McQueen is such a boss in this movie. - The Towering Inferno (1974) Discussion

[–] dazfiddy 11 years ago

I agree with you.

His character,Chief O'Halloran is totally professional throughout the movie.Love the scene where he asks O J Simpson's character for a list of guests, and he gets attitude. O'Halloran calmly explains why he needs the list as various items, such a tennis balls, give off various gases when burning.

Throughout the movie, he's all about the job, even if that means setting explosives on the roof to blow the water tanks.The only time he smiles is when he says goodbye to Roberts, the architect.Love the fact that he gets the final line in the movie.

"How do I get back down?"

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] timothy-5 11 years ago

If someone's going to play a fire chief, he has to have a tough, take-charge attitude. It would be miscasting to cast someone who comes off as a timid fairy.

reply

[–] Eric-62-2 11 years ago

McQueen almost has a Jack Webb style professionalism about him in the role. He's all "just the facts" and it's so refreshing that his character isn't bogged down by any personal connections to the trapped guests like a wife or girlfriend. He's just there because it's his job.

reply

[–] hobnob53 11 years ago

Originally Newman was cast as the fire chief and McQueen as the architect. But McQueen told Irwin Allen that he was kind of a blue-collar guy and felt more at home as the chief. Allen saw his point and switched the two. During filming a real fire broke out on the Fox lot and McQueen helped put it out, which pleased him no end. O'Halloran is my favorite character in the film, for reasons others here have stated. I love the way he handles the job and how McQueen portrays him.

But how does he keep his adrenalin pumping so high all night long?! Even firemen get tired and have to take a break (as we see in the movie). O'Halloran just keeps going and going.

reply

[–] Synergetic11 9 years ago

Even truck drivers get tired and have to take a break but there are these things called little white pills, they take a few and their eyes stay OPEN WIDE.

In real life, McQueen used a lot of drugs but seemed to never have any major problems other than putting a loaded gun to his wife's head and beating the crap out of her, becoming psychotically jealous and paranoid, etc. He never went anywhere without his cooler full of beer, smoked weed every day openly in front of everyone, did lots of peyote, a ton of LSD, plenty of cocaine, etc. When he caught his kids smoking weed, he told them to COME TO HIM for their drugs and HE WOULD GET IT FOR THEM, make sure it was good quality stuff and then DO IT WITH THEM because anything they could possibly do, he had already done numerous times.

McQueen's nickname "The King of Cool" only applies to his roles on the screen. Off screen, he was anything but "cool" and secure. He was just another macho and violent guy, albeit with a very intelligent and sensitive side. He was an insecure, extremely jealous male chauvinist who insisted on doing himself what he would never allow his wives do, had a very bad temper, was physically violent and abusive to women, etc. His wife Neile, without whom he would have never become a star, and whose advice he would always seek, especially in the early days when his ego was still under control, is actually the real "cool" person in the Steve McQueen saga, the "Queen of Cool."

reply

[–] Corky666 9 years ago

I hope you DIE

reply

[–] Synergetic11 9 years ago

LOL

The truth hurts like a mofo and hypocrisy has the worst stench of all, doesn't it?

Sorry to have ruined your hero's carefully manufactured Hollywood image.

Read the book written by his first wife, IF YOU DARE. Did his kids deny what was written there? Nope. She even dedicated the book to her kids. She didn't write a book just to bash her first husband but to set the record straight. She only bashes Steve when he deserves it and has plenty of good things to say about him as well, especially in the early days. I don't hate the guy. I have plenty of admiration for bringing to life heroic qualities on the screen that he couldn't pull off in real life. He was an idol of mine growing up. But I was fooled by the image just like everyone else.

And by the way, although he owned many classic old Harleys, McQueen didn't like the Harley Davidson riders of the 1960s and 1970s either because they only rode for "image" and not true love of motorcycling and quality bike engineering. He considered all the so-called "Outlaw Bikers Gangs" of the 1960s responsible for ruining the sport of motorcycling by giving it the worst and lowest class image possible in the public's eye.

