The disaster movie genre of the 1970s is generally remembered for two things: solid blockbusters with all-star casts (The Poseidon Adventure, The Towering Inferno) and overstuffed, C-grade dreck starring over-the-hill relics from Hollywood’s golden age. Guess which category today’s movie fits into?
Not to be confused with the 1987 Hong Kong action flick of the same name, City On Fire at the very least delivers on its title, although most of that delivery arrives in the form of ill-matching stock footage and special effects ranging from rather impressive (miniature skyscrapers ablaze) to risible (Jittery optical mattes only a first year film student could love). The bulk of the fire illusion is rendered via a controlled burn on either a backlot, or a few blocks that the city of Montreal was willing to let the filmmakers destroy.
There’s not much rhyme or season to why these fires are set. On early fire is an accident from young boys smoking in a treehouse and the other the result of a considerably more sinister attempt by a disturbed and disgruntled chemical plant worker (Jonathan Welsh) to get revenge on his employer for refusing him a promotion. With the chemical plant having been built right next to the movie’s unnamed midwestern metropolis, it doesn’t take long before vast swaths of the city are consumed by a raging inferno, which happens to be converging on a newly-built hospital.
As veteran fire chief Risley (Henry Fonda) attempts to manage the deteriorating situation, uncomfortable bedfellows Mayor Dudley (Leslie Nielsen) and Dr. Whitman (Barry Newman) have their hands full attempting to evacuate the hospital’s patients under increasingly precarious conditions. Not that anyone cares, but alcoholic TV host Maggie Grayson (Ava Gardner) and her man-toy producer (James Franciscus) are covering the story from the safe confines of their TV studio. Any further subplots are not worth mentioning.
About halfway through, it occurred to me that City On Fire may have fared better as a TV movie-of-the-week, preferably one with a 90 minute time slot so as not to prolong the suffering. By the end, I had modified this sentiment to simply leaving the film buried in a vault (even I’m not heartless enough to let the worst films burn).
This may sound harsh, but I honestly have very little patience for movies that waste my time. Fire offers virtually nothing for the audience to emotionally invest in and even the advertised thrills are fleeting and underwhelming at best. The entire cast feels like they’re sleepwalking through the flimsiest scaffold of a script that could collapse under the weight of its own mediocrity at any moment. Any credit I give this film stems from the picture staying in focus and the project keeping its largely Canadian cast and crew gainfully employed.
No story can work unless the audience is emotionally invested in what’s happening and the characters it’s happening to. An emotional connection, a relatable plot point or character trait, anything. Instead of feeling relief for the survivors at the end, you’ll find yourself disappointed that the whole city didn’t burn down and perhaps even feel like calling your grandparents with condolences about their tax dollars being wasted.
2/10
If this review wasn’t punishment enough, City on Fire can be streamed on Tubi.