PrintShare
The press uncovers the catastrophe: Michael Douglas and Jane Fonda in “The China Syndrome”. © imago images/Mary Evans
The nuclear power plant thriller “The China Syndrome” had its world premiere in 1979 – today it is more relevant than ever.
On the poster for the film, under the names of the main actors Jack Lemmon, Jane Fonda and Michael Douglas was the title of the film “The China Syndrome” and above the name of the stars: “Today few know what it means… Soon will be.” You know.” We wish we had that much self-confidence back in our times obsessed with ratings and clicks.
The filmmakers, let alone the poster, had no idea how right they were. The film, directed by James Bridges and produced by Michael Douglas, depicts an accident at a nuclear power plant that comes within a whisker of a nuclear meltdown. On March 28, 1979, there was a partial meltdown in one of the reactors on “Three Mile Island” near Harrisburg. Now everyone knew what was meant by the “China Syndrome”: the fear that a nuclear meltdown would eat through the ground all the way to China.
Not only did the film earn an Oscar nomination for the screenplay, but Jack Lemmon, who played the technical director of the reactor in the film, also received the award for best male actor at the Cannes Film Festival. Something else must have made the producer very happy: “The China Syndrome” cost him $5.9 million. But it grossed $51.7 million at the American box office.
Nobody expected that. Jane Fonda plays a television reporter who initially doesn’t know whether she wants to follow the anti-capitalist impulses of her wildly hairy cameraman Michael Douglas or whether she would rather keep her job. The station is under pressure from the nuclear power plant operator not to run the story. The film, like its famous predecessor from 1976 “The Untouchables”, in which Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford play the two reporters who start the Watergate scandal and ultimately bring down the American president, is a high song for the Determination, imagination and courage of the individual. And the individual.
The producer and screenwriters – the director was one of them – had The Untouchables in mind and they knew exactly why they were including a woman in the cast. At the time, the feminist movement was radically uprooting American households. Jane Fonda was an icon of opposition to the Vietnam War. She was exactly the right choice for this film. Her next film came out the following year. Title: “Why don’t we kill the boss?” That’s the question three female employees ask themselves. Wikipedia summarizes the film’s plot as follows: “During a trip by the boss’s wife, they kidnap him and hold him prisoner in his house. Meanwhile, they make office practices more human-friendly. The changes result in an increase in productivity, which the CEO takes notice of. He attributes the credit to the boss, who as a reward is supposed to manage a project in Brazil.” One of the women – Jane Fonda – gets married, another – Dolly Parton – becomes a country singer. The third becomes boss. And the boss? He is kidnapped by a liberation movement in Brazil. A comedy then. It grossed twice as much as the drama “The China Syndrome,” which oppressed viewers.
The USA of those years cannot be compared with what we observe there today. There was the Black Panthers, which one of the screenwriters of China Syndrome made a film about. There were leftists in Hollywood who raised enough money to release films that reached mass audiences. Nobody will wish for the return of the violence that the state and those who fought against it carried out back then. But there is a fear that the social setback could once again develop into a political one and that no one will then be willing to stand in the way of a Donald Trump who assumes his omnipotence. In 2016, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said in a speech: “My supporters are so smart. The surveys say that too. They show that I have the most loyal followers. Did you already know that? I could basically stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot someone and still not lose any voters. OK?!”
He didn’t do that. But he was elected despite this statement and despite his insults to women. The hopes of the USA and its allies rest on Joe Biden. That’s a terrible idea.
“The China Syndrome” was a film that fit the times and was therefore relevant. Today, since it no longer fits the times, it is even more relevant because it is even more necessary. “The China Syndrome” shows the power of the devices, their interconnectedness, their ruthlessness. But it also shows that someone who simply lets the camera continue to run and takes back the film from which it has already been taken is holding a snowball in his hand that grows into an avalanche that buries the cameras.
The real “China syndrome” is this anti-China syndrome. It doesn’t work for long, but it stops the usual course and leads to detours. I like these films because they don’t let go of the hope that people will change – like Jack Lemmon and Jane Fonda in this film – and that they will change circumstances. Also for the better. If only because they help prevent the worst. I also like the pathos with which “The China Syndrome” addresses each of us. I’m not a better person after this. I continue to sit in my freshly upholstered office chair and don’t go down to the street. But I know that those who do it are right and I’ll tell anyone who will listen. And I’ll tell you too, who may not want to hear it. I’m talking like I’m drugged? I am inspired.
This is true. Take two hours, go online, watch the movie and see what it does to you.
2024-03-14 16:29:40
#Antinuclear #film #China #Syndrome #burns