Try a little Crowley black magic if you really want to kill the messenger of bad news.

reply

[–] Corky666 9 years ago

I read most bios on him but I didn't read his ex wife's yet. But from what I remember didn't sound as bad as you put it earlier, but I guess I have some reading to do.

reply

[–] ericsugarland 9 years ago

Absolutely agree with the posters here. He is a total professional, a team player and a leader. He confidently issues orders, doesn't get emotional and he treats people with respect. If this movie were made today, the hero would be barking out orders, would be a smart aleck, a prima donna, etc.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] manage-932-700755 9 years ago

If McQueen was kind of a blue collar guy, Newman was kind of a white collar guy. That was evident in this film, but even more so in other films. In one of his underrated films- as the attorney in "The Young Philadelphians," Newman was reported to have said that he was more like Anthony Lawrence in real life than any other film character he played. I think he could also have said that of Doug Roberts in TTI.

I read somewhere that Ernest Borgnine was considered for the architect role in TTI. Now Ernie did a good job in Poseidon, but as the architect in TTI, he would have been terrible. Too old, too fat and too ugly.

As it turnd out the casting in TTI was one of the best ever.

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

If McQueen was kind of a blue collar guy, Newman was kind of a white collar guy.

Quite right, which is why they switched roles -- both men realized their strengths and images as actors.

I heard that about Ernie B. too. I wonder if he really came anywhere near to getting it. This always sounded more like the usual pre-production speculation and name-tossing rather than serious consideration for a role.

Right again -- the casting of TTI is one of the best ever. Even at the time, this was recognized as the epitome of the 70s disaster cycle. No one could ever top it -- in cast, drama, spectacle or overall quality -- so it's not surprising the genre began going downhill soon after...helped by Irwin Allen himself, whose subsequent disaster films were abysmal. Back in '74 I told friends that this one was Irwin's Gone With the Wind -- the best thing he'd ever do, and something he would never top. Amazingly, I was right!

How ya doin', manage?

reply

[–] manage-932-700755 9 years ago

With regard to top casting I came across the following statements somewhere on IMDb.
______________________________________________________________________________

In the original script the role of the fire chief (known at the time as Mario Infantino) was considerably smaller. According to director John Guillermin, the role was offered to Ernest Borgnine with Steve McQueen playing the architect. McQueen later said, "If somebody of my caliber can play the architect, I'll play the fire chief," and Paul Newman was brought onto the project as the
architect.

(Mario Infantino was the name of the fire chief (first deputy chief) in the book- "The Glass Inferno," one of the two books on which the film was based.)

So the above is another slant on how McQueen became the fire chief.

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Yeah, I've heard that too. Very possible -- it sounds like McQueen, who was desperate to co-star in a movie with Newman.

McQueen had made his film debut in 1956 in an uncredited bit in Somebody Up There Likes Me, which was Newman's second film and his break-out role. When the two became the hottest stars of the 60s McQueen thought playing opposite Newman would be a way of showing he'd arrived, especially since Newman was always considered the better actor.

The duo almost co-starred in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid but McQueen refused to take second billing and no one could figure a way around this impasse. So the role went to Robert Redford instead and the rest is history. McQueen didn't want to lose another chance so when he switched from the architect to the more suitable role of the fire chief in TTI and Newman came aboard, it gave McQueen the major co-star he wanted...but they still had that billing problem. This was finally overcome with the famous left/lower - right/higher billing, in the film and in all advertising, so that both actors could claim to be the top star. But I think most people see McQueen as the top dog.

The whole project became so embroiled in egos that each man demanded equal dialogue -- neither one could have even a single line more than the other. (As far as I know they did not do a word-count!) The producer, director and screenwriter took great pains to count each line to make sure neither Newman or McQueen spoke more than the other. But the dynamics of the plot worked against Newman. He had most of his lines in the first portion of the film, before McQueen arrives and takes over the story. From that point on his character is the dominant one -- and he has all his dialogue in that last two-thirds, while Newman has already used up over half his allotted lines as well as no longer being the focus of attention!

reply

[–] manage-932-700755 9 years ago

"But I think most people see McQueen as the top dog."

