MovieChat Forums > Day the World Ended Discussion > A Decent Enough Story

A Decent Enough Story

posted 18 years ago by gary_overman
36 replies | jump to latest

********THIS THREAD HAS POSSIBLE SPOILERS***********

I bought this film recently in the two-feature DVD from Lions' Gate (the other movie was She Creature, a film too silly to finish) and I really enjoyed it. I enjoy post-apocalyptic stories in general and this was one of the better films of this genre to come from the 1950's.
While I take exception to some of the 'science' in the film, (the effects of exposure to massive doses of high-energy radiation would not produce the fantastic results seen in the film; they would be fatal) it does present a more realistic scenario over-all than the excellent film On The Beach. After a few weeks of hunkering down, it would be safe to go outside for limited periods, and the longer the time after the initial fusion weapon's detonation, the safer the outside exposure would be. In this, at least, this film is fairly realistic, while OTB is simply not.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

Me me me me! Hi on yet another board, gary. I don't know if I can quite buy into the notion of DTWE as more "realistic" than ON THE BEACH (even in the very narrow sense of how devastating the effects of a nuclear war would be...per our OTB thread). Neither gets overly high marks in that department, for different reasons. However, as a story -- provided you're willing to swallow A LOT uncritically! -- DTWE is pretty enjoyable, with a decent cast and some fun dynamics between the characters. Although it was always obvious that the mysterious mutant lurking out in the hills was what's-her-name's fiancee. Also, what luck all these survivors suddenly appearing more or less simultaneously at the one radiation-proof spot in the entire country! Of course, radiation poisoning, bullets and a convenient creature all combine to leave the two lovers the sole survivors as they go out to find the "other voices" Paul Birch so thoughtfully told them were out there just before he expired...without troubling to give them a clue as to WHERE they were!

Did you ever see Corman's TEENAGE CAVEMAN? Title aside, and the fact that it reportedly was filmed in two days, it's an interesting tale (I don't want to say more until/unless you've seen it), which also incorporates a few shots from both DAY THE WORLD ENDED and SHE-CREATURE. Lion's Gate has that on a two-film DVD with I believe THE VIKING WOMEN. Unfortunately, though the film was shot widescreen, it's reproduced only in pan & scan format. Starring Robert Vaughn, a year before he got his Oscar nomination for THE YOUNG PHILADELPHIANS!

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

In essence, what I meant by a more realistic scenario than OTB was that there would be survivors. In OTB, life itself would be extinguished and I can't think of any reputable scientists who said that it would. And once again, I agree that a nuclear exchange between the US and USSR would have been a disaster on an unprecedented scale. Every rational person agrees with that.
What I disagreed with OTB on was, like I said before, the notion that there would be NO survivors, and I bet that more would survive than you or many other people seem to think. Hopefully we will never have to find out.
Where I thought that DTWE was-for lack of a better term--screwy, was the effects that the exposure to massive doses of radioactivity would have on the survivors. They would not become horrible mutants as the film depicts; they would simply die outright.
Another thing that I just thought of was that the location that Jim Morrison chose would have no protection whatever from radiation, in spite of it being surrounded by deposits of lead ore. Do you know why?
I did enjoy seeing Mike Conners being the bad guy for a change, and I thought that Morrison was a bit too heavy-handed at first, but then, he did not know who he was dealing with, so this is understandable.
Here is a little trivia question for you. What advantage did the people in the 1950's have over people of today in dealing with the effects of an atomic or nuclear blast? IOW, what advance in technology makes us more vulnerable than we were in the 1950's?
I'll let you ponder that.

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

It's been a while since I've watched the film so I'd have to go back to see if I can pick up a clue as to why the house's location wouldn't have protected them. I vaguely recall some talk about the winds being right, but I doubt that's what you're getting at. Give me a few days to ponder that one. (BTW, the lead-lined mountains were a weak enough rationale anyway.)

Ditto your trivia question -- aside from the "advances" (if one chooses to use the word) in nuclear technology that have produced more numerous, more lethal weapons (obviously there wasn't anywhere near the potential nuclear destructiveness of the available arsenals 50 years ago compared to now -- another reason OTB was unrealistic, even set in the 60s as it was). I've gotten to know that some of your expertise lies in such things as weaponry so undoubtedly you're far more informed and conversant than I am on such matters. When I come back on this board I'll see if I've been able to come up with anything but I'm looking forward to finding out the answer from you.

