Still more lazy thoughts from this one…

Reprise – Friday Forgotten Book/Film: FAIL-SAFE

I’m of a generation that grew up during the height of the Cold War, and thankfully weathered time to witness the ushering of that era’s end. From this longstanding conflict, there has been a mountain of fictional material written across books and films produced from the period. Many, drawing upon the fear and dread from that confrontation. A few generations expected it could only end one way. The full bleak glory when each of the superpowers finally launched their nuclear payloads at one another. It dotted many a work in the period, and may seem bizarre (or perhaps, even quaint) to younger age groups.

I’d submit that Eugene Harvey and Burdick Wheeler’s 1962 novel, FAIL-SAFE, epitomized a good portion of this anxiety, and did it exceedingly well. The well-worn bestseller should lay on top of that particular old-world-view books stack with some pride. The synopsis of the novel, that of the accidental triggering of a strategic bomber air-wing strike against the Soviet Union caused by computer glitch, and its horrifying and terrible solution in the tale, was close enough story-wise to a another such book. Peter George’s (aka Peter Bryant) earlier 1958 novel, Red Alert. So much so, that it caused its author to once sue the tandem of Harvey and Burdick.

Despite that, and though Red Alert came out first (and was later the source material for Stanley Kubrick‘s brilliant black comedy, Dr. Strangelove), I daresay FAIL-SAFE‘s story has held up better in the decades since either book’s initial release. In spite of the fact both were locked into that specific post-WWII military tension, the later novel remains more relatable to current times because of its version in the nightmare scenario. Its basis of a technical glitch I believe rang more true then, and certainly more understandable with folks today, regardless of the passage of time.

The explosion of technology, a direct result of the strained relations between the Western/Eastern blocs (1947 – 1991), in the daily lives of people, especially since the 60s, has had the effect of turning many of us into a technical amalgam, of sorts. Some manage without, but we all inter-relate via computer systems in one form or another nowadays. Most of us are all just users in this span. Which, like the engineering term fail safe, has a terrible irony to it — in the novel’s story and in people’s normal lives when dealing with technology.

Name someone you know who hasn’t suffered through, directly or indirectly, with at least one technical glitch in their lives? Most can’t.

It’s hard to do without a person living some sort of secluded hermit existence nowadays, or part of the nation’s poor who are chronically on the other side of the digital divide. Our daily being today (whether you care to know it or not) revolves around computers and networks (wired, wireless, or social). And they were center stage, in early primitive form, along with the people tied to it, in this thoughtful work. The book’s chapter describing our lives interacting with satellites overhead and missile silos below, offered a haunting glimpse few readers had ever considered beforehand.

I think it was that aspect, so astutely done and written about in the authors’ FAIL-SAFE novel, that made the work worth remembering. One not to be left on the heap of forgotten history, chiefly, because its remnants are still all around us.

Fail-Safe

Since I didn’t read this novel when it first came out — hey, I was only 8 at the time, I picked it up only years later because of Sidney Lumet‘s highly underrated 1964 film adaptation. In fact, I still have an old copy of the novel in my library. Fail-Safe, the film, came out the same year as Dr. Stangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. The latter motion picture by Kubrick was easily the more successful of the two at the box office, a critical darling, and remains one of the all-time great films. No question.

Yet, the film by director Lumet was easily the more nail-biting of the doomsday pair because it was not played for black comedy, even if Kubrick’s take was his most brilliant. Certainly FAIL-SAFE endures as a more dramatically haunting film, in my opinion. Satire, no matter how superb, need not apply. I first watched it on local television on one of those late-night Saturday movie shows my generation lived on. Like the striking supersonic B-58 used as the movie’s symbol, compared to Dr. Strangelove’s buff B-52s, it left quite an impression.

Director Joe Dante covered it best a couple of years back in his adept and appreciative Trailers From Hell video examination:

The film was loaded with a great cast of actors, many considered either great, familiar, or without doubt underrated. Who wouldn’t want Henry Fonda as the President trying to prevent a global nuclear war? Outside of his stint in the great film Charade, I don’t think Walter Matthau was ever more casually villainous than he was here as the hawkish civilian advisor to the Pentagon, Professor Groeteschele. And if you only know Dan O’Herlihy from some of his work in the 80s, Halloween III: Season of the WitchThe Last Starfighter, or Robocop), first-time viewers will be more than surprised, and touched, by this actor’s performance as the thoughtful General Black in the piece.

Like this film, they were unforgettable.

Admittedly, its low-budget pedigree shackles the film some, though not as much as you would think. No military cooperation via the Pentagon was forthcoming in this small New York City-based production, the repeated stock footage of the same jet craft throughout was a telltale sign. Still, as Mr. Dante noted,

“…editor Ralph Rosenblum and Sidney Lumet make a virtue of the limitations by staging scenes in just a few small sets distorted by wide-angle lenses.”

Because of it was a small independent production, Columbia Studios bought it during filming to make sure it’d be released after Dr. Strangelove. The movie’s tight sets and close-quarter lensing by filmmakers made all of the performers’ faces doubly important, especially by the final outcome. Including those of veteran character actor Frank Overton, Fritz Weaver (in his big screen film debut), a young Larry Hagman gathering notice, and keenly, like General Black, Ed Binns as the strategic bomber pilot tested beyond measure, each made important contributions in the dramatic telling of this story.

The framing of entire cast via close-up photography throughout the movie was simply remarkable. Lumet and his cinematographer, Gerald Hirschfeld, used the technique marvelously to convey the tumult and emotions tearing at the insides of the predominately male cast. Its 60s heritage, in the wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis, left no room for overly emotive men. Anguish for the task at hand was handled matter-of-factly, but still with cost. A good example being the highlighted the contribution of the late Dom DeLuise’s small role in the film last year in a tribute post.