I don't see McQueen as the top dog or lead actor. But I did like him better in the film. How much of that is do to the nature of the roles and timing of their appearances I don't know.

With all the hassle going on with the billing and roles between McQueen and Newman, the film certainly didn't need any more from Holden. I understand that McQueen and Newman recived exactly the same money- $1 million plus 7% (or 10%) of the gross. I don't know what Holden got.

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Well, when the film is listed in TV or cable listings, or in movie guides (including Maltin), McQueen is always listed first, for what it's worth. He's clearly the more dominant character in the film.

From a source I now can't recall, I remember reading a number of years ago that Holden received $750,000 for his work. Whether that's accurate or not I of course don't know, but it sounds plausible given the others' salaries and the billing circumstances. I never heard whether he got a percentage of the gross or not; I suspect not, but if he did it would obviously have been a great deal less than the two stars' takes (I think they each got 7%).

reply

[–] manage-932-700755 9 years ago

I liked McQueen better than Newman in the movie, but for me, they seemed to have equal roles. Perhaps I am influenced by the book, "The Glass Inferno," in which the architect's role was slightly stronger.

I am sure you are right that movie guides usually list McQueen first. I think this might be due sometimes by their aphabetical order. I found the following listing in IMDB under recommended movies on The Poseidon Adventure page.

The Towering Inferno(1974)

Action | Drama | Thriller

10.00/10

At the opening party of a colossal, but poorly constructed, office building, a massive fire breaks out that threatens to destroy the tower and everyone in it.

Director: John Guillermin

Stars: Paul Newman, Steve McQueen
______________________________________________________________

You and others have made the point that half of Newman's lines were in the beginning of the film before we even know about the fire chief. And, in my view, the bedroom scene with Dunaway was unnecessary as it didn't follow the major themes of the film and didn't add much. But I prefer McQueen in general, although I like more of Newman's films.

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

I know what you mean -- I find McQueen a more compelling screen presence, usually, than Newman. He had this charisma that always drew you to him. But overall I prefer Newman's movies, and certainly his acting. But in truth each had a number of films I really don't care much for -- Newman probably more, only because he lived a lot longer and did a lot more films. I also think he was a much nicer guy than McQueen, who was pretty self-centered. Can you imagine McQueen selling foods and other things to raise millions for charity? Though it's also curious that much later in life, Newman developed an affinity for one of McQueen's favorite pastimes, auto racing.

I didn't read in their entirety the books on which TTI was based. I still have both paperbacks laying around somewhere, but never read either all the way through, just poked about portions of them. At the time they never interested me all that much, even after the movie came out. I'm not much of a novel reader anyway -- generally I prefer non-fiction. So the characters in the books, vs. their incarnations or re-imaginings in the movie, never bothered me much. Maybe one day I'll sit down and read both The Tower and The Glass Inferno.

Of course, the film's title is a combination of the two books' titles, but fewer people realize that in the film the building itself has the "opposite" name combination: The Glass Tower. Which is a pretty stupid name for a building.

Maybe something sensible instead. Like, Trump Tower? That one they would've just let burn.

reply

[–] manage-932-700755 9 years ago

Even accounting for McQueen's much shorter life, Newman made more films in general. I read that McQueen made 27 films in total. At the age of 50 (the age when McQueen died), Newman made approximately 35 films. I haven't checked, but I would guess that Newman made more TV appearances and certainly more stage appearances by that age.

My favorite Newman movie is "The Sting." Although several others are close for me, especially "The Hustler," and "The Young Philadelphians." My favorite McQueen move was “TTI.”

But I also liked McQueen in run of the mill movies like "The Hunter." And I liked him a lot in "Papillon," although the film itself was quite depressing. But while McQueen sometimes had big name co-stars, Newman seemed to have them more often and in better films. In "The Hustler, George C. Scott and Jackie Gleason were very memorable. in the Sting, you have Redford and then the exceptional performance by Robert Shaw. Newman overall had more range, while McQueen had more personal appeal. What are your favorites of the two stars?

