married to his job, than his wife. Dean Martin can't decide between wife and lover. Helen Hayes sneaks onto planes without paying. Van Heflin is suicidal. George Kennedy can't have any family time because there is always a problem at the airport. Some of these stories interrelate, but the screenplay doesn't focus as much on the people as on the disaster as it develops and it's resolution.
Sorry I'm not concise and clear. The Godzilla type monster film evolved from the atomic bombs dropped in Japan. As I watched BACK FROM ETERNITY, I was curious when the disaster films started and if there was something prompting their creation.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 14, 2023 13:47:47 GMT
There are different types of disasters depicted on screen. I think filmmakers in this sub-genre took their cues from the news and from real-life history.
A silent film that has amazing action sequences is THE JOHNSTOWN FLOOD (1926) which made Janet Gaynor a star. It is based on a horrific flood that happened in Johnstown, PA in 1889.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Johnstown_Flood_(1926_film)
In 1935 RKO produced THE LAST DAYS OF POMPEII starring Basil Rathbone which was about the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 A.D.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Days_of_Pompeii_(1935_film)
As for the comment about all-star casts with mostly independent but interlocking subplots, I think that was done after television started siphoning off movie audiences. This was a way for producers to draw people back into theaters, where they could see not one but a handful of popular actors in one movie. So the disaster was no longer really the main attraction. Instead, it became all about the gimmick of a high-priced cast battling a corny script, most of them struggling to keep their careers going and their stardom intact.
|
|
|
|
Post by kims on Aug 14, 2023 23:58:11 GMT
I hadn't thought about the films being a gimmick by using all-star casts-good point.
By the time TOWERING INFERNO was made, were McQueen and Newman in a career slump? Or had the genre generated profits and so given better scripts and current fave actors? Of course TOWERING INFERNO benefitted from better special effects.
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 15, 2023 14:18:25 GMT
I hadn't thought about the films being a gimmick by using all-star casts-good point. By the time TOWERING INFERNO was made, were McQueen and Newman in a career slump? Or had the genre generated profits and so given better scripts and current fave actors? Of course TOWERING INFERNO benefitted from better special effects.
Incidentally, some of these disaster films, with their inflated budgets, barely broke even at the box office in the U.S. But they became profitable in foreign markets and when the rights were sold to TV for broadcast viewings. |
|
|
|
Post by kims on Aug 15, 2023 17:45:01 GMT
I think you might have the answer to this: MCA bought Universal in the sixties I believe and they made bigger profits on tv production than films. By the 70's, with studios sold and financial people running studios, was the business model of the studios to make films they knew would not show a profit until run on tv? Their decisions of what films to produce was based on what tv audiences liked?
|
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 15, 2023 21:17:55 GMT
I think you might have the answer to this: MCA bought Universal in the sixties I believe and they made bigger profits on tv production than films. By the 70's, with studios sold and financial people running studios, was the business model of the studios to make films they knew would not show a profit until run on tv? Their decisions of what films to produce was based on what tv audiences liked? |
|
|
|
Post by kims on Aug 15, 2023 21:40:49 GMT
I thought this might be true, though I have not ever heard this business model ever verbalized. TV productions became cash cows.
I watched Dick Cavett often. His interview with Robert Mitchum, Mitchum talked about why did the studios make so many bad films? During the 70's particularly, I think every big actor has a list of embarrassing films to go with contemporary good ones. Cavett also had an episode with directors Pollack, Lumet, Pakula, and Reitman. Lumet stated the studios were more interested in films for teenage boys than aiming at a larger audience. Those two episodes made me curious about decisions by studios for what films to make.
|
|
|
|
Post by vannorden on Aug 20, 2023 17:51:17 GMT
This is a fascinating topic because disaster themes date to the infancy of film. Still, it was not until the 1930s that a conspicuous difference emerged between "disaster films" and biblical epics. I would say some of the earliest disaster films were rooted more in fantasy and science-fiction, such as Abel Gance's End of the World (1931), G.W. Pabst's Atlantis (1932), Cooper and Schoedsack's King Kong (1933), Felix E. Feist's Deluge (1933), Maurice Elvey's Transatlantic Tunnel (1935), and William Cameron Menzies Things to Come (1936). More "realistic settings" developed after the success of San Francisco (1936) and its heart-stopping depiction of the "Great Quake" of 1906, paving the way for other historical disaster productions such as In Old Chicago (1937), Suez (1938), and The Rains Came (1939). Another one worth mentioning is John Ford's drama-packed The Hurricane (1937), one of the earlier films to highlight a single, momentous weather event.
|
|
|
|
Post by intrepid37 on Aug 31, 2023 4:00:01 GMT
I watched THE CROWDED SKY this morning. Lots of characters, lots of back stories w/flashbacks. Early entry in the genre including the Airport films and TOWERING INFERNO, where the disaster is the star of the film, not an event in the film. I consider SAN FRANCISCO and THE RAINS CAME as films that the disaster is an event not the star of the film. What was the first we could call a Disaster Film? |
|
