Jet Storm

Way before Airport! This might not be the very first all star airline dramas (I believe The High and the Mighty was) but it was way ahead of its time. Good thriller with fair subplots and good acting. Hermione Baddely nearly steals the show as a surly, panicky passenger.

"Kidboots" critique above informs us adequately of the basic plot.However I would like to concentrate more on the actors and their performances.This is rather a cloistrophobic production since 95% of the action is filmed at Shepperton studios in a mock-up of the interior of a passenger jet airliner in 1959.It was rather sad to note the passing of so many famous actors among them, Stanley Baker, Hermione Baddeley and Harry Seacombe teamed with Dame Sybil Thorndyke.Regarding the latter, I had only seen her playing the mother of the Rev. Marston in "Gone To Earth" (1949); but here she shows her acting versatility by adopting a rather humorous role, while Harry Seacombe couldn't resist the odd "Goon" like facial gesture.

It was surprising to see the obviously suited Canadian married couple of Barbara Kelly (who I had only ever seen in the 1950s TV panel game "What's My Line") and her husband Bernard Braden (tv's "The Braden Beat"), acting together as a divorcing couple.Stanley Baker keeps impeccably calm as the airliner captain and there is a rather touching romance between Virginia Maskell and the American co-pilot.The "Brummy" actor who plays the hit-and run driver played a very similar role in "The Night My Number Came Up" with Sir Michael Redgrave.I had never seen Marty Wilde in a film acting role, of course playing a pop star, and noted he composed the opening popular theme music.

With all the actors competing for dialogue, no one should be singled out as that would be unfair since they all give professional performances.The "Brummy" hit-and run driver met an end like Gert Frobe's "Auric Goldfinger".

It's not easy to catch up with this marvelous little film, but DO NOT pass up any chance you get. It's a real little gem, which manages to live up to some very high aspirations.

A quick plot synopsis makes it sound very much like Airport, or The High and the Mighty, but Jet Storm is a very different type of film. It's not an adventure, or a soaper, or a suspenser. Although it does include a diverse group of passengers and a hidden bomb, it's not actually about whether the plane will be saved, or how. It's about how these people react to danger. And about how all of us SHOULD react to danger.

The cast of familiar British actors does a superb job. Richard Attenborough shines in his portrayal of a weak, confused man, who's slipped over the brink of bitterness, depression and madness. Harry Secombe adds a contrastingly jovial note. And a young Paul Eddington (best known from the much later Yes, Minister series) is interesting as a not-very-admirable husband.

We learn a lot about these various characters, but the real meat of the film is in how each of them reacts when faced with imminent danger and probable death. The film asks us not to worry so much about whether these people will die, but to consider how they choose to live. Do they meet fear and uncertainty with fortitude? Resourcefulness? Humor? Resignation? Or even indifference?

The film shows us that some of these responses are clearly better than others. It demonstrates that the fear of disaster is far worse than the disaster itself. This message makes Jet Storm more relevant today than when it was made. We can see how much wiser things were in the 1950s. A psychopath would have been able to walk up and easily place a bomb on an airliner... but we didn't allow that remote possibility to dominate our lives.

Jet Storm reminds us that risk is a part of life, but when we focus on that risk to the exclusion of everything else, we stop living. So while terrorism (of any sort) is sad, and crazy and reprehensible, giving in to terror is far more shameful.

This has to be a key progenitor to the modern disaster movie well before the famous Airport series for instance. There are scenes in this repeated with great hilarity in Airplane! too. But here the style is of a serious drama and thriller, as opposed to a comedy, except for the inevitable inadvertent howlers for the contemporary viewer. There's a preponderance of excellent actors at all levels with quite a lot to offer in the now standard character-development phase of the plot -- there are ongoing themes on typical preoccupations of the era like social class prejudice, the destruction of world wars and fears of nuclear apocalypse, and lots on the burgeoning sexual revolution to name a few. With stuff like this the real action and indeed the plausibility of the plot becomes strangely irrelevant. But if one cares to pick the latter apart it's not hard to see wobbly elements like the odd two-level areoplane in the studio when the external shots are of a re-fitted Tuplov Soviet nuclear bomber with just a single deck fuselage. The addition of the "lounge deck" is important in the story, and anyway adds to the feel of specialness and luxury that flight in the 1960s was synonymous with. So, for the excellent drama, and the bits of cultural history alone I give this 9/10 with just a point loss on the plausibility front. Attenborough is excellent as the creepy antagonist.

This is basically a disaster movie prototype, from before there were such things. It wasn't the first film made about a flight in peril, but it was one of the first to feature a jet aircraft. This film is chock-a-block with fine acting talent and the claustrophic confines of the aircraft make for a good 'plot pressure cooker' that eventually brings things to a head.

Actually the confines of the aircraft are not anywhere near as small as they ought to be; the aircraft cabin set is eerily quiet, and incredibly spacious, having eight foot plus ceilings, wide seats and a huge gangway. There is a downstairs lounge too, with a second row of windows (unseen in any external shots), a bar and a luggage hold that you can wander around in. Jet aircraft were certainly not like that at the time and in fact never really have been. The camera work has just a hint of sway to it; enough to suggest the aircraft is actually flying, but without making you feel seasick watching it. The aircraft used in the film vary; in long shots prior to and during take-off a medium-haul Aeroflot Tu104A (CCCP-42390) is used, however they are seen boarding G-AOYM (actually a BEA Vickers Viscount, with no jet engine exhaust in the trailing edge of the wing root of course) and announce themselves using a different call sign (G-AJOR) to the control tower. A Tu104-esque model is used too, which is also marked G-AJOR. Near the end of the film a completely different aircraft, a turboprop of some kind, is seen in twilight.

The film was released in 1959; the only passenger jet aircraft flying for most of the previous three years had been the Tu104. Both the Boeing 707 and the DH Comet IV had been flying transatlantic since October 1958, but portraying either type in a disaster movie would have been a political hot potato; effectively the US and UK aircraft industries were busy duking it out for the long haul jet aircraft market. Choosing the Tu104 to represent a fictional type flying the equally fictional 'Atlantic Queen' service was a neat way out of any controversy that might so be caused.

It is a pretty good film, this, all told; an interesting period piece, a proto-disaster movie, a hothouse of acting talent.