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

My favorite McQueens: The Magnificent Seven, The Great Escape, Bullitt, The Getaway, The Towering Inferno; honorable mention, with some reservations: The Blob, Never So Few, The Cincinnati Kid, The Sand Pebbles, Papillon.

My favorite Newmans: Somebody Up There Likes Me, The Rack, Until They Sail, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, The Young Philadelphians, From the Terrace, Exodus, The Hustler, Hud, Hombre, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Sting, The Towering Inferno, Slap Shot, The Verdict, Nobody's Fool; honorable mention, with some reservations: The Long Hot Summer, The Prize, The Drowning Pool, Absence of Malice, Mr. & Mrs. Bridge.

I should put a word in for Paul's disastrous film debut, The Silver Chalice, an incredibly bizarre Biblical epic that is awful beyond description despite a great cast, with some of the weirdest sets in Hollywood history. When the movie hit TV in the 60s Newman himself took an ad out in the trades apologizing for having ever made what he called "The worst film of the 50s." Not quite, but pretty stupid.

Most McQueen movies simply don't interest me very much, though like you I also found his last, The Hunter, not so bad; its terrible reviews always mystified me a little. Certainly not great, nor even among my favorites, but okay.

Newman overall had more range, while McQueen had more personal appeal.

Yeah, I'd agree with that.

reply

[–] Eric-62-2 9 years ago

Can you imagine McQueen selling foods and other things to raise millions for charity?

Actually I can, Hob, because remember McQueen became a born-again Christian in the last year of his life (before his cancer diagnosis I might add so it wasn't a foxhole conversion) and was living a much different lifestyle and where the people who knew him and worked for him had high praise for how he was toward them. There are also stories of him in this last year being quite generous toward others. Everyone agrees his conversion experience was quite sincere.

reply

[–] Eric-62-2 9 years ago

So the characters in the books, vs. their incarnations or re-imaginings in the movie, never bothered me much. Maybe one day I'll sit down and read both The Tower and The Glass Inferno.

I read both novels decades ago Hob, because in the pre-VCR days I always obsessed with reading novel versions of movies I liked since it was the only substitute at the time for seeing the movie again which in those days you couldn't do! This is a quick breakdown of some key points from both novels.

The Tower

-The world's tallest building conceit.

-Crooked son-in-law of the builder, Paul Simmons (not Roger) cuts corners which cause fires to break out, though the real culprit that makes it worse is a sabotage act committed by a disgruntled ex-employee fired from the project named Connors (a brief nod to that character when Fire Chief Dabney Coleman tells McQueen that there's only one other man in the department qualified to set charges, Connors, who just carried out with burns).

-The Mayor Robert Ramsey character.

-The breeches buoy rescue conceit. (Attached to the nearby North World Trade Center tower. The action of "The Tower" takes place in New York).

-The Will Giddings character but in the Tower he's the lead engineer of the project and does not die.

The Glass Inferno

-The San Francisco setting.

-The characters of Harlee, Lisolette, Jernigan and Bigalow (as well as Bigalow dying during a tryst with a mistress who like Lori in the movie, falls to her death out the window after Bigalow fails to make it). Lisolette doesn't die in the novel.

-The lead builder is more reminiscent of Duncan than the one in The Tower who is more the victim of son-in-law Simmons' cost-cutting.

The architect character is a literal combination of the Tower's "Nat Wilson" and Glass Inferno's "Craig Barton" (in fact the first draft of the script named the character "Craig Wilson"). The first draft also retained the fire chief's name from "The Tower" in part which was Mario Infantino (when they were first thinking of it as an Ernest Borgnine part). Faye Dunaway's character is more reminiscent of Nat's adulterous wife "Zib" (which was her name in the first draft) in "The Tower."

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Thanks for the recap, Eric. I remember many of those details from what I did read forty years ago...aided by some reminders along the way!

