Keywords

12.1 Introduction

The Yarnell Hill Fire in Arizona, United States of America (USA), began with a lightning strike on 28 June 2013 [3]. The fire consumed approximately 8300 acres of land, destroyed 114 structures, and forced the evacuation of thousands of people, before it was contained on July 10th [1]. Among the assets mobilized to contain the fire were the “Granite Mountain Hotshots,” a highly trained Interagency Hotshot Crew who are tasked with the most challenging, critical assignments involved in fighting wildland fires in the USA [17]. On 30 June 2013, the Yarnell Hill wildfire killed 19 of 20 firefighters from this crew: it is the highest death toll of US firefighters in a single event since 11 September 2001.

The feature film, Only the Brave (2017), follows the story of the Granite Mountain Hotshots over the course of several years as they fight wildfires in America’s southwestern states and ultimately to the fire that entrapped and killed them. The focus on workplace disaster is rare among major motion pictures but similar to recent movies such as Deepwater Horizon [4]. Only the Brave provides an opportunity to examine a re-telling of a story about a multi-casualty disaster in a high-risk context.

Representations of workplace disaster, which can be shared in many different forms—such as news articles, documentaries, feature films, and government reports—can teach us about how events occur and how to prevent them [4, 5, 7]. Film can visually communicate the story of workplace disaster, message how it should be seen, and provide insights into its causes. Importantly, when we look at any visualization of health and safety we also need to bear in mind that while these are ways of seeing “their downside is that they are ways of not seeing” [11], p. 80. Story compositions, and the “narrative choices” that go into them, influence what audience members will see and how they will understand the causes of workplace disaster [13]. Films are organized to form a particular narrative that includes (and excludes) information and emphasizes some factors while deprioritizing others. As such, part of examining film as visualizations of safety is to identify what is and what is not present on the screen.

12.2 Communicating Safety in Feature Film

There is a well-developed literature on the role that films play in shaping culture and understandings of the world. It points to film’s power to change views, reinforce perspectives, educate, and/or to be used as a consciousness-raising mechanism [16]. Feature films have distinct characteristics such as large budgets and casts of celebrity actors. They appeal to emotions and are visually exciting. Hollywood films are intended to earn a large return on investment and therefore are designed to entertain the largest audiences possible. They often do this by creating dramatic content and using well-worn conventions [10, 16]. A cinematic story with selfless heroes performing extraordinary acts, overmatched by forces seemingly beyond control, and against a backdrop of spectacular special effects, is a successful and perennially used template. Some of these same characteristics privilege seeing workplace disasters in one way rather than another such that more micro-level factors are emphasized.

Only the Brave displays a degree of what we refer to as perspectival alignment between (a) individualistic safety perspectives (e.g., human error, “person approach” [14]) that focus on the safe or unsafe actions (or inactions) of individuals in a workplace that create the conditions that cause injury or disaster [8], and (b) the content and form of Hollywood feature film (e.g., well-worn tropes, closed story arcs, 90–120 min length). Renditions of disaster stories that can be presented in an exciting, non-complex way (i.e., limited number of actors, short span of history, clear heroes and villains), with clear cause-and-effect relationships and in approximately two hours, fit extremely well with film industry needs. American film tends to focus on individuals (or small groups) and individualistic attempts to prevent or mitigate a disaster [4]. These films concentrate on the immediate causes of disaster such as ignored safety warnings, failure to follow safety protocols and the agency of the heroic characters, while deemphasizing or excluding the larger context and its influence. In doing so, they exclude questions such as “why were safety protocols not followed?” and “what conditions preceded violating safety protocols?” To be sure, immediate causes are integral parts of the story. However, left out, or at least minimized, are the structural- and organizational-level factors that are critical explanatory factors for the disaster (e.g., [8, 9]) whose inclusion would give viewers a more fulsome visualization of the causes of workplace disaster.

12.3 Wildland Firefighting Crews

Interagency Hotshot Crews (IHCs) or “hotshots” are groups consisting of 20 persons who are tasked with directly attacking a wildland fire. They receive a great deal of training; often hike long distances to reach fires (or are occasionally helicoptered to the fire), and fight them by building firelines around a fire that slow or stop its advance by starving it of fuel. For hotshots, building fireline involves physically removing fuel (e.g., trees, shrubs, grass) down to the mineral soil from the fire’s path in a 1–1.5 m line around the fire. To remove combustible materials, hand tools such as Pulaskis, shovels, and chain saws are used. Hotshots also use “back burning,” the practice of depriving a wildfire of fuel by burning sections of forest between a fireline and the advancing fire. In a combined effort to stop a fire, hotshots often work with other firefighters such as engine crews (fire trucks) and aerial suppression crews (e.g., planes and helicopters). All of these techniques and tools are used in the film.

12.4 Analysis

12.4.1 A High-Competence Crew

Only the Brave makes a very persuasive case that the Granite Mountain Hot Shots were a highly competent crew in a high-risk context (see [2] regarding wildland firefighting competence). We identify four distinct, but non-exclusive, competencies—cognitive, leadership, technological, and physical—that contribute to protecting the crew’s health and safety which are portrayed in the film. The presence of each of these competencies support the narrative that the crew had the knowledge, skills, and attitudes essential to effectively and safely fight fire.

Cognitive competency refers to the formal and informal knowledge that firefighters acquire and practice about fire behaviour such as how it is affected by fuel types, weather and terrain, and how to suppress it. This enables crews to assess fire dangers, develop attack strategies, coordinate resources, and devise escape plans. The Granite Mountain Hotshots are not incautious or reckless. Multiple examples are shown in the film in which the crew receives a fire call and they quickly, but systematically, assess the size and behaviour of a fire, strategize an attack, and plan an escape route. They assess the conditions by communicating with incident command elements, other crews, reading topographical maps, closely monitoring the weather, and “reading the fire”, looking at fuel types, prevailing winds, and how the fire is acting. When their plan is in place, the firefighters deploy to their various positions to construct fire line and protect themselves.

The crew’s adeptness at “reading the fire”, is on display in multiple scenes. Early in the film, the crew offers advice to another group of hotshots suggesting they control a fire in a particular way. This suggestion is rejected by the hotshot crew. In a scene that highlights the superintendent’s knowledge of fire behaviour, we see the neighbourhood that the crew was trying to save engulfed in flames and the Captain points out, “They should’ve listened [to us], supe [superintendent Marsh]. Could’ve saved a lot of people’s homes.” This is on display again when the crew unconventionally but successfully contains part of an intensifying fire in steep terrain and once more in dramatic fashion when their well-constructed fireline and backburn halts the advance of a raging fire.

Leadership competency refers to the decision-making, problem-solving, and directional style of individuals in a group. Superintendent Marsh is portrayed as a firm but caring leader: he is willing to discipline the crew if they are not meeting the high standards he has set but nurturing as he provides lessons about fire behaviour and technical skills. In demanding, stressful situations he is decisive and the crew are respectful of him. While he is the clear leader, he asks for feedback from his crew.

Visuals of technological competency permeate the film. This competency refers to the use of physical technologies such as the measurement instruments and fire suppression tools. Throughout the film, hotshots skillfully use the tools and technologies including the use of hand tools such as axes and shovels, power tools such as chainsaws, and drip torches. We also see examples of firefighters being taught how to properly use the tools of their trade. For instance, the superintendent coaches a rookie firefighter, in the proper use of a drip torch as they light a “backburn” to eliminate vegetation, depriving the fire of fuel.

The strength and endurance that are essential for wildland firefighting, the physical competency of hotshots, is portrayed throughout Only the Brave. The crew intensely trains multiple times in the film, running for several kilometres and practicing digging line. The crew’s physical abilities are also depicted throughout the film in scenes where they are hiking long distances with their equipment through steep, difficult-to-navigate terrain, digging line in hot, smoky conditions.

12.4.2 Hazard Identification

Hazards abound for wildland firefighters and include falling trees, uneven and steep terrain, the tools and equipment of fire control and suppression, and of course, fire itself. Wildfire is the obvious antagonist and the most threatening hazard of the film and is presented in visually stunning ways. When the fire is moving slowly, we see the crew work amidst the flames and smoke trying to control the fire’s advance. In numerous breathtaking scenes we see towering walls of flame approach the crew that works unperturbed by its advance, toiling in smoke, embers, and firebrands. Enhancing the differences in power between the fire and crew, are wide angle camera shots that are used to place the firefighters in panoramic scenes working ahead of an encroaching blaze. These shots accentuate the smallness of the firefighters in a vast terrain: a small number of individuals armed only with rudimentary hand tools grossly outmatched against the huge wildfire.

