Fire

"Fire!" came out at the peak of the disaster craze, when studio heads were actually green lighting movies like "Food of the Gods" and "Empire of the Ants". You would think they could get a little more creative with the title. This one centered on a forest fire and a group of children stranded in the middle of it all. Donna Mills is ultra 70's and very polyester. Pretty predictable stuff. This was a TV movie that came out the same time as the equally predictable TV movie "Flood!".

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!

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.

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!

"Fire!" is an okay disaster flick that was above average in quality for '70s TV flicks. The movie is dead serious but the preview is not.

See how Warner Home Video sold this title by clicking on the trailers icon. It's funny!