The Cassandra Crossing
1976 UK
Dir: George Pan Cosmatos
Str: Richard Harris, Sophia Loren, Burt Lancaster, Ava Gardner
Is this movie actually a turkey movie as many reviewers have said?
According to Mick Martin & Marsha Porter's Video Movie Guide, The
Cassandra Crossing is a turkey, and it is simply dismissed with just one line telling "A plague infected
train heads for a weakened bridge". Then, some Japanese movie review says there is a critical error in this
movie. Firstly, I thought what's that? But as I read the review, it eventually turned out to be a very subtle flaw.
That is, the direction of the flow of the scenery viewed from the inside of the train through a window suddenly
changes from one scene to another being only separated by a very brief intervening scene in-between. I had never
noticed such a mysterious phenomenon despite the fact, by then, I had watched the movie at least five times. So
I watched again, and confirmed it's true. But, so what? Even the most observant viewer wouldn't notice it unless
s/he knew the presence of that flaw in advance. I don't know how the reviewer could find it out. But, anyway, I
can understand what he wants to say; that is, if there is such a scene as described above, it, no matter how trivial,
may well prove the attitude of the director, and, therefore, there must be many of this kind of flaws other than
that. Honestly saying, I must confess there are many. Before mentioning them, it would be necessary to explain
the story.
What an unbelievable story! A member of a terrorist group
carries deadly virus aboard on the international train, and the
train
proceeds head first to the abyss of dilapidated bridge "Cassandra
Crossing".
The story begins with the scene where two members of a terrorist group try
to assault the huge building of some kind of world health organization located upon in Geneva by sneaking into
it, though I don't know what kind of business the terrorist group has with that institution. Unfortunately for
them, they are caught sight of by a watchman. When they try to escape, they are trapped in a laboratory that is
full of specimens of various diseases. One of them is shot to kill. Another manages to escape the building, but
not before being contaminated by deadly virus when a bullet shattered a glass vial containing it. After that, he
embarks on an international express train, which means all of the passengers of that train will be exposed to the
most dangerous virus human being has ever known. However, there always is a hero in this kind of movies. The
Cassandra Crossing isn't an exception for that. It turns out that a world famous doctor (played by always overacting
Richard Harris) is also aboard on that doomed train with his ex-wife (played by always too much makeup Sophia Loren).
Meanwhile, Colonel MacKenzie (played by at that time always playing bureaucrat Burt Lancaster) sets up the headquaters
countering this international disaster. He contacts Harris on the train, and instructs him to find out the terrorist
plagued who might be dead by that time. Though he finds out the terrorist, eventually the terrorist dies. By this
time, many of the passengers have got sick. Now, the train has become a none-stop deathtrap because Lancaster doesn't
want to stop it, the ostensible reason of which is to prevent the plague from spreading all over the country by
the plague-infected passengers sneaking out of his control. Finally, Lancaster makes a decision to completely seal
the train off from the rest of the world, and take them to a facility situated in Poland, which means the train
will have to cross the bridge known by the name "Cassandra Crossing" whose stability is in question for
those who once lived near it, but not necessarily so for Lancaster. Thus, the train embarking hundreds of passengers
goes straight ahead toward the abyss despite the fact many passengers are gradually recovering from their illness
by the effect of oxygen, not by the endeavor of a world famous doctor, i.e. Richard Harris. The rest of the plot
I'm not going tell, for the movie belongs to a category of suspense movie, and complete divulgence of its plot
might water down the element of suspense.
Here, I've enumerated many of flaws of this movie. If you try, you
will be able to find out more.
As I said before, I, by myself, can enumerate several flaws of this movie,
the purpose of which, however, is by no means to debase the entire movie; in that case, I wouldn't have written
about it in the first place (I've never written any review about a movie by itself that is not my favorite one
at all). First example; it's strange only three members of staff (Burt Lancaster, Inglid Thulin, John Phillip Law)
are dealing with this international disaster at the headquarters. I am wondering they might have tried to cut the
budget for making this movie. Second example; it's strange main characters but Martin Sheen never get the plague
despite the fact the probability of catching it is supposed to be 60%. I think 30% would have been sufficient enough
to convince the audience they didn't get it by chance, even though still 30% would be unacceptable statistically.
But, I can understand saying 30% might have given the impression the plague wasn't so deadly after all. Another
possible explanation for that is, they only focused the persons not to be plagued in the first place. But, it would
be an idiotic idea for a suspense movie. Third example; it's strange when Lancaster is stalling about the matter
the train is going ahead to Germany instead of France by saying bombs have been set up all over the railway in
France by some terrorists, no one doubts the credability of that cockamamy story other than just fussing about
their own situation. Why the train should go ahead to Germany without stopping at any station in order to detour
France that has only temporarily become dangerous, I can't understand. But, anyway, I've never been to Europe.