I always wondered why the building in The Glass Inferno was, like the one in the movie, the world's tallest, while the one in The Tower was if I recall a mere 66 stories high -- quite a slide down from WTC 1 on the breeches buoy. One character I'm sort of glad they didn't carry over into the movie was "Grover Frazee" (I believe I have the name right) from The Tower -- NYC's official greeter or whatever. A bad combination of the famous real-life Grover Whalen, the city's official greeter under LaGuardia, and, I suppose, a whizzy, goofy surname taken from singer-actress Jane Frazee. Just as well he was bumped off in the elevator.

reply

[–] Eric-62-2 9 years ago

Hob, there's a lot of stories people have shared about McQueen in his final year, and I'll just say that they do count for something regarding the sincerity of what was a newfound commitment to changing his life from what he knew had been destructive. That to me is a testament to the power of how God can change our hearts and it is something to admire even as I do acknowledge his serious flaws beforehand.

Anyway, back to the books, it was the other way around with the Tower being the world's tallest building and Glass Inferno just being a 66 story SF high rise. The "Tower" building was 125 stories high as I recall.

Grover met his demise trying to go down the stairs actually (the device of the stairs being blocked and being unblocked by two firemen going up the whole way comes from that book. In this case it was communications equipment for the TV antenna on the roof blocking the way. After the stairs were unblocked, Grover defianty chose to ignore the warnings that he'd never make it down alive (Grover's stunt is what Simmons does in the movie, though in the movie Simmons makes it back up to meet his later demise).

The guy who grabs the elevator all to himself and kills himself in the process was a guy named "J. Paul Norris". I leave it to you to figure out who that was meant to be! 😀

The governor of New York was also trapped in the Tower, "Bent Armitage". We also had Senator "Jake Peters" (dies along with the governor) and Congressman Cary Wyckoff (who makes it, but who is also a dislikable character). Simmons BTW isn't part of the party. He does however later get picked up by the police when he tries to destroy his paperwork.

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

I'm sure McQueen, having taken stock of his life in 1979 -- divorced, no work (not for want of offers), still suffering the consequences of much self-administered physical abuse from drugs and alcohol, already ill, and adrift emotionally -- found a new solidity in his life thanks to the relentless proselytizing of his flying instructor and his wife and son, all Evangelical Christians. Forgive me if I don't consider this a sign of the power of God but rather of the ability of people, in the habit of pushing their particular religious views, to influence an addictive and weakened personality toward the promise of something better. No doubt his conversion (if one would call it that) brought some solace and emotional peace to McQueen, so well and good, and it was certainly better than smoking dope and getting drunk all day. But let's be honest about the circumstances.

Within a couple of months McQueen had the bad news about his health confirmed, and it grew worse in very short order; whereupon -- in common with many susceptible personalities -- he found a new obsession, quack medical "cures" and malpractice that probably shortened his life even further. McQueen was a restless soul who I think found little happiness in life beyond the immediate gratification of his material wants, and I believe no one can ever be truly happy or fulfilled with such an empty life. It's not therefore surprising that at some point he would embrace an alternative that relied for its acceptance on that same emotional susceptibility that had previously led him to find meaning in destructive behavior. This is a strain of personality that is evident throughout McQueen's life. I respect the fact that as a deeply religious person you attribute his supposed late-life fulfillment to the effects of God in one's life, but excuse me if I take a more literal view of it all, in the context of McQueen's demonstrated traits.

Now we've both had our say on this matter. Back to meaningless things.

Re the film and books, thanks for clarifying and correcting my 40-year-old faulty memories of those few portions of the novels I recalled. Who was the guy in one of the books who died in an elevator -- it was a pretty horrible scene as described, and I remember that the author wrote that the last memory this man had before he died in the flames was of some little girl (?). However imperfect my memory, what I do recall of that I found very affecting. Was that this "J. Paul Norris" guy? Doesn't sound like him but I don't remember.

And no, I can't begin to think who Norris was supposed to be. J. Paul Getty? Nah. I'm at sea. As usual.