Most peculiar, though, but in keeping with the movie’s austerity, there was no musical score with this undervalued work. The film ultimately didn’t need one.

Fail-Safe was at its utmost a classic, but stark cold-war suspense thriller, in either book or film form, to come from that era. However, the real artistry in the film, besides Lumet’s stellar direction, was that it never lost its humanity within its screen adaptation or plotting. Credit Walter Bernstein, another blacklisted writer of the 50s, a victim of the Republican-led House Un-American Activities Committee, for achieving that. The fact that it was beautifully shot in austere but noirishly shadowed black & white remains something to behold.

If you’ve not seen the film, it’s definitely one worth taking the time to do so. All the while your nerves may be left a bit jangled watching it, I reckon. What shouldn’t be forgotten was that all the characters in Fail-Safe, like in the novel, stood out amidst all that safe-failed technology, and assumed its terrible, albeit allegorically Biblical, toll.

Advertisements

23 Responses to “Reprise – Friday Forgotten Book/Film: FAIL-SAFE”

  1. Mark Walker

    Excellent post Michael. This is a film I really need to get round to. I’ve seen the made for tv remake which I actually quite enjoyed but the original has always eluded me.

    Like

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      I should have mentioned the TV remake of FAIL-SAFE, which I thought a solid effort by Stephen Frears and George Clooney. If you can, I think you’d enjoy the original when you screen it. Thanks so much, Mark.

      Like

      Reply
    • le0pard13

      Having seen the film, when I came to read the novel, I thought I knew what to expect. As usual, the book offered added insight to the characters. Still, screenwriter Walter Bernstein distilled it beautifully. Thanks very much, Sergio.

      Like

      Reply
  2. jackdeth72

    Excellent work, Michael!

    It’s still a toss up for me between “Fail Safe’ and ‘Dr. Strangelove’. Both are superb in cast, mood and story being told. Making it what mood I’m in most helpful in pre viewing selection.

    Though the B-58 ‘Hustler’ bomber was supersonic and very hard to find and kill. It did have incredibly short legs. Which would have meant one last mid air refueling near over the Bering Strait before being able to hit targets in Moscow.

    Dom DeLouise, Walter Matthau, Larry Hagman and Henry Fonda all reached far beyond their grasps and scored big time in this film!

    Like

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      The delta-wing B-58 was something. Yeah, I go back and forth with these two bomber-on-a-mission-to-our-doom films. Love ’em both. I think the only film of recent time that approached the nail-biting tech-gone-wrong tension of FAIL-SAFE was 1990’s BY DAWN’S EARLY LIGHT. As you said, one great cast going over and above and hitting big. Many thanks, Kevin.

      Like

      Reply
  3. Aurora

    WONDERFUL post giving attention to a truly underrated gem! One of the best thrillers ever, a genius ending!

    Love it, Michael!

    Aurora

    Like

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      You know I’m going to agree with you, Aurora. One of the great thriller endings, ever. Those images were truly haunting. Thank you so much, my friend.

      Like

      Reply
  4. ckckred

    Great write-up. Love Fail-Safe. I wrote a paper in high school about the Red Scare in HHollywood and it was one of the films I cited.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Kevin

    Haven’t read the book but saw the movie (maybe on TV) and perhaps compared it unfairly to Dr Strangelove. I remember the tension in many of the scenes. Maybe it is time I revisit it.

    Like

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      I’m all for that, Kevin. Kubrick’s take with the concept was indeed brilliant, but Lumet’s (and this novel’s) was as thought-provoking, as well. Thanks, Kevin.

      Like

      Reply
  6. Kevin

    Interesting to see that you have Fail Safe in your top 100 movie way above Dr Strangelove. My equivalent would be Malick’s The Thin Red Line being superior to Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan. I think it had also helped that I read TTR novel some years before hand.

    Like

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      They, FAIL-SAFE and Dr. Strangelove, are actually close on that list, I only numbered it on the post so I didn’t under- or over-report. It was not intended as a ranking. Y’know, when I first saw The Thin Red line I didn’t know what to think about it, being use to most war films. Over the years, it’s really something to ponder, Malick’s view of things. I need to revisit the work. Thanks very much, Kevin :-).

      Like

      Reply
  7. Eugene R. Carter

    The title refers to the term “Fail Safe Point” which was used by the Strategic Air Command (SAC) to designate the mid-air point at which their patrolling nuclear bombers were ordered to hold and then turn back from approaching the Soviet Union — unless they received authenticated orders to proceed with their mission to attack. The Fail Safe Point was intended to prevent a SAC bomber from accidentally crossing into Soviet Air space and precipitating a nuclear war. In more general terms it refers to what could be called an “engineer’s commandment”: ” fail safe “, meaning to take into account all the ways something can go wrong (fail) and ensure as far as possible that the machine or process itself will not make things worse in the event of something going wrong. The title’s irony lies in the fact that the author contends that the nature of SAC’s Fail Safe protocols could, under the right circumstances, cause their Fail Safe mechanism to “make things worse” and cause the event it was intended to prevent.

    Like

    Reply
  8. 70srichard

    The thing I remember most from the book was the detail on the translator character. He was studying law but with a desire to teach rather than practice. The backstory on his Russian and the careful way he had to monitor the language was an important part of the story that did not translate to the screen as strongly as it was emphasized in the book.

    Like

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      Excellent point, Richard. Great to find another who has read this novel. This thriller had plenty of interesting threads going that coalesced wonderfully by its startling finale. Many thanks, my friend.

      Like

      Reply

Are you talkin’ to me?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Basic HTML is allowed. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

%d bloggers like this: