VIDEO: the history of Disney's "The Black Hole"

blewis17

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
This is one of the most comprehensive and fascinating tellings of the making of The Black Hole. Lots of narration and still pics, but very well researched. Some fascinating info, like:

1) A young Sigourney Weaver was recommended for the role of Dr. Kate McCrae, which was ultimately filled by Yvette Mimieux (RIP)
2) When they passed on Sigourney, they hired bombshell Stephanie O'Neal for the role, but demanded that she cut her hair short for the part (screen test, it didn't flow right during the wirework for the 0-G scenes). She drank lots of wine to go through with the haircut (by her stylist Vidal Sassoon), and on her drive home she suffered a car crash and was hospitalized with her injuries. Her role was re-cast the next day.
3) They considered hundreds of film titles before settling on "The Black Hole"
4) Disney designed their own "Dykstra-flex" motion controlled camera rig after finding out the high expense of "renting" the setup from LucasFilm /ILM

 
Last edited:
I still don't like the Angel bit but the Demonic Maximillian in Hell was satisfying.. Although I always thought he was Kates father..?
its possible, good point - i sort of thought that but didnt really make the connection until you said it. and yes, the ending is so 70s Disney
 
This movie is a guilty pleasure of mine.

The problem with the female actors' hair in zero gravity never made any sense. They could have tied her hair up in bun or a hat or something. It's not that big of a deal. It would have been realistic for a character to do that. FFS, they only had zero-G for a few scenes. Did none of this ever occur to anybody at any point during the movie's pre-production & casting?
 
I still don't like the Angel bit but the Demonic Maximillian in Hell was satisfying.. Although I always thought he was Kates father..?
Kate's father was part of the crew, Reinhart said he had died.
^^
Weird indeed; when you think that most of the camera equipment is rented by the Studios in the first place...why build one from scratch?
It was the motion control system that was built, named A.C.E.S. for automatic camera effects system.
 
Yeah but Reinheart lied about just about everything..
And he does mention about loosing his best friend ?

There's a great documentary about The Blackhole and how it was stuck in development hell for years and also delves into the A. C. E. S and why they had to build it..
 
I just watched it for the first time since 1979.
The ending is still "....dafuq??", but I didn't find the film as bad as I feared. The model work is great, and the only FX issues were some of the blue/green/whatever compositing. I only saw wires on a robot once. John Barry, of course, rocks. Great Ellenshaw paintings.
VINCENT is a very cool design and written well. Roddy McDowell is great fun, he never gave a bad performance in his life.
The main astronauts are a bore, alas.
SUPER copout that the only reason Reinhardt's plan goes awry is because A. Harry Booth doesn't know how to fly a spaceship (Deus X Borgnine-a) and B. a random meteor storm comes at just the wrong time, straight from the Plot Convenience Zone.
 
^^
Weird indeed; when you think that most of the camera equipment is rented by the Studios in the first place...why build one from scratch?
Disney, at the time probably had very high hopes for the success of the film at the time and were likely hoping that it would either do well enough to warrant sequels, or at the least more big sci-fi features where the tech would come in handy down the line. It's also possible that they thought that if movie proved to be a hit they could rent out the camera system as a lower cost alternative to ILM's. and they could point to the success of the Blackhole of how good their system was, they could say that it was key to making the movie the hit that it (never) was.
 
While there is a "Making of The Black Hole" YouTube clip(s), most of it involves interviews from years later, mixed with film clips. Other than a HANDFUL of behind the scenes photos, the production of the film is almost completely bare when it comes to BTS photos and on-set videos / outtakes/ special effects shots / etc.

It is one of the most frustrating things, how poorly the making of this film was / is documented. I've gone nuts trying to find anything online from the production time, and either:

1) It exists but was never archived digitally and therefore is not available, or...
2) Disney just never documented it at the time.

The full scale Maximillian and Vincent props were on display at the Walt Disney World resort for some time in 1989/ early 1990s before being moved (Max was in the at the beginning of the Disney-MGM Studios walking tour, while Vincent was at the Planet Hollywood restaurant in Downtown Disney).

This Youtube video BRIEFLY shows the full scale Maximillian at center frame for 2 seconds"


My original thread:
Question: Is there any "behind the scenes" footage from Disney's The Black Hole?
 
Last edited:
Disney, at the time probably had very high hopes for the success of the film at the time and were likely hoping that it would either do well enough to warrant sequels, or at the least more big sci-fi features where the tech would come in handy down the line. It's also possible that they thought that if movie proved to be a hit they could rent out the camera system as a lower cost alternative to ILM's. and they could point to the success of the Blackhole of how good their system was, they could say that it was key to making the movie the hit that it (never) was.

Makes sense. Disney probably hoped TBH would spawn sequels (or at least similar spacey spinoffs) and that would justify the investment in the camera system.

Or maybe they underestimated the expense/difficulty when they made the decision to invent their own motion control rig. That strikes me as a possibility.

Either way it seems like an obvious mistake in hindsight. So what if TBH had been a hit? That would give them maybe 1 or 2 more movies out of it, probably with decreasing returns. I mean, what else could they do with that kind of camera rig? At the time it probably looked useful for spaceship/miniature shots and not much else. Today we have the hindsight of knowing what ILM did with MC tech in the 1980s-90s.



I've always had a soft spot for TBH but it's partially because of how it compares to Star Wars. It's been argued that when you look at TBH, you see the space adventure movie that everybody thought George Lucas was making. It's a notch too slow & dark & cerebral for the kids. But somehow it's also too corny & swashbuckling for the adults. It feels out-of-step with the late 1970s culture in general, like it should have been made in the mid-60s alongside 'Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea' and 'Star Trek'.

This is why Fox (and the other studios) were so reluctant to fund ANH. They saw the script & concept art but they couldn't picture what George had in mind. There was no precedent for combining such a fast/loose tone with Kubrick-level tech realism.
 
Last edited:

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top