I do have a very vague recollection that Simmons in the book didn't die but was arrested. As for the names of those various pols...my God, how unimaginatively awful! "Bent Armitage"? Who ever names their kid "Bent" outside of Norway? "Jake Peters"? What, he changed it from Petrovsky to run for office? "Cary Wyckoff". Sounds uncomfortably close to a slag term for castration. But I can see -- unless I'm mistaken again -- where "Gary Parker" came from: a nicely altered and laundered combo of Cary and Peters. Maybe. Or maybe not. Just my bent.

And as much as I looked around Jim Duncan's offices, there wasn't a single donut in sight, anywhere. Disillusioning.

reply

[–] Eric-62-2 9 years ago

My final comment on the first point, Hob, is that I do admittedly come from a perspective where acts of "charity" are not always defined by the material amounts one puts forth, and how ultimately the greatest act of charity (the greatest of these things we abide by with faith and hope) is the charity (love) of answering the call given to the original 12 to share the Good News to those in need of it.

I actually was thinking J. Paul Getty because when you name someone "J.Paul" in the 70s, it can't be a coincidence! Yes, he's the one who dies in an elevator but he doesn't have a memory of a little girl. What happens is he cowardly steals the elevator for himself before anyone else has a chance to get in and the Governor phones down and tells the fire chief to have the police arrest him for attempted murder as soon as the doors open. But when the doors open, they report back he's dead from the heat that filled the car on the way down.

As for "Jim Duncan" that was admittedly simpler than the names of either of the two builders in both books. "Bert McGraw" in "The Tower" (who suffers a fatal heart attack when he confronts Simmons about the design changes and also the fact Simmons is shacking with architect Wilson's wife, whereupon Simmons lies to him and says the architect is shacking with his wife which supposedly shocks him into having a coronary). In the "Glass Inferno" we had "Wyndom LeRoux" who I think was closer to Duncan in the final version.

Oh, but here's the real thing about "The Tower" that is amazing. Remember, it isn't just Simmons' changes that cause the fire it's the sabotage (bomb) done by disgruntled ex-employee Connors that when *combined* with the fires that are breaking out due to the wiring flaws, makes everything lethal. Now how did Connors get to do this? THE COPS ON DUTY IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING LET HIM GO IN EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T HAVE CREDENTIALS! The book makes the two cops, Irish Patrolman Shannon and black Patrolman Barnes characters throughout the whole book, and Shannon just gets so irritated by Connors insistence that he's reporting for work and "Who are you questioning my credentials?" that he just lets him go through.

BTW, Merry Christmas!

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Hey, Eric, my apologies, this is my first trip back to this page since a few days ago, so I missed my chance to wish you a Merry Christmas before Christmas. I trust it was a happy and joyous one for you and your family.



But it's not too late for me to wish you and yours all the best for 2016. My sincere good wishes and hope for all blessings to you!



See, it's neat having you fill me in on aspects of the books, which as I've said I read only scattered portions of over forty years ago. Frankly I'm glad the movie simplified things!

Even so, wasn't there some character in one of the books (I think The Glass Inferno) who died in an elevator, and whose last memory was of a little girl or something like that? My admittedly very vague memory is that this person (a man) was a good guy and that he burns to death (very cheery). But again, after 40 years...well, you know all about people who wander around aimlessly for that amount of time!

reply

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Well, I'm talking about the McQueen who lived the first 49/50ths of his life, and he was not known as a selfless or generous person.

I can't speak to the nature of his conversion but even if it was as you describe, being a born-again Christian is no guarantee of a charitable or generous frame of mind, as millions of born-again Christians prove every day. In any case, Newman did his ventures out of a lifelong sense of right and desire to help others...though it's true he was motivated to act after the death of his son Scott.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SnoozeAlarm 9 years ago

Surely part of the appeal of the character is the writing.

If a private venture fails it's closed down. If a government venture fails it's expanded. M Friedman

reply

[–] nameismike69 9 years ago

SM was cool but acted the same way in every damn movie... He was just too wooden

reply