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

Please let me help you with the trivia question: it has nothing to with increases in the weapons' destructive power.

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

No, that much I figured. But I'm intrigued by the question. I'll be back, probably without an answer, in a day or two. Meanwhile, other conversations welcome.

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

No, I haven't seen Caveman or the other film. They will go on my 'to get' list. From what I gather, it (TC) is a sort of WWE told from the mutants point of view. Is this a fair assessment?

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

Welllll, yes and no. There are definitely a few broad similarities, but the cavemen aren't mutants. I never actually thought of likening TC to WWE, kind of an interesting notion...maybe a WWE in reverse, at least in some ways. Is this confusing enough? I don't want to give the plot away. But get it and see what you think. Just remember it's really, really, REALLY cheap! I think the DVD costs more today than the film did in '58.

Haven't had the chance to re-view DTWE yet...but doubt as I said I'll be able to catch your trivia questions. But I'll get back (to throw in the towel) over the weekend sometime.

[–] paul-fisher-ctr 18 years ago

I believe MST3K did up TC.. One very powerful scene I remember from DTWC was shot by the lake. It was shot as an 'open sight' rifleman's view from behind the M-1 Garrand --target-- the lead mutant--- rifleman-- the leading man... Though obviously struck by the rounds the mutant continues to advance from --50--40--30--20--10 yards.........

[–] paul-fisher-ctr 18 years ago

I don't know why anyone would call DTWE unrealistic. Every time you see a mutant he always has a pretty girl in his arms -- and aren't all the larger ones bullet-resistant?? Today they hide in plain sight -- just look at the NFL and NBA........

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

Good thinking.

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

Mr. Fisher, you definitely have a point.

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

<The location that Jim Morrison chose would have no protection whatever from radiation, in spite of it being surrounded by deposits of lead ore. Do you know why?>

Radioactivity from a nuclear blast would mostly be in the form of fallout, which would be carried by the winds, and could easily be deposited in the location. It would simply have come from above, thus the lead ore surrounding Morrison's carefully chosen place would have been no protection whatever from fallout.
A shelter constructed along Civil Defense guidelines could have offered adequate protection from fallout. Morrison's shelter was just his house. The winds that he was counting on to carry the fallout away would have also brought it in.

<Here is a little trivia question for you. What advantage did the people in the 1950's have over people of today in dealing with the effects of an atomic or nuclear blast? IOW, what advance in technology makes us more vulnerable than we were in the 1950's?>

I'll save the answer to this one in case you come up with something within the next day or so.

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

Well, I was coming over here from BILLY MITCHELL to throw in the towel because things got so hectic around here the past few days I haven't been able to re-view DTWE. I hadn't seen the above re-post of the two puzzlers you posited. But if I recall I did say I remembered something about the winds that might be the answer, although I didn't think that's what you were driving at. So I'll give myself a quarter-point for that one!

But the second tech question -- you've stumped me. I suspect when you tell me I'll go, Oh, yeah, obviously -- the trickiest answers are the ones right in front of your face! This question was actually the last thing I was thinking of before falling asleep the other night -- and it wasn't helpful in that endeavor, either! But I must admit I'm dying of curiosity, which is decidedly preferable to dying of radiation poisoning or mutant bites. Okay, kid, ya got me -- and I just KNOW I'll be embarrassed that I was so dense I couldn't get it, not even a stray notion.

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

No reason to be embarrassed, my friend; a lot of people don't know this stuff. Anyway, the answer is anything with solid state or integrated circuitry (IC) would very likely be subject to the effects of EMP (Electro Magnetic Pulse). When a fission or fusion device is detonated, it gives off massive amounts of high-frequency radio energy, and these can overwhelm devices such as computers, solid state or transistorized radio receivers, and what I would strongly suspect will be the most distressing to Americans, their TV sets, and even their automobiles. Devices such as our precious cell phones would be dead in the water, long range communications would be severely disrupted, as well as our economy. Civilian air traffic would cease. The higher the detonation, the wider the area of disruption will be.
About the only counter to this on IC equipment would be a device known as the Faraday box. Vacuum tube devices would not be as badly affected. But, how many of them do we have nowadays? If I had to venture a guess, I would say 'not many'.
So, we can see that we have become just a little too dependent on IC and solid state stuff. At least we are when this type of scenario is taken in to account. Of course their convenience for now far outweighs the potential for disruption posed by airbursting a device over a particular area.
And the hell of it is, that all of this misery could be caused with just a few nuclear devices.
That is a lot of bang for the buck, is it not?