Importantly, while there is omnipresent danger from fire throughout the film, it is simultaneously recognized as a force that can be safely controlled through the crew’s expert capabilities and the proper prevention practices for safely fighting wildland fire.

12.4.3 Hazard Prevention

We see the firefighters relying primarily on two protections in the film. First, we see them using personal protective equipment (PPE) such as goggles, helmets, clothing, and footwear and we see them practicing the deployment of vital fire shelters, shielding that will protect from radiant heat but not direct flame should they be overrun by fire. The other type of protection that predominates in the film are administrative controls: rules, guidelines, and training about how to effectively and safely fight fire. In several scenes, we see the firefighters rely on their training and rules to decrease their exposure to hazards. For example, we see the crew enact proper procedure as they post lookouts, check weather readings, and watch for spot fires that have crossed their fireline. Among the procedures, explicitly referred to are the “10 Standard Firefighting Orders and 18 Situations that Shout Watch Out.” These are the guidelines issued by the US Forestry Service and have been relied on for 40 years to protect firefighters (see [2]). The import of these is clearly demonstrated in a tension-filled scene during a training exercise when a firefighter forgets one of the “10 and 18” and the superintendent—inches from the rookie firefighter’s face—growls, “firefighters died for us so we could learn all these Watch Outs”! The superintendent then forces the whole crew to do push ups as collective punishment for not remembering the safety rules.

12.4.4 Communication

The nature of wildland firefighting requires well-coordinated movement and communication between and within groups involved in fire suppression activities. Only the Brave displays how communication facilitates safe and effective fire management. The film depicts coordinated fire suppression activities between ground and aerial fire crews. Amidst plumes of dark, heavy smoke, and the rhythmic thumping of helicopter blades, the film opens with a scene that portrays strong coordination between air and ground units as a helicopter flies over the crew who directs the pilot precisely where to drop water on a fire. In several scenes, we see senior incident command elements, poring over topographical maps, planning fire suppression activities and passing direction on to subordinates. On the ground, communication among the Hotshots, whether it be through shouts, hand gestures, over radios, is illustrated as concise, practiced, and unerring even against the crackling of the fire, screaming of chainsaws, and the thudding and scratching of digging tools impacting earth.

As the film progresses, there are depictions of errors and the limits of technology that disrupt communication exposing crew members to hazards. While coordination among crew members remains strong, there are breakdowns in information exchange between the ground and air attack crews. During the “Dragon Fire” a large, four-engine air tanker drops its multi-tonne load of water on an incorrect target and a massive wall of water narrowly misses the crew. During the Yarnell Hill Fire scenes, a tanker mistakenly drops its water on the Hotshot’s backburn, extinguishing it. Hampered by both smoke and terrain, the ground and air crews are unable to communicate with the Granite Mountain Hotshots before they are overtaken by the wind-driven, fast-moving wildfire [6].

12.4.5 Entrapment

Prior to their entrapment the Granite Mountain Hotshots were in a safe position—an area already burnt by the fire—had assessed the situation, considered it safe to move, and were moving in an organized way to a pre-planned safety zone. We cannot be “in the heads” of the crew so their true motivation for moving is unclear. Their route took them from atop a ridge where they could watch the fire into a box canyon where a ridge obstructed their view of the fire. At the same time, as the fire was approaching his position, the crew’s look out relocated and he was unable to see and report on the fire. Both of these events restricted the crew’s ability to adapt to the fire’s behaviour. As the crew hiked to their new location, the fire, swept along by wind gusts and tinder-dry fuel intercepted them. The weather conditions were dynamic, the winds shifted direction and increased and fire intensified. When it became apparent their route was cut off by fire, the crew, following their training, cleared a deployment site and readied their fire shelters for the burnover. Simultaneously we see the communication breakdowns between ground and aerial crews, and desperate, unsuccessful attempts to reach them. Confined in the canyon, unable to be helped by ground or aerial firefighting units, the crew's position was overtaken by fire, killing the 19 hotshots. 

