Il colosso di fuoco

Earl Bellamy directed this Irwin Allen produced TV movie that stars Ernest Borgnine("The Poseidon Adventure") as wealthy lumber mill owner Sam Brisbane, who tries to win back an old flame(played by Vera Miles) who owns a lodge in their mountain community. Their plans are ruined when a fire involving two prisoners(played by Neville Brand and Erik Estrada) gets out of control, threatening to destroy the area, and cost several lives... Donna Mills, Lloyd Nolan, Alex Cord, and Patty Duke costar. Made concurrently with "Flood"(1976), disaster film is an improvement, with more excitement and interesting story turns, and the expected(if quite familiar) scenes of triumph and tragedy.

This is one of the most boring disaster movies I have ever seen. The actors are playing really bad and walk around like zombies. Donna Mills was the only reason I watched this movie and I must say, she is the only one who seems to be talented in "Fire". Her part is very small and the storyline around her part is sometimes very illogical. She portrays a kindergarten teacher who is out in the woods with a bunch of kids. When the fire gets close to them they try to escape and one child is missing. When she manages it to be saved with the kids she seems to be the only one who was really concerned about the missing child. Nobody else was interested. I must admit they tried to make a good movie by telling several stories about the different characters and how they finally get together in this disaster. But they totally failed by showing everything so boring and characters you won't be interested in. A total waste of time and money, it so forgetable.

This is a great example of a 70's disaster movie! Starts off with all the story lines...Vera Miles and Ernest like each other, but never got married...Donna Mills is a school teacher out in the woods with her class...Erik Estrada is a disgruntled prisoner (falsely accused!)...Alex Cord and his wife are both doctors, but just can't see eye-to-eye about their marriage. Then the fire starts in the woods!! And all the actors come together in various threads (at the lodge, on the road, etc.) to battle the blaze and display their heroism. It's pretty entertaining, and also considering this is PRE CGI affects!! The best part for any Airwolf fans out there (the 80's helicopter action series) is to see Ernest B. (Airwolf's Dom Santini) and Alex Cord (Archangel in Airwolf) together in this!

Fire (1977)

** (out of 4)

Sam (Ernest Borgnine) really loves Martha (Vera Miles) but she says it's too late as they should have acted on this years earlier. A married couple (Patty Duke, Alex Cord) find themselves falling out of love. A teacher (Donna Mills) must make a devastating decision. Oh yeah, there's a convict who starts a fire to try and make an escape and soon this fire is threatening the entire town. The all-star cast then must jump into action.

Producer Irwin Allen struck gold with THE TOWERING INFERNO so why not take that fire a put it in a different location? FIRE was a made-for-television film that comes as a major disappointment and especially if you're a fan of the genre. As you'd expect, there's a great number of familiar stars on hand here and all of them turn in decent enough performances. Obviously most of the cast were just picking up checks for movies like this but it's still fun seeing all of them here. Not only do we get the stars I mentioned but there's also Erik Estrada, Gene Evans, Neville Brand and Lloyd Nolan.

The biggest problem with FIRE is that there's not a single second that you feel any tension. What I really disliked about this movie is that the "good guys" are constantly put in harm's way but there's no a single moment where you feel as if they are in danger. We get some really ridiculous scenes where it seems like the characters are going to die only to have some cliffhanger-style non-sense happen to where everyone is safe. Whenever you're watching a film like this and you can't feel any tension the entire thing is just pointless.

What's worse is that the 100-minute running time seems to drag on and on. There's really not a very good story here as it's all rather routine and especially the various personal dramas that are thrown in. Even the special effects aren't all that great. Sure, one shouldn't expect the same quality as THE TOWERING INFERNO but what's here just isn't all that memorable.

After "Flood!" comes "Fire!", or vice versa! In 1976 and 19744, producer Irwin Allen and director Earl Bellamy shot two disaster movies back-to-back in the beautifully green state of Oregon. Ever since their releases these two titles seem to be inseparable. Most people watch them as a double-feature and, in my country, they were even release together on one single VHS-tape. There must be some sort of supernatural force involved because, after seeing "Flood!" last week, I also immediately felt the urge to see "Fire!" as soon as possible! Moreover, it's another great opportunity to subject another title to my specifically developed rating scale for typically 70s disaster movies!

Condition #1: without producer Irwin Allen, there wasn't a budget for special effects and thus no movie. "Fire!" is a TV-production, so obviously it's less spectacular than its distant fiery cousin "The Towering Inferno", but the flames, set-pieces and cinematography look very realistic (and superior to "Flood!") quite good, so I'll give it a full point. Condition #2: all disaster movies star one major star (Charlton Heston and Paul Newman were prime choices) and a long list of "secondary" stars (like Ernest Borgnine, Leslie Nielsen...). I am going to be very generous here and award the full point again. For reasons linked to the TV-movie status, there isn't a major star, but Ernest Borgnine rises to the top as a genuine hero, and the list of secondary stars is nevertheless long and impressive: Vera Miles, Patty Duke, Donna Mills, Alex Cord, Erik Estrada, Neville Brand, ... Condition #3: The characters are usually split into two camps with completely opposite ideals and/or initiatives. This condition, on the other hand, isn't applicable here. The little town of Silverton is exposed to a humongous forest fire, ignited by a convict as part of a more elaborate escape plan, and there isn't a chance for anyone to deny the fire's existence or to minimalize the impact. "Fire!" is one of the rare 70s disaster movies where all the characters work together to battle the inferno. Condition #4: Regardless what type of disaster we're dealing with, variants of the exact same perilous situations are always applicable. Pass, for sure! We have little girls gone missing during the local school's field trip, wind and weather conditions that continue complicating the working conditions and doctors that can't provide medical care because their car nearly crashes into a bear! Condition #5: always remember that, when the situation appears to be at its worst, it can and will still get even worse! For this condition, "Fire!" scores a lot better than its companion "Flood!". The rescue helicopter crashes down, the mountaintop lodge that initially serves as safe harbor nevertheless still threatens to go down in flames, dumb kids lock themselves into their rooms and certain people become forced to heroically sacrifice themselves in order to safe the others. There's one hopeful little moment, however, when a cute and furry little bunny miraculously gets rescued by fire chief Gene Evans.

If we sum it up, "Fire!" scores 4 out of 5 on rating scale for 70s disaster movies! Make no mistake, though, as this is only an indicator to state that the film qualifies as fantastic entertainment with all the joyous clichés and stereotypes represented! Skeptical film fanatics are likely to disdain the film for all the exact same reasons!