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

Well, I'm a little embarrassed; I know the effect you're speaking of, but it never crossed my mind -- I was trying to concentrate on something pertaining directy to weaponry rather than ancillary technological effects. Yes, quite right: that's a loss that would most keenly distress most Americans -- most people, I think. And that would prove so disruptive and devastating to one's defenses. The more we've over-teched our society, the more vulnerable we are, and you're dead on in saying we no longer even have to have a widespread nuclear exchange to break down the threads of society, or our ability to recover from an attack, as would have been required in the 50s. I suppose that almost constitutes progress, of a sort.

I also suppose this was why Paul Birch's vacuum-tubed-powered radio worked despite the attendant nuclear clouds, fallout, poisoned rain, ex-future-son-in-law-turned-mutant, and so on. Anyway, good question!

[–] gary_overman 18 years ago

Thank you once more for the kind words, Hobnob. If it is any comfort to you, a Faraday box is simple to make. Put the device inside of a container made of an insulator, and surround it with a conductor. Voila! Instant faraday box. Now your transistor radio can survive EMP! Never mind that there probably won't be any broadcasts for quite a while, due to the stations being knocked off the air, but your radio will have made it. Feel better?

[–] hobnob53 18 years ago

Back in 1982 or so, TV Guide had a weekly column called "TV Q&A", where people wrote in with various, usually technical, questions. One guy wrote the following (quoting fairly closely from memory):

"I've read that the electromagnetic impulses from exploding nuclear bombs can erase the images from my videotapes. Is this true? And would storing them in a lead-lined container help?"

The response: "To answer your first question, yes. To answer your second, I don't know, but you'd better crawl in with them."

I guess this is what they mean by "prioritizing".

(Gary, check your typo -- voila! Unless the only thing I'd get on my Faraday receiver is the sweet sound of a final viola solo somewhere!)

[–] JPfanatic93 17 years ago

This is defintely one of Roger Corman's better movies of the fifties. I'm glad I got him to sign my DVD copy, nice old guy that he was.

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

"Nice old guy that he was"? I guess you're right -- he turns 82 this year -- but please -- don't rub it in! A lot of us grew up watching Roger's stuff -- if not when it came out, then ten years later on TV. Very classy guy. Oh, and don't say "was" -- "is" is the right word. Roger is still very much with us, I'm happy to say. Don't know what we'd have done without him.

[–] JPfanatic93 17 years ago

True, since he's still working in the industry, 'was' is the wrong term here. But the DVD signing happened in the past and my sentence used a past tense form already.

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

Well, RC was and is a nice guy and unfortunately now, incidentally, old. Anyway, good you have his autograph on this DVD.

[–] JPfanatic93 17 years ago

And on Teenage Caveman and Viking Women and the Sea Serpent as well! :)

Still, it couldn't topple Ray Harryhausen signing my copies of The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms and 7th Voyage of Sinbad. A golden moment for me that was.

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

I'll bet! If you ever see Mr. H again, tell him he should never have helped colorize his three b&w Columbia films of the 50s! But you got his signature on two of his very best.

I guess we should get back to DAY THE WORLD ENDED...definitely not a Ray Harryhausen movie. But we love Roger C. just as much. And Francis Ford Coppola didn't cast Ray Harryhausen as a US Senator in GODFATHER II!

[–] gary_overman 17 years ago

<I'll bet! If you ever see Mr. H again, tell him he should never have helped colorize his three b&w Columbia films of the 50s! But you got his signature on two of his very best.>

Dang!! Sometimes, it's too bad that I'm way out here in the sticks!!
I'm just about to get moved down to Oklahoma. How are things going for you, my friend?

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

Yes, those of us on the coasts live such marvelously sophisticated lives.

Plenty of valleys to protect us from radioactive fiances turned horned monsters who melt in the rain, however. Which happens a lot.

Hi, Gary! -- I've been wondering where you were, and how. Thought you'd have moved down to OK by now, but it sounds like it'll be soon. How long will that take, and when do you think you'll be back on line? I've missed our discussions.

Did you hear the guy who played the original Creature from the Black Lagoon died Feb. 21? He only played him on land; they had a different guy to do the swimming; and he didn't play Gil in either of the sequels. A better costume than Lori Nelson's fiance's, I thought -- at least the head didn't look like it was about to fall off!

