Flammes dans le ciel

Original title: The Man in the Sky

IMDb RATING

YOUR RATING

Donald Pleasence, Jack Hawkins, Megs Jenkins, Howard Marion-Crawford, and Elizabeth Sellars in Flammes dans le ciel (1957)

The efforts of test pilot John Mitchell to make a better life for his wife Mary and their two children seem doomed to failure and he blames himself.The efforts of test pilot John Mitchell to make a better life for his wife Mary and their two children seem doomed to failure and he blames himself.The efforts of test pilot John Mitchell to make a better life for his wife Mary and their two children seem doomed to failure and he blames himself.

See production info at IMDbPro

IMDb RATING

6.7/10

542

YOUR RATING

See production info at IMDbPro

Nominated for 1 BAFTA Award
- 1 nomination total

Photos35

+ 28

User reviews20

6.7542

Featured reviews

6Learner5

The story-line is simplicity itself

Nothing could be more straightforward than this story-line : a pilot - alone in the aircraft - is unable to land it. Yet the director and cast not only build up the suspense, but they also present to the audience, through the opinions of those on the ground, conflicting interpretations of what is going on in the pilot's mind. The result is that the simple story-line is seen to contain moral dilemmas which have no simple solution.

8planktonrules

A very simple story that is told wonderfully thanks to Ealing Studios

Those 'in the know' about classic films instantly perk up when they see that a film is made by Ealing Studios. That's because this small British film company had a wonderful string of small films that were absolute gems in the 1940s and 50s. Most of these were wonderful little comedies, though pretty much all the Ealing films I have seen have been excellent or even better. Their track record was absolutely astonishing. When I saw this was an Ealing production, I made sure to tune in when it came on Turner Classic Movies.

Unlike most of the famous Ealing films (such as PASSPORT TO PIMLICO and THE LADY KILLERS), this one is not a comedy but a rather tense drama. However, when I read the TCM plot summary of the film it was very inaccurate. It read "a test pilot thinks back on his past as he fights to survive a burning plane". However, this film is NOT a series of flashbacks (thankfully) and exactly what the pilot (Jack Hawkins) is thinking isn't really investigated until the last few minutes or so of the film! So what is the film all about, then? Well, Hawkins is a test pilot and the plane does catch fire, but once the fire is extinguished it's difficult to control the plane and he circles for about a half hour to burn up fuel. And during all this time the film is told in real-time and shows how many members of the crew (who had parachuted to safety), the airplane company's owner and others react to impending doom for Hawkins--as it appears that successfully landing the craft is a fool's errand! Despite this very simple plot, the film earns a lot of respect and a high score on IMDb because of exquisite acting and especially writing. For the subject matter, the absolute most is squeezed out of the plot and the tension is amazing. It's a great film fill of wonderful character studies and is a whole heck of a lot better than many of the more recent and special effects intensive films we've gotten from Hollywood. Acting and writing--that's what it's all about, isn't it?

john-killoch

Pure entertainment

It is unforgivable that a film should be made in black and white, that is devoid of CGI and populated by first class actors who can do more that the strutting, posing and mumbling so evident in today's films. OK. I know this was made in 1957 but for 80 or so engrossing minutes I was captivated by the dialogue driven story. Jack Hawkins and the delectable Elizabeth Sellers remind us what is missing in today's popcorn extravaganzas where virtually the same story is recycled, action replaces dialogue and the 'STARS' just stand there trying to look either menacing or provocative. Actors need not apply.

Highly recommended film that reminds us what we are missing.

8thomaspaws

I remember it being made

I have just watched the film again because it brings back memories for me. I lived in Wolverhampton then only a mile or two from the airfield and I recognise where much of it was filmed. I frequently saw the plane flying around, sometimes with smoke trailing as it passed over the playing field of my school. Watching it again after all this time, I was surprised not only by how well it stood up, but also how much of it was clearly shot on location, including the air control tower. The other notable feature for me is the quality of the cast: just about everyone in it had significant acting careers, Donald Pleasance, Lionel Jeffries etc. It's also fascinating to hear such details as rent prices (£200 for a year's rent, I think was mentioned) and to see how deserted the roads were then.

francozanaboni

great movie

Great movie, english flavour, great performers. Jack Hawkins has been one of the best English actors ever. Aviation fans must ab-so-lu-te-ly see this movie, altough not available in the VHS circuit. As far as I know, this is the only feature film where it is possible to admire the ubiquitous Bristol 170 Freighter. She was a cargo plane built in the late forties by the english aviation firm Bristol. A must for all you aviation minded people. The cast is at his best, the drama and suspense still thrill a lot. Highly reccomended !

More like this

6.7

Il était un petit navire

6.2

6.7

6.7

6.7

6.3

6.8

Schlagzeilen Gegen Hitler

6.7

6.6

6.6

6.8

6.4

Storyline

Edit

Did you know

Edit

Trivia
Although the flying scenes were filmed at Wolverhampton, practice for the single-engine landing was carried out at Lydd Ferryfield in Kent (now London Ashford Airport). Filming was not without problems and on 15 May 1956 the aircraft overshot the runway, causing quite extensive damage to the nose and wing sections.

Goofs
The cockpit scenes show the port engine propeller slowly turning. The outside scenes show the propeller in a stationary position.

Quotes
[John Mitchell has successfully landed the stricken plane that he was test-flying, despite being urged by senior management to abandon the plane and save himself by bailing out]
Mary Mitchell: You didn't *have* to do it. They didn't *want* you to do it. They even begged you not to *try* to do it, and *still* you did it. Why? What in heaven's name were you thinking about? Didn't you give a single thought to what it would mean to us if you were killed? Didn't you *care* whether you were killed? Were you trying to kill yourself?
[Mary runs out of the room and John follows her]
John Mitchell: For thirty-five minutes. For thirty-five bloody minutes I sat up there thinking of *nothing* but you and the boys, and saving my own skin so that I could go *on* having you and the boys. How *dare* you say a thing like that to me! Now listen to this. I admit it was stupid to try to pretend it wasn't bad. In fact I'll tell you how bad it was. It was the worst thing I've ever known. I've never wanted anything so much in this life as I wanted to get out of that aircraft. For the last ten minutes I thought that the chances were a hundred-to-one against pulling it off. The instant I touched down, I felt only one thing: surprised at being alive. You asked me if I thought of you and the boys. I only *did* it for you and the boys. Now listen to this. Let's get this clear. There were plenty of reasons for me to stay with that aircraft - good reasons. It was my duty to try that landing so long as there was a chance in a hundred. I don't give a *damn* what any other man would have done. It was a question of loyalty, of loyalty to Reg, the company and a hundred and twenty other people who've built the aircraft. And I didn't stay with it for those reasons. Not for *any* of those reasons. I stayed with it because the alternative was to come home and tell you I'd got into trouble in the air today so I'd abandoned the aircraft, and the company's out of business. Is *that* what you would have had me do? Well that would have been the end. I should have spent the rest of my life never quite looking you or the boys in the face again - or myself, that that matter. A man who quit when there was still a chance - that's what I would have been. And that's what you and the boys would have had. If I had been killed, it would have been better for the three of you than if I'd bailed-out and quit. Can't you understand that? The man who said "better a live coward than a dead hero" *was* a live coward. Can't you understand that?