Airport, '75, '77 and '79 will they be all released as one package? (1 Viewer)

[Randy Korstick]

Only bad thing about that is just like Midway and Eathquake they could only release the Television Version in Pan an Scan since the extra TV version footage was all shot 1.33:1 where the movies were 2.35:1. I think this is the reason none of these versions have been released.

For the Airport series I believe only Airport 77 had an Extended TV version.

I would love to see them put the television versions on the blu-ray discs.

 

[Dr Griffin]

Damn dirty airport! I'd like to see a Blu-ray of Skyjacked and the Airport films too. I am a sucker for the Suspense/Disaster/Potential Disaster films of the 70s. The TV version of Airport '77 would be a nice extra in a Blu-ray Terminal Pack

 

[Michael Elliott]

Saying people are confused or don't understand the intent of AIRPORT is somewhat calling them out for being stupid. The film didn't get the greatest reviews when it was originally released and there were even jokes about it getting the Oscar nominations then. Have the sequels or the other disaster pics ruined its reputation? I think its reputation was debatable before any of the sequels but some of us who don't like it might very well "get it" but simply see it as a boring melodrama that adds up to very little in the end.


HALLOWEEN shouldn't be considered a slasher because it isn't. It gets called one because the populiarity of the film had people cashing in. AIRPORT might not be a disaster picture but it kickstarted the genre and got it rolling. Sure, it's not fair to blame it because it's not playing by the "disaster rules" of something later in the decade but I think most film fans will know when it was made, what it's goal was and the fact that it was just GRAND HOTEL on a plane.


To me, I think "future" disaster films saw the problems with this movie and tried to improve on it. It's certainly a more respectable film than the sequels but in terms of entertainment I'd pick the second and third.

 

[Jack P]

There were additional scenes for '79 shot for TV only, including a flashback of Jessica Walter as Patroni's wife who we learn how she died. They did nothing to enhance a bad movie on all levels.


The extra material for '77 though came from the original production shoot and fills in the gaps of a number of points in the narrative that are left unclear or hanging in the theatrical cut. The biggest difference is that Patroni in the theatrical cut doesn't even appear until after the plane crashes, whereas there are a lot of scenes of him before the crash in the TV cut (including a return performance by the actor who played his son in '75). There's even in the TV cut a Jaws-inspired moment of the divers suddenly seeing the body of Monte Markham popping out from the hold as they're diving on the plane to attach the balloons.

 

[Rob_Ray]

Saying people are confused or don't understand the intent of AIRPORT is somewhat calling them out for being stupid. The film didn't get the greatest reviews when it was originally released and there were even jokes about it getting the Oscar nominations then. Have the sequels or the other disaster pics ruined its reputation? I think its reputation was debatable before any of the sequels but some of us who don't like it might very well "get it" but simply see it as a boring melodrama that adds up to very little in the end.


HALLOWEEN shouldn't be considered a slasher because it isn't. It gets called one because the populiarity of the film had people cashing in. AIRPORT might not be a disaster picture but it kickstarted the genre and got it rolling. Sure, it's not fair to blame it because it's not playing by the "disaster rules" of something later in the decade but I think most film fans will know when it was made, what it's goal was and the fact that it was just GRAND HOTEL on a plane.


To me, I think "future" disaster films saw the problems with this movie and tried to improve on it. It's certainly a more respectable film than the sequels but in terms of entertainment I'd pick the second and third.

What kickstarted the seventies' disaster cycle was THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE. It was *that* film's mega-success that made Universal go back into its vault of story properties and decide that sequels to Arthur Hailey's AIRPORT, a recent box-office hit, could be adapted to fit into the disaster mold. Until AIRPORT '75 came along, the original was not considered part of any disaster cycle. And THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE's Oscar nods got just as many laughs from the critics as AIRPORT's did.

 

[JohnMor]

Saying people are confused or don't understand the intent of AIRPORT is somewhat calling them out for being stupid. The film didn't get the greatest reviews when it was originally released and there were even jokes about it getting the Oscar nominations then. Have the sequels or the other disaster pics ruined its reputation? I think its reputation was debatable before any of the sequels but some of us who don't like it might very well "get it" but simply see it as a boring melodrama that adds up to very little in the end.

Not at all. How can people be stupid about a movie they have never seen? And what possible difference could the critical reception in 1970 have anything to do with someone in 2015 sitting down to see it for the first time, thinking they're going to see a disaster movie based on the films it gets lumped in with? You honestly don't believe they could be confused or disappointed then? Funny, I've talked to a few who said they were exactly that when they finally saw the film for the first time. They weren't stupid and they understood the film's intent. But they were confused and disappointed in why they had been told it was a disaster movie all these years.

 

[JohnMor]

What kickstarted the seventies' disaster cycle was THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE. It was *that* film's mega-success that made Universal go back into its vault of story properties and decide that sequels to Arthur Hailey's AIRPORT, a recent box-office hit, could be adapted to fit into the disaster mold. Until AIRPORT '75 came along, the original was not considered part of any disaster cycle. And THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE's Oscar nods got just as many laughs from the critics as AIRPORT's did.

Exactly.

 

[youworkmen]

This long ramble is my way of saying the original film is not a yawnfest. I suspect you were simply expecting something else, more along the lines of Poseidon Adventure and Towering Inferno which are "disaster" films in that the disasters occur at the beginning of the film and its characters deal with the aftermath of the disaster. That is not the case with Airport.