Try to post before you move and let me know how long you think you may be off-line. Though how moving your home and life from one state to another could possibly be more urgent than posting on IMDb mystifies me!

Good luck with the move, good friend.

hob

[–] gary_overman 17 years ago

Hi Hob!!

I'm actually in Okie-land right now, and the movers will come out Tuesday and do the heavy stuff. I've been moving a lot of small stuff down over the space of several weeks, including (with the help of a freind, my PC) and the local telephone company helped me set my Dell computer back up and they got me back on-line. I was offline for about a month or so, but just got back.
I'm looking forward to not having to pack and unpack stuff!
The house is old. It was built in 1935, and is one of the nicer houses in town. Speaking of which, the population of this town is now 13. Anyway, back to topic; because the house is so old, the wiring is--to put it mildly--antiquated, and I had to get a licensed electrician to rewire some of it, installing a proper ground, so I could hook my PC back up. Ordinarily, that would not have been a problem, but the area just had a major ice storm in January that knocked the power lines down throughout a good portion of both this state, and Kansas. That meant noboidy was available to do the rewiring for a long time. So, I was pretty much stuck with my thumb up my----well, you get the picture.
Best thing for me is that now I am in my own house for the very first time, and I am also just about half a mile away from my farm, so now I can go there whenever I want. Heck, I can even ride my bicycle to my place, and save the gasoline. I need the exercise anyway. I want to live as long as I can so Boeing will have to pay me their pension!! Plus, while there is no financial pressure to sell my house in Kansas, they say that houses are selling well in the town that I just came from. All that I have to do is get it ready and put it on the market. I consider myself very lucky in that department.
It was good to hear from you again, my friend. Let's do continue our discussions; I enjoy them as well. Ciao.

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

Hey, with a population of 13, you're fortunate you could get an electrician there as quickly as you did -- ice or no ice!

Hope you're not too far off the beaten path, anyway. I remembered your farm and had assumed that's where you were moving, but it sounds as if you're basically next door. Just please make sure your tornado shelter is solid and accessible! I lived in MO for a couple of years and while I have no problem with hurricanes (I've been through 15 or 20 of those), twisters scared the hell out of me. Probably also a good place to store all DVDs for safekeeping.

And I hope you're also getting good and plentiful cable or satellite reception!

Say, Gary, as a former Boeing employee, and now relocating to a rural area in OK, and since this IS the board for "Day the World Ended", I have to ask...have you heard something the rest of us should know???

Best of luck in your new home, and don't be in too much of a hurry to sell off the KS place just yet. See how things work out for a while, just in case. It's always nice to have someplace to go back to, if necessary.

Saw you posted on WWE too, and am now headed there.

hob

[–] gary_overman 17 years ago

<Hope you're not too far off the beaten path, anyway. I remembered your farm and had assumed that's where you were moving, but it sounds as if you're basically next door. Just please make sure your tornado shelter is solid and accessible! I lived in MO for a couple of years and while I have no problem with hurricanes (I've been through 15 or 20 of those), twisters scared the hell out of me. Probably also a good place to store all DVDs for safekeeping.

And I hope you're also getting good and plentiful cable or satellite reception!

Say, Gary, as a former Boeing employee, and now relocating to a rural area in OK, and since this IS the board for "Day the World Ended", I have to ask...have you heard something the rest of us should know???>

Actually, I'm about equidistant from two towns of fair size, neither of which is big enough to support a WalMart, so I'll have to go a bit further to shop with Sam Walton's creation. I believe the nearest one is about 30 miles away. (And the nearest fast-food joint is as well, so that should help my waistline.) I don't recall mentioning the tornado shelter in the house. Did I? Anyway, it has one attached to the house, and a substantial one at that. One thing I hope that this town gets is a good community shelter and a tornado siren. Maybe if I become mayor, I could seek a state or federal grant for these things.

Unfortunatley there is no such thing as cable in this county, as the population is way too small to support it. That leaves either antennae or satellite. Direct TV seems to be fairly popular out here, so I'll give it a try. I can get by roughing it for a while, but pretty soon, I'm going to start missing A&E, FoxNews, and the History Channel. At least I have my DVD's to keep me company for a while!!

