The biggest box-office
success of 1974 and in many ways the climax of the ’70s disaster-movie genre, The Towering Inferno is terrible from an
artistic perspective, featuring clichéd characters and ridiculous situations
spread across a bloated 165-minute running time. Still, it’s fascinating as a
case study of how Hollywood operates. First and most obviously, the movie
represents producer Irwin Allen’s most successful attempt to mimic the success
of his underwater thriller The Poseidon
Adventure (1972), because Allen outdoes the previous film with bigger
spectacle, bigger stars, and bigger stunts.
The movie also reflects movie-star
gamesmanship. Steve McQueen and Paul Newman agreed to costar, then fought for
primacy within the story, each demanding exactly the same number of lines in
the script. Even sillier, their agents arranged for the actors’ names to appear
in the credits in the same size type but at different heights, so each would
have “top” billing even when their names were side-by-side. Furthermore, the
movie demonstrates the ease with which greed trumps pride in Hollywood. A pair of books with useful narrative elements involving burning buildings were owned by different studios, so Allen persuaded Twentieth Century-Fox and Warner Bros.
to co-produce the movie, an industry first; each studio sacrificed the
integrity of its respective brand for half of a sure thing.
Somewhere amid the
power plays, an actual movie got made, and The
Towering Inferno is the epitome of what later became known as
“high-concept” cinema. It’s about a big building on fire, and that’s the whole
story. Sure, there are mini-melodramas, like the romantic tribulations of the
folks trapped inside the building and the macho heroics of an architect
(Newman) and a fireman (McQueen), but the thing is really about the excitement
of seeing which characters will get burned to death, which will fall from
terrible heights, and which will survive.
The plot begins when an engineer cuts
corners in order to rush the opening of the Glass Tower, a skyscraper in San Francisco. Once the inevitable blaze erupts, further
shortcomings in the building process complicate efforts to rescue trapped
occupants. (Elevators, helicopters, rope bridges, and other contrivances are
utilized.) As per the Allen playbook, an all-star cast trudges through the carnage,
trying to instill cardboard characterizations with life. Richard Chamberlain
plays the short-sighted engineer, Faye Dunaway plays Newman’s love interest,
William Holden plays the oblivious builder, and Robert Wagner plays a
smooth-talking PR man. Others along for the ride include Fred Astaire, Susan
Blakely, Dabney Coleman, Jennifer Jones, O.J. Simpson, and Robert Vaughn.
The Towering Inferno is a handsome
production, with director John Guillermin and cinematographer Fred J. Koenekamp
using their widescreen frames to give everything a sense of opulence and scale.
Additionally, Allen (who directed the action scenes) knew how to drop debris
onto stuntmen. Nonetheless, The Towering
Inferno is humorless, long-winded, and repetitive. Amazingly, the movie
received a number of Oscar nominations (including one for Best Picture), and
won three of its categories: cinematography, editing, and original song. In
Hollywood, nothing earns praise as quickly as financial success.
The Towering Inferno: FUNKY
Aaaw come on…. great blog 'n' all, but are you sure you're not being just a little bit stingy on this one? I mean, come on…. great drama, awesome cast, captivating stories, great script, amazing action sequences, a movie everyone remembers seeing and will watch again, not to mention the impact it had, surely it has to be at least a GROOVY, if not a RIGHT ON, or even, comfortably, I would suggest, an OUTTA SIGHT! But… a FUNKY?
ReplyDeleteMy test for this one was watching it in quick succession with 'Poseidon Adventure,' which, by comparison, moves so much faster and features more invested performances... To me, 'Towering' is just way too bloated and the acting has too much cash-the-paycheck indifference... Nonetheless, I'm sure the ghost of Irwin Allen appreciates you sticking up for him! Thanks as always for your thoughts...
ReplyDeleteSure sold a lot of tickets but missed the mark for sure.
ReplyDeleteI loved it. Schlockety-schlockety-shlock-shlock... it was a showcase of seventies filmmaking and as much as I like the film, it shows how much better some things can be with the word 'Spielberg' attached. BTW-Hope you don't send out Sandmen after me for this; hope it entertains... http://volcanocat.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/disaster-doomed-in-seventies.html
ReplyDeleteThe less said about the TV movie ripoff "Terror On The 40th Floor" the better.
ReplyDeleteThe models of the building...were atrocioius.
ReplyDeleteA dreadful and boring film and one of the worst films ever nominated for a Best Picture Oscar! The script is awful, the pacing is deadly and there is no fun or funk here.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteActually both novels were about fires in skyscrapers, one average sized in San Francisco and the other, the world's tallest, in New York. Allen was the one who wanted, but lost, the bid on the Frisco story but bought the other and convinced the studios to combine productions rather than make competing films where both would likely lose at the box office.
ReplyDeleteIt does have a great score by John Williams giving a bit of a preview to the kind of grand scores he would compose for Star Wars, Superman and others just a few years later.
It also inspired the hit song Disco Inferno.
The film has zero style, the stairwells and building's top floor where most of the action for over 2hours and 40 minutes takes place are dreary and the extras are boring and cloddish. Cutting an hour from this film would be a mercy to the audience.
ReplyDelete