I think it's definitely a yawnfest for anyone coming to it as a disaster movie which is what its usually labelled.

Seeing the other 2 and more regular disaster movies first certainly didn't help. After 45 minutes I was wondering when something interesting was going to happen.


But as others said , as a starry big budget soap it succeeds but regardless of its merits how on earth it got into the Oscars is a mystery. Must have been a really bad year


Don't think how good the book is matters , there are plenty of good books turned into crap films and vice versa

 

[SilverWook]

George Kennedy's character is in all of them, which was a nice connective thread. I'm surprised the Zuckers didn't get him for Airplane! Maybe he he was still under contract for another sequel at the time?


He did a guest shot on the sitcom Wings, where one the characters idolized and fanboyed him because of the Airport movies.

 

[SilverWook]

Besides the cheesy direct to video movie Submerged, did stock footage from Airport '77 turn up anywhere else? They had to have used it in at least one tv show.

 

[FrancisP]

Only bad thing about that is just like Midway and Eathquake they could only release the Television Version in Pan an Scan since the extra TV version footage was all shot 1.33:1 where the movies were 2.35:1. I think this is the reason none of these versions have been released.

For the Airport series I believe only Airport 77 had an Extended TV version.

I would have no trouble with the pan and scan tv versions being included. It's not like Midway and Earthquake were loaded with extras.

 

[Jack P]

Besides the cheesy direct to video movie Submerged, did stock footage from Airport '77 turn up anywhere else? They had to have used it in at least one tv show.

Airport '75 footage was used extensively in an "Incredible Hulk" episode called "747". Hulk also recycled footage from "Duel" in another episode that so infuriated Spielberg he demanded Universal never do that to one of his films again.

 

[darkrock17]

Shout Factory should release the entire Airport series, as they would give us great transfers and all the special features this series rightfully deserves.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

What kickstarted the seventies' disaster cycle was THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE. It was *that* film's mega-success that made Universal go back into its vault of story properties and decide that sequels to Arthur Hailey's AIRPORT, a recent box-office hit, could be adapted to fit into the disaster mold. Until AIRPORT '75 came along, the original was not considered part of any disaster cycle. And THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE's Oscar nods got just as many laughs from the critics as AIRPORT's did.

But "Poseidon Adventure" didn't get nominations that indicated it was viewed as a great film. It received no Best Picture/Director/Screenplay nominations - it was nominated for technical categories other than music, song and Best Supporting Actress (Shelley Winters).


"Airport", on the other hand, was up for Best Picture and Best Screenplay.


"Towering Inferno" got a Best Picture nomination, though...

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Gotta admit I'm surprised to see so much sentiment that "Airport '77" is the best of the sequels. I thought "1975" was easily the best of the bunch - it's silly and campy but at least it's entertaining. I think "'77" is just boring!

 

[darkrock17]

Gotta admit I'm surprised to see so much sentiment that "Airport '77" is the best of the sequels. I thought "1975" was easily the best of the bunch - it's silly and campy but at least it's entertaining. I think "'77" is just boring!

Each of these film has a danger factor to them, 75 has the same plot as 70 with the whole trying to land a plane after being crippled in flight, except it adds an extra bit more with they need to land it before it crashes into the Rocky Mountains. 77 on the other hand has the same race against time plot that Poseidon and Towering have, and more people seem to prefer those Disaster films more.

 

[Thomas T]

I've read in a few places that The High And The Mighty is considered an early forerunner of the "disaster" genre. That drives me absolutely crazy as it is nowhere near a disaster film. It also amuses that (perhaps not unlike the original Airport) people seeing it for the first time dismiss it as old fashioned and cliched. Well, sure because it has been duplicated and ripped off by countless other films like Zero Hour, Crash Landing, The Crowded Sky, Skyjacked etc. not to mention countless TV movies. It was the first and the granddaddy of the "genre". Sometimes being the first can be a mixed blessing when the imitators steal your thunder.


It should also be noted that the acting in Airport is stronger than its sequels. Both Helen Hayes and Maureen Stapleton were justifiably Oscar nominated and Van Heflin should have been too.

 

[darkrock17]

It should also be noted that the acting in Airport is stronger than its sequels. Both Helen Hayes and Maureen Stapleton were justifiably Oscar nominated and Van Heflin should have been too.

I agree, Airport is a great film because of the personal overlapping stories that make up the plot, yes the plane disaster is important, but the film's core is those stories more than the actual disaster itself.

 

[JohnMor]

But "Poseidon Adventure" didn't get nominations that indicated it was viewed as a great film. It received no Best Picture/Director/Screenplay nominations - it was nominated for technical categories other than music, song and Best Supporting Actress (Shelley Winters).


"Airport", on the other hand, was up for Best Picture and Best Screenplay.


"Towering Inferno" got a Best Picture nomination, though...

I think Airport deserved the Screenplay nomination... far more than Love Story. And as far as Best Picture nods go, it easily is more deserving than Doctor Dolittle or Love Story or many would feel, Hello, Dolly!. I doubt anyone expected it to win, but it was an acknowledgment of the quality of the production and how well it juggled the multiple storylines.


I never understood the nomination for The Towering Inferno because it mainly struck me as a rehash of The Poseidon Adventure.

 

[JohnMor]

It should also be noted that the acting in Airport is stronger than its sequels. Both Helen Hayes and Maureen Stapleton were justifiably Oscar nominated and Van Heflin should have been too.

I completely agree.