So, this might not be so strange for those who have long been living in Europe. Especially, Japanese tend to consider
the national borders to be very strict, for Japan doesn't have any national border line on land. Therefore, the
impression might exist only in my imagination. Fourth example; it's strange Martin Sheen who once, by his cowardice,
rejected to go ahead to the engine car to control the whole train by advancing on the top of the roofs of the train
tries to do so once again by inching through the side of the train where he can secure his foothold only on the
marginal edge of corrugated iron. Do you think inching through the side of a train like a crab is easier than advancing
on the top of the roofs of a train? He who thinks so (obviously Martin Sheen is one of such) must be utterly crazy.
Fifth example; it's strange the world famous doctor (Richard Harris) shows his efficiency only by his mascle power,
but never by his speciality, i.e. medical practice. Though I stop enumerating with five examples, if you try, you
will certainly be able to find other flaws, I guarantee. Additionally saying, this movie also has a scene a girl
is singing a song. The reason why I said "also" is because, in 1970s, it seems to have become a tradition
of disaster or panic movies that, somewhere in the movie, a girl sings a love song. For example, "Wherever
love takes me" of Gold, "The Morning After" of The Poseidon Adventure, and "We
may never love like this again" of The towering Inferno. I remember the later two got the Oskar, and
all of them were excellent songs. But, the song sung in The Cassandra Crossing is disastrous, more disastrous
than the virus itself. I even wonder the same Jerry Goldsmith who composed the excellent opening theme played by
a full orchestra also composed this rubbish too. Quite doubtful.
In spite of all of what I've said, The Cassandra Crossing is still fun
to watch. This movie should be considered as a suspesce movie,
not
as mere another panic movie which was flourishing in 1970s.
I think I've said too many negative aspects of this movie. Nevertheless, I
have no intention of disposing of it as just one of those crap movies. As I said before, I've never reviewed any
movie that I consider is a total shit except mentioning it in the reviews of other movies as a bad example. So,
I'm considering The Cassandra Crossing is still fun to watch. I'm going to explain why I think so. In 1970s,
there appeared many disaster and panic movies. The Cassandra Crossing can be regarded as one of them. However,
being different from those movies such as Earthquake or The Towering Inferno, The Cassandra Crossing
has suspense elements. Because, as a premise, the passengers on the train don't know exactly what is happening,
and, therefore, they are always anxious and nervous about whatever might happen (Incidentally, one of the causes
for this uncertainty seems to be brought about ironically by the very presence of buaurocratic efficiency of Burt
Lancaster, which might be considered to be criticized by this movie, though I have no intention of explicating
this aspect, for I think there might be dozens of other good movies for that.). On the other hand, in the case
of Earthquake, as the earthquake is instantaneous, which means it is either all or nothing, so people either
don't know anything about the earthquake before it happens, or know exactly what has happened after it happened.
Therefore, no element of suspense here by definition. In the case of The Towering Inferno, they all know
what has happened once the fire started after a short ambiguous period passed. So, it certainly causes panic and
fright, but not anxiety that is the essense of suspense movies. And, there is another thing. Other panic or disaster
movies are lacking the element of movement. By contrast, most of the scenes of The Cassandra Crossing takes
place in a rapidly moving train. Furthermore, as I said in another review, only the fact that most of the scenes
takes place in rapidly moving vehicle doesn't ensure that the audience can get the feel of rapid movement out of
the movie in question. For example, on an airplane, there is no suggestion of rapid movement becaude of the lack
of static objects comparing to which viewers can feel tremendous speed of that airplane. Anyway, I quess it's impossible
for oridinary people to feel real speed of an airplane, for it's beyond human ability of controlling its own sensory
input. In short, usual people would never be able to feel real speed of an airplane directly. Only the pilots who
can fly airplanes in extreme low altitude might be able to approximately know what it might be like. I presume
the feeling for speed of the pilot on an airplane flying in very low altitude would be completely different from
the one of those who are watching such an airplane from the ground. The reason why I think so is because the person
on the ground is just watching an airplaine as a point against the background of sky while the pilot is watching
continuous surface of the earth, and the vast amount of view from his perspective belongs to foreground. And, also
I think speed is a notion involving relativity, which means the speed of a certain object is only knowable through
comparisons to other objects. Anyway, in this respect, The Cassandra Crossing has the feel of rapid movement
due to the fact most of the scenes takes place in a train moving through beautifully shot scenery of European continent,
which means the background of it isn't abstract like sky or outer space. And, therefore, the audience will certainly
be able to feel the speed of that ill-fated train very easily, and, at the same time, by that, the tension coming
from suspense elements will all the more mount. If any doubt, I can say the most notable example of this effect
can also be seen in the marvelous movie Runnaway Train.
Just watch the train running against the background of beautiful
scenary of Europe.
Though I must confess the reason why I like the movie might be affected by
the fact I like to just get on a train, and go wherever it goes, I think, even so, it's unfair to dismiss the movie
so quickly as many reviewers have ever done. Additionally saying, Jerry Goldsmith's gorgeous full-orchestrated
scores seem to have succeeded in considerably augmenting the atmosphere of the movie too. To tell the truth, I
feel I've spent too much space for writing negative aspects in this movie's case, but, as I said before, I am still
thinking The Cassandra Crossing is, nevertheless, fun to watch. So, forget all those flaws, and watch the
train running against the background of beautiful scenery of Europe.
Go Back to Movie Reviews Main Page