For its time this is very brave and no doubt had some effect on why we havent suffered the consequences of nuclear war.

Disturbingly powerful especially when considered within the context of the era in which in was made.

Extraordinarily intense recreation of an anticipated nuclear attack circa 1965. Originally shot for TV and later understandably rejected on grounds of adult material, film packs a mighty impressive punch. Still scarier than any modern disaster film, the convincingly naturalistic performances by the cast (a mix of amateur and professional) and documentary feel make this one of the greats, not to be missed.

Watkins's argumentation-style is in-your-face, as it should be. Even more disturbing than the scenarios of a nuclear aftermath are the facts about what the horrifying consequences of one would be. A must-see near-masterpiece.

an interesting curiosity.

Automatically, we're watching an artifact of history. It's impossible now to experience the film on an emotional basis if you don't have clear memories of the Cold War. Even through a historical and intellectual lens, I didn't learn anything. Maybe those dummies in the mid-60s didn't know what happened in a nuclear explosion, but I feel like everybody understands it clearly today.

An excellent docu-drama about the horrors of atomic warfare.

It feels like a rough draft for Threads. Although the ironic juxtaposition of the current and future documentaries is occasionally devastatingly effective, it lacks the production value to truly horrify. And like Threads, the brutally realistic depiction of the future is somewhat blunted by the fact that its future did not, in fact, happen.

Pretty harrowing and effective, even today.

Top baddass moment? Under the circumstances, probably anyone that manages to do anything useful is going to be pretty bassass. 0 cats and 0 decapitations; (although I guess amongst the millions of dead there were probably some).

At first I had doubts about the film because of the fact that it was commissioned by British state. However, as the film progressed I was really impressed by its political stand and humanitarian point of view. Also, it bears some of the most haunting images in history of film. I have no idea how it achieves it though.

Strong!

As what is essentially activist cinema, the film is tied strongly to a specific place and time, and yet the absurdities it points to are not. In its repeated reference to Dresden, Hiroshima, and other similar events, the film argues (convincingly, I think) that the particular policy, government, or weapon matters little; the logic remains the same.

I'll never understand how this became a classic. This trite, ultra-didactic what-if-documentary, tries to show the aftermath of a nuclear attack on britain, with the ridiculous archaic voice-over that docs had these days telling us the facts while the images do nothing but illustrate it. That's the whole movie. It wouldn't be so enraging if there wasn't a film made 20 years later (by the same BBC) called Threads, made with roughly the same premise, but infinitely more real and harrowing.

Pretty impressive...

Unsettling, unforgettable pseudodocumentary about what a post-nuclear-war world would be like

Despite my miserable experience with Punishment Park, I gave Watkins another chance. This one's another pseudo-documentary, but this time far more convincing, even though the viewer is periodically reminded that the scenario is hypothetical. It's quite disturbing and bold for its time. It's been superceded by better films like Threads and Where the Wind Blows, but it deserves credit for pre-dating those works by some 20 years. The acting is uneven and the script is sometimes a bit off.

You can say that the time of this harrowing warning has past, that nuclear war is now an impossibility or that people truly understand the dangers (I disagree with all three points) but this documentary/horror sci-fi remains compelling and disturbing. The situation concocted by the film-makers to bring the world to nuclear war is a little too far fetched (compared with real examples of Cold War brinkmanship) but it is the effects of the scenario that matter.

To me films like this are more interesting in terms of being an illustration of their times than for their actual persuasiveness or informativeness. The serious tone, the continual use of terms like "inevitability," the palpable fear and confusion, all these things are quite evocative of the perception of a threat in a way that doesn't exist now.

The acting is often shoddy and any bits where characters speak to the camera early in the film feel clunky at best (in a script riddled with clunkiness) and later on in the film detract from any horror the film is presenting. Please stop telling us for the nth time that "THIS WILL HAPPEN IF THERE IS NUCLEAR WAR!!!" and that the general public doesn't know all that much about it (really? your average joe doesn't know what that certain radioactive isotope does? shock! horror!). I don't get this.

Aggressively didactic depiction of a hypothetical cold war outcome and all the more effective for it.

It's odd to me that the narrative often reminds us that it's fictional, which could spoil the effect, but somehow doesn't - it still feels like we're seeing footage from the future (or the future as it could've been according to the past's perception of it. Erm, yeah). It's quite affecting.

The most terrifying film I know.