And, no; I haven't heard anything, but I do think that were something to occur, God forbid, that I would be much better off out here in the sticks than I would be in a big city. Admittedly, part of the appeal of this place is the fact that it is fairly isolated, and as a person who is trying to prepare for a lot of different scenarios, that is an advantage. I try to not be paranoid about things, but merely to be aware. I hope that I have not just branded myself as a nutcase to you, but I don't think that I did. There are things like inclement weather, etc., to think of as well as the more dramatic stuff. In that vein, the town to my north had a bunch of power poles to the east of that town blown down by extreme winds Sunday night, so those things do happen out here more often than most people think. There are no mountains here to break up the winds, so they are sometimes pretty fierce.

The movers came down yesterday and did their thing, so now I have a bed and some furniture, and the place is starting to look civilized. There are a few more things that I have to get from Kansas, but the basics are here, and I have a lot of the creature comforts that I need.

With that I'll close. You take care, my friend.

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

No, you didn't mention a tornado shelter, but I presumed...I mean, I have seen THE WIZARD OF OZ, so I'm pretty well informed on this kind of thing.

I have DIRECTV at my summer house and it's very good, so I'd think you should be able to get all the channels you mentioned, and others, without any problem.

No, I think you'd be better off out there than I would be north (or east) of NYC. Although, if something catastrophic were to happen, don't fall prey to the paranoia of isolation! Have you seen PANIC IN YEAR ZERO? Akin to DAY THE WORLD ENDED, but with more shotguns.

Also, if a meteor hit the Atlantic, I'd be gone, while you, you lucky guy, would have beachfront property. (Speaking of which, I can't remember which late night comic it was -- I think Bill Maher -- but anyway, whoever it was said the other week that it was amazing to think that Barack Obama could become President, since before this the only time any Americans accepted the idea of a black man as President was when a comet was about to hit the Statue of Liberty!) But if ever I desert this place it'll be, aptly, for the desert, back to AZ where I've also lived. Crowded now compared to 30-40 years ago, but I like the barren plains and mountains of the southwest.

But glad to hear you're settling in. Watch the gas consumption on your trips to civilization's outposts (the various Marts and food joints). You never know when a few Molotovs might come in handy. Now I'm thinking too much of IT CONQUERED THE WORLD!

Good luck in the new house and I'll be back at you soon, I hope.

hob

[–] gary_overman 17 years ago

<No, you didn't mention a tornado shelter, but I presumed...I mean, I have seen THE WIZARD OF OZ, so I'm pretty well informed on this kind of thing.>

Yeah, right.

< Have you seen PANIC IN YEAR ZERO?>

PIYZ is one of my favorite films. I think that it is fairly realistic, too.

<But glad to hear you're settling in. Watch the gas consumption on your trips to civilization's outposts (the various Marts and food joints). You never know when a few Molotovs might come in handy. Now I'm thinking too much of IT CONQUERED THE WORLD!>

I've heard of that film, but I haven't seen it. Is it any good?

[–] hobnob53 17 years ago

ICTW (1956) is definitely a good movie -- actually, it really is pretty good, another Roger Corman epic, but pretty well scripted and kind of scary, despite the fact that the titular It is basically a giant fanged cucumber from Venus that glides along a cave floor on crab legs and sports a perpetual, evil grin. It uses a scientist to land on Earth, where it promptly cuts off all power and communications, then sends out bat-like creatures to bite the local bigwigs, turning them into mind-controlled slaves who proceed to take over the world for It. Good cast including Peter Graves, Beverly Garland and Lee Van Cleef, and with some surprisingly downbeat plot twists. Unfortunately it's not readily available on DVD -- I was hoping the same guys that put out DTWE and these other double features would release that sometime as well, but so far, no dice. I think it is available, but from marginal outfits. If I ever see it coming up I'll issue the usual alert. It was remade (!) a decade later as ZONTAR, THE THING FROM VENUS, with John Agar: another dreadful Texas-made rip-off from schlockmeister Larry Buchanan...which IS on DVD. Go figure.

By the way, I was in Manhattan (NYC, not KS -- hometown of the Docking clan) the other night and went into this small memorabilia shop and there, on the wall (but not for sale) was a French movie poster for DAY THE WORLD ENDED -- only its title in French is LE FIN DU MONDE -- The End of the World. There was actually a 1930 French film by that title, about a comet headed toward Earth, which scientists knew would destroy the planet but could of course do nothing about; it showed how people around the world reacted as their extinction, and the Earth's, loomed. No happy ending. A very odd, and surprisingly foresighted, story. Anyway, I recognized the poster's artwork right off, with the former fiance, current monster, drooling over his ex-soon-to-be-Mrs. while in the background an atom blast was going off above a small, silhouetted city, and various of the other characters from the film looked skyward in anger, fear, lust, boredom, whatever. "Avec", as the poster said, "Touch Connors." Touche.

