a5c7b9f00b Brian McCaffrey's father's a fireman and he was there, as a child, when his father died. When he grew he tried to be a fireman but quit and left town and for a few years tried other jobs. He would eventually return and try to be fireman again. However, he finds himself working under his brother Stephen whom he doesn't exactly have a good relationship with. When Brian gets his picture in the paper and is lauded as a hero when in fact it was a mistake, a politician offers him a job working under the department's arson investigator, Donald Rimgale. It seems that Ringale is working some unusual fires wherein someone is killed. Brian initially refuses but when he has too many confrontations with Stephen, he takes the job. And he gets a lesson on what it means to be a fireman.
Two Chicago firefighter brothers, who don't get along, have to work together while a dangerous arsonist is on the loose.
I was going in, thinking it would be a awesome film, but I got burn. It's no way realistic. I know it's Hollywood so there going to take some liberties, but this movie has a ridiculous portrayal of firefighters. These firefighters are so terribly trained that they don't even know how to don their gear correctly. When Stephen "Bull" McCaffrey (Kurt Russell) goes into the 2 story building, to rescue the child from a fire, he has his coat wide open and no SCBA equipment. The smoke would have killed him in a matter of seconds as his lungs would be seared by the heat. If anybody was to run into a fire filled room with their coat undone they'd be cooked like a goose! Most of the characters would have died within the first 30 seconds of the film from having seared lungs, smoke inhalation, or extreme burns. I like how the fire can explode right in their face, and they don't end up getting first or second degree burns. The amount of smoke that was in the fires if real life would have been blinding, not clear. By the way, what type of firefighters smoke cigarettes while cleaning up a burned out building after breathing in tons of smoke? I would be afraid to light up in a building that might have gases in it because it might start a fire, again.As for the title of the film, 'Backdraft'. It's very incredibly rare behavior of fire. Even if you were the evil genius arsonist setting these backdraft, you would need to spend days creating just the right environment where a back-draft can occur. It's a easy task. Honestly the idea that an arsonist is creating backdrafts to kill certain individuals is preposterous to begin with. I'm not a firefighter and I know that it would be nearly impossible to do that, and it would certainly be impossible to do it to the extent that the arsonist does here. The movie plot is suppose to just that. Firefighters trying to catch the arsonist, but screenwriter Gregory Widen shovels one subplot on top of another, and it becomes too much. There is the sub-plot about two brothers, Stephen McCaffrey and Brian McCaffrey (William Baldwin) having a love and hate relationship, with Brian living under the shadow of his heroic brother, and father. The movie is very clichés with the firefighter heroics such in the case it becomes unrealistic. The first shot of Kurt Russell's Stephen is him walking out a burning building in a manly pose. This is follow up with a heroic slow moment of him rescuing a kid. It's so cheesy. Even the opening scene is over the top, with the firefighters taking a child with them to fight fires. Who is going to babysit the kid while you are fighting fires? Is taking a child to a fire zone kinda dangerous? Director Ron Howard seeks to wring tears from the audience by having a fireman's helmet incredibly bounce out of a second story window in front of the kid and everybody slow motion moves around is just poetic stupid. The worst is the silly montage of Brian training under his brother with dripping his head in water as if a male model. Another subplot of the film is Stephen trying to get back with his estranged wife, Helen McCaffrey (Rebecca De Mornay) which doesn't play no factor into the main plot. No, honestly, it's doesn't play into anything. It's just waste screen time, that could have better been focus on finding the arsonists. The best scenes in the film are that of Brian teaming up with Donald "Shadow" Rimgale (Robert de Niro) a dedicated arson investigator looking for the backdraft killer. They even get help from Arsonist 'Silent of the Lambs' what a be Hannibal Lector, Ronald Bartel (Donald Sutherland). Donald Sutherland is pretty creepy in his role. "A fire eats and breathes and hates." He quotes. Sorry, but fires don't hate; only people hate, Ronald. Firs is not a living entity, film. Robert de Niro is great in his role, and get closer to closer to finding the murderer. Too bad, Brian is rarely any help. Brian barely does anything in the film for the main character, but gets in the way of better supporting characters. Rather than finding the killer, he is having sex with Jennifer Vaitkus (Jennifer Jason Leigh) Brian's ex-girlfriend and works for the city alderman who trying to cut back the fireman department budget. Her loyalties are torn between her job and Brian. I think making love on top of a speeding fire truck will get you fired in real life.William Baldwin is no Alec. His performance was horrible. The way he played puppy dog in an attempt to convey depression and self-pity, it was eye-rolling bad. Baldwin's role was originally written for Tom Cruise, who would have given the movie some much-needed star power. He is disappointing. The film tries way too hard to be cool instead of realistic, which is a shame considering that a film about firefighters and arson could have been wholly intriguing while remaining believable, had it been attempted properly. Instead, this film feels so fake with the over the top action sequences. The factory argument in particular is awful. Rather than putting out the fire, they waste their time arguing while the building is burning around him. Don't get me wrong, the action scenes are impressive, and the special effects are still rather extraordinary, but it's scenes like that, that makes me cringe. Han Zimmer's score is amazing in my opinion. The best thing to come out of this movie is Backdraft fire special effects show at Unversial Studios Hollywood, and that's not saying much. It closed down in 2010 after 19 years worth of shows. Overall: watch it if bored, but don't think too much into it. It's just a pointless popcorn flick
I'll go on record here as saying that Kurt Russell is one of the least appreciated, least recognized forces in acting today. Having said that, for those viewers who remain unaware, Backdraft is his finest film. Not only did Ron Howard direct him perfectly, he surrounded him with a flawless supporting cast ... with the exception of Billy Baldwin. Stephen would have been the better Baldwin for this role, sorry.<br/><br/>To set the scene, we have Chicago in the summertime, feuding brothers reunited, heroes walking a fine line, lost loves resurfacing and a vengeful arsonist destroying with motive. Even better, the heroes are real men, possibly the last of the greatest heroes: the firefighter.<br/><br/>I've always considered Kurt Russell to be a modern day cowboy ... not like Sam Elliot, just the mystique. He can stand alone in the street and stare down what goes against the grain of his principles and never bat an eye. His entire world is crumbling around him and the one person who is spearheading the demise is the brother he can't understand.<br/><br/>While DeNiro, Donald Sutherland and the late J.T. Walsh turn in superb performances, the real heart of the supporting cast lies in Rebecca DeMornay and Scott Glenn. Backdraft is a fantastic character piece, and absolutely a classic. I would have a hard time not naming this as one of the five greatest films ever made. *****
Fire, as this movie makes clear, is nothing if not photogenic, and Howard has done a beautiful job of conjuring both its danger and its deceptive, primal beauty.