12.5 Discussion

Only the Brave chronicles the work of a hotshot crew in a high-risk context. It presents the hazards they faced, the controls they used to prevent harm, and the crew’s tragic deaths. Films such as Only the Brave can provide entertainment and increase people’s awareness of disasters and their causes. In so doing, they render workplace disasters visible. Completely dismissing these films as only having entertainment value is not a good direction if we are interested in raising awareness of, and enhancing knowledge about, workplace disasters. However, Only the Brave tells a particular story. It focuses on individuals’ behaviours and largely follows typical templates of Hollywood feature film. As such, audiences are presented with a rendering of the story that focuses heavily on the crew’s actions and minimizes, and in some cases excludes, the role of structural and organizational factors.

Only the Brave uses a standard cinematic story template that focuses on a single group of characters at the micro-level of workplace disaster. We are shown the crew’s competence, cohesiveness, expertise in employing firefighting practices, and their adherence to the Standard Firefighting Orders. The film tightly “zooms in” to present the immediate causes of the disaster: the crew’s decision-making, the changing weather, in particular the wind, and the fire. This parsimonious set of factors provides a close look at the circumstances leading up to the entrapment but in doing so leaves out the structural, cultural, and organizational factors. These are critical factors to explore in any disaster story (e.g., [9]). There is much we do not see antecedent to entrapment, the canyon, and the Yarnell Hill Fire itself.

“Zooming out” and exploring distal causes or in the words of Reason [14], “latent conditions,” is more challenging as they are not considered in the film. The exclusion of the distal causes is, in Rae's [13] words a “narrative choice”, which is partly driven by the film industry’s need for easy-to-understand, exciting, and closed-ended cinematic stories. As Quinlan [12] states, “while unsafe practices in workplaces cannot be ignored, focusing on them in isolation from the social structures and interests that encourage them is misleading and ineffectual” (p. 169). Unfortunately, the film does not present viewers with the latent conditions that influenced the disaster such as organizational factors and the role of these are left unexplored. Several critical factors contributed to the disaster [18] but are omitted from the film. Questions about whether the crew should have been fighting the fire or whether incident command should have deployed them where they were in light of the extreme fire conditions—high winds, drought conditions, and an abundance of fuel—are not problematized. Indeed, the area that the hotshots were fighting fire was in drought conditions and had not burned in 47 years, creating conditions for extreme fire intensity known to be difficult, if not impossible to control. A larger, though related question concerns the efficacy of trying to protect structures in the urban-wildland interface when these are deemed “indefensible” [18]. Any discussion about whether “complexity of the operation exceeded the organizational capacity of the firefighting system mobilized to respond to the fire”, including whether there were sufficient firefighting resources and inclusion of all relevant stakeholders in decision-making ([6], pp. 43–44) and the part these played in the disaster is also left out. The influence of the US Forestry Service’s practice of “aggressively fighting all wildfires” and relative risks to firefighters’ safety is also not represented [15]. Dixon and Gawley [4] found a similar lack of attention to the broader context in the film Deepwater Horizon.

These portrayals have implications for the use of films for understanding workplace disaster. Only the Brave can reproduce the notion that despite precautions, safety systems will fail, and there is nothing that can be done by workers or managers. Such a notion has the potential to forestall consideration of the influence of latent conditions not presented in the film (e.g., managerial decision-making). Another notion that is reproduced in Only the Brave is the “person approach” [14]: the cause of the disaster was the workers’ unsafe decision-making. Looking only at the film one could be forgiven for thinking the hotshots, in haste or hubris wrongly and unsafely decided to reposition. Settling on this explanation places sole responsibility on workers, negating the macro factors and latent conditions that influence individuals in the local context. Without considering the influence of cultural and organizational factors we are left, unfortunately, with blaming the “incompetent dead” [2].

12.6 Conclusion

The spectacular nature of films, such as Only the Brave, draws in viewers and highlights the hazards to which workers are exposed, raising awareness and enhancing understanding about workplace disasters. Importantly, while stories about disaster are screened, through filmmakers’ narrative choices particular parts of the story are screened out, ultimately hindering our understanding of the disaster. The film industry’s need for spectacular stories influences how disasters are covered and how organizational factors, for example, contribute to the disaster are minimized or excluded. This can influence peoples’ understandings of workplace injury and disaster. Only the Brave’s focus on the firefighters’ abilities and actions in the lead up to the entrapment, without attention to factors such as firefighting doctrine and managerial decisions and how these intersect with natural environmental conditions, serve to reproduce a person approach narrative without raising questions about the role of socio-political and organizational factors. The educational value of these films can increase with greater integration of individual and structural elements, providing a more comprehensive picture of workplace disaster.