[–] snagletooth 8 years ago

After a few weeks of hunkering down, it would be safe to go outside for limited periods, and the longer the time after the initial fusion weapon's detonation, the safer the outside exposure would be. In this, at least, this film is fairly realistic, while OTB is simply not.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Depends on whether or not they design the bombs to be particularly dirty, IE. "Cobalt" bombs (probably not even air-dromped or missile-launched bombs, but devices exploded in statically placed positions):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt_bomb

A cobalt bomb is a theoretical type of "salted bomb": a nuclear weapon designed to produce enhanced amounts of radioactive fallout, intended to contaminate a large area with radioactive material. The concept of a cobalt bomb was originally described in a radio program by physicist Leó Szilárd on February 26, 1950.

.........

Fission products are more deadly than neutron-activated cobalt in the first few weeks following detonation. After one to six months, the fission products from even a large-yield thermonuclear weapon decay to levels tolerable by humans. The large-yield three-stage (fission-fusion-fission) thermonuclear weapon is thus automatically a weapon of radiological warfare, but its fallout decays much more rapidly than that of a cobalt bomb. Areas irradiated by fallout from even a large-yield thermonuclear weapon begin to increasingly become habitable again after one to six months; a cobalt bomb's fallout on the other hand would render affected areas effectively stuck in this interim state for decades, of habitable, but not safely so under constant habitation conditions.

Initially, gamma radiation from the fission products of an equivalent size fission-fusion-fission bomb are much more intense than Co-60: 15,000 times more intense at 1 hour; 35 times more intense at 1 week; 5 times more intense at 1 month; and about equal at 6 months. Thereafter fission product fallout radiation levels drop off rapidly, so that Co-60 fallout is 8 times more intense than fission at 1 year and 150 times more intense at 5 years. The very long-lived isotopes produced by fission would overtake the 60Co again after about 75 years.[6]

Theoretically, a device containing 510 tons of Co-60 can spread 1g of the material to each square km of the Earth's surface (510,000,000 km2). Radiation output from 1g of Co-60 over one half life is equivalent to 44000 GBq, which is sufficient to kill any inhabitants. If one assumes that all of the material is converted to Co-60 at 100 percent efficiency and if it is spread evenly across the Earth's surface, it is possible for a single bomb to kill every person on Earth. However, in fact, complete 100% conversion into Co-60 is unlikely, as 1957 British experiment at Maralinga showed that Co-59's neutron absorption ability was much lower than predicted, resulting in a very limited formation of Co-60 isotope in practice.

[–] Gary O. (1016) 4 years ago

Having misplaced my copy of the DVD I searched high and low for it and then today after many moons, I found it when I wasn't looking for it. Anyway, I watched it again and really enjoyed it just like I had when I first started this thread on IMDb fourteen years ago. Like I said on IMDb, I am fond of post-apocalyptic stuff

It was a real pleasure to watch it again.

[–] thingmakersback (1445) 4 years ago

Always a favorite of mine. Very creepy and the inaccuracies actually amount to an almost surreal, nightmare, version of the effects of nuclear war. No more realistic than the versions that show up in Kurosawa's Dreams, but not a whole lot less compelling.
A few years ago i found a slim paperback - No Place to Hide by David Bradley (1948) - which is a log made by a medical safety monitor at Bikini. The writer's encounter with a horrifying creature on the island (which turned out to be merely a badly burned pig) reminded me of this film.
Still hoping for a really good HD copy so I have an excuse to watch it yet again.

[–] Gary O. (1016) 4 years ago

As I said, I enjoyed it. I like post-apocalyptic stories and this was actually pretty good. As an aside, I finally decided to watch the second feature on my DVD 'She Creature', and was surprised to find that it was not nearly as bad as I had remembered it. It was still silly, but at least it was watchable and I finished it this time around.

[–] thingmakersback (1445) 4 years ago

Yeah, She Creature is a bit weak. The whole Bridey Murphy thing was popular for some reason and this was the oddest film to come from it. The monster suit (reused in a couple more films) is the wildestt thing Paul Blaisdell ever did, with the stomach apparently intended to suggest vagina dentata... I was always sad that they didn't have time to rig wires so the tail could be animated.
I am also a fan of the truly awful films made by Larry Buchanan for TV release in the '60s. Both of these got remade in that bunch.