“Man in the Sky”
January 14, 2012
APROPOS of the recent discussion at VFR about women pilots, I highly recommend the 1957 British movie Man in the Sky, produced by Ealing Studios, which churned out so many outstanding films in the 1940s and 50s. This is one of the best. Man in the Sky stars Jack Hawkins as John Mitchell, a test pilot working for a small aviation company and struggling to support his family in the middle class town of Wolverhampton.
The film, released as Decision Against Time in America and directed by Charles Crichton, is interesting for its portrayal of the almost entirely male world of commercial aviation and for its aerial cinematography, but also for its sensitive exploration of the psychology of the male provider. Though made less than 60 years ago, this is a world in which a female commercial pilot is unimaginable.
At the beginning of the story, Mitchell realizes he is unable to afford a better house for his family and that his company faces bankruptcy if its newest freight plane doesn’t sell. Mitchell takes the plane for a test flight with a potential buyer and virtually everything goes wrong. A fire breaks out in one of the engines. The passengers bail out of the plane. Mitchell refuses to ditch the aircraft in the Irish Sea at the radioed instructions of the company president.
In a brilliant scene, Mitchell later reacts to his wife Mary’s charge that he has thoughtlessly risked his life. Mary has witnessed her husband’s harrowing flight and becomes upset and angry. She accuses him of caring for his job, not his family. The wife is played magnificently by Elizabeth Sellars. Mitchell’s response to his wife, as played by Hawkins and written by the screenwriter William Rose, is breathtaking and utterly true to life. Watch its prelude and the actual scene starting at minute 1:05 here. The actor said it was one of the best performances of his career:
“I then had a six-minute speech, which was really the justification why a man does a job – any job – which was brilliantly written by Bill Rose, one of the finest screenwriters, and a man who wrote perfectly for me. This speech attracted a lot of attention, and for an actor no feeling exceeds the satisfaction when people come up afterwards and say that the character you played was splendid, and you were the right person to play it.”
This movie echoes so many themes that have been discussed here, it could be said to be a Thinking Housewife movie.
— Comments —
Thomas F. Bertonneau writes:
The Thinking Housewife has been here before. You might recall the discussion about a year and a half ago concerning David Lean’s film The Sound Barrier, to which Man in the Sky is indebted.
Laura writes:
Yes, thanks. I meant to mention that. And there is this post on Mr. Bertonneau’s observations on aviation films. As he wrote in an article at The Brussels Journal:
The Sound Barrier celebrates in beautifully day-lit black-and-white cinematography the angular sheet-metal poetry of the sweptwing, jet-powered planform and it pays gentle respect to the pastoral beauty of the English countryside, where the testing of the aircraft takes place.
John Purdy writes:
Ah, paradise lost. Thanks so much for posting this. Imagine, a world in which men habitually wore a suit and tie. I am probably among the last age cohort to be required to do so. And the boys were such perfect examples of the innocence and impishness of boys in the “old days.” All gone now. As you are probably aware, Apollo 13 was the last movie ever made to show an all white male world, comprised of experienced, dedicated and capable men. We’ll never see that again.
Thanks again for the blast from the past.
Vincent C. writes:
I believe that Signor Bertonneau is somewhat incorrect in that the movie he is referring to was entitled in the US, Breaking Through the Sound Barrier, and starred Sir Ralph Richardson and Ann Todd.
Laura writes:
British pictures were often renamed for American audiences. The Sound Barrier was released as Breaking Through the Sound Barrier here. Renaming Man in the Sky shows especially poor judgment. Decision Against Time is a terrible name for a movie.
Neal Anders-Thal writes:
Time warps. Takes a while to get your balance afterward.
I am 47 years of age and was, with my two brothers, raised for the world of John Mitchell. Men did what had to be done and their women stood by, even if they didn’t, couldn’t, understand.
Sure as hell, it’s not like that today. Feeling a twinge of blue, truth be told. But no time for that now. I face a death-struggle over house paint and must prepare. I am not kidding, mainly. My freedom and my children are at stake. Actually, they are at stake 24/7. Pray for me, a throwback to when men were men and women did not use children as a blunt force object.
P.S. Did no one else catch it? When the plane landed, not a single person clapped.
Laura writes:
Everyone was too stunned and awed to clap. Watch the faces of the people in the crowd.
Fitzgerald writes:
Neal Anders-Thal wrote:
“I am 47 years of age and was, with my two brothers, raised for the world of John Mitchell. Men did what had to be done and their women stood by, even if they didn’t, couldn’t, understand.”
This hit me in the solar plexis. I am roughly the same age, and I have two brothers oddly enough, and am stuck in a bit of time warp myself. I’m an old movie buff so these films speak directly to me. Now that I’m middle-aged they represent a flight of fancy, a glimpse into another world that no longer exists and I mourn for it knowing all the while they papered over the negatives of bygone eras, I still would have preferred it over today’s world in many ways. My ex-wife never understood what I did for a living, nor was capable of really grasping it frankly, and didn’t stand by me. She was like so many women today.
Neal Anders-Thal responds to Laura:
Re “clapping”:
Thinking here of the omnipresent, tedious and saccharine Hollywood/Madison Avenue portrayal of the “single clapper” who starts tentatively, clapping slowly alone in his righteous “You go girl!” recognition of a superior being. Soon, he is joined by another clapper and the tempo, thus encouraged, increases as more and more join in thunderous – but otherwise completely silent – ovation.
You know what I mean!
Laura writes:
Ha! Yes, I got it. There is none of that.
Jan. 16, 2012
Charlie Kennedy writes:
Just finished watching the movie at the link you provided.
I agree with everyone that the character of Mitchell is brilliantly written and played. There’s none of the cocky test pilot nonsense you see in some movies: alone in his crippled plane, Mitchell knows he is likely to die and he shows it. He holds himself together, masters his fear and does what he thinks to be his duty. When the crisis is past, there’s no end-zone celebration: when he walks from the plane to his office, still wearing his suit and tie, he struggles with every step to hold himself together. After composing himself in the privacy of his office, he drives himself home, stopping to pick up the laundry, and greets his wife with the demeanor of a man who’s had a normal day at the shop.
The reaction of the other workers is appropriate. They know what Mitchell has been through and they show him quiet respect. One man touches him lightly on the shoulder as he walks by. There is real delicacy of feeling in these understated scenes.
His wife also is admirable. She fully understands the dangers of his job (note the scene where she describes to her mother the death rate among her husband’s colleagues) and does her best to support him. At the same time, her meltdown after his near-fatal flight is understandable (and convincingly acted). Her husband and children are her world, and she can’t understand why he took the avoidable risk of staying with his plane. His response is powerful and true, but so were her terror and frustration.
I knew men like this when I was in the Air Force. I still meet them today in civilian life. I try to be like this, myself. Our toxic culture drives this desire out of some men, but not all of them. We’re wired this way.
