7/10
Worthwhile Nuclear Disaster Drama
31 March 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Panic in Year Zero (1962) aka End of the World

CONTAINS SPOILERS

The Cuban Missile Crisis ignited an explosion of excellent movies dealing with nuclear holocaust including Fail-Safe (1964), Dr. Strangelove (1964), (Stanley Kubrick's follow-up masterpiece to Paths of Glory (1957) and Lolita (1962), (Spartacus (1960) is very good, but it is what it is)), and The Bedford Incident (1965). The theme was explored from slightly different angles, (Seven Days in May (1964), Twilight's Last Gleaming (1977), Wargames (1983), The Manhattan Project (1986), By Dawn's Early Light (1990)), and with varying degrees of verisimilitude, (A Day Called X (1957), This is not a Test (1962), The War Game (1965), The Day After (1983), Threads (1984)), quite consistently through the end of the Cold War. Most of these movies deal with a big picture view and, at least in part, give a ringside seat to the councils of the decision makers, (at least the local ones in Threads). There are some very good exceptions of course, particularly Malevil (1981) and Testament (1983).

Panic in Year Zero appeared a year before the missile crisis and follows a family of four, who happen to be driving away from Los Angeles on a vacation when the city is destroyed, as they try to survive the growing chaos in the surrounding areas. An AI exploitation picture, the low budget precluded dramatic scenes of large scale carnage or destruction, but allows at times for a surprisingly intelligent examination of some of the moral issues about survival, self defense and self preservation. (For instance, Ray Milland (who also directed, by the way) has to overcome his son's, (Avalon), initial reluctance to use a rifle; later, Avalon is actually eager to use it. As soon as Milland sees this, he scolds him and makes clear that he must be prepared to use the gun if necessary, but he should never want to or enjoy doing so and must always be on guard against his own inclinations that way.)

Neither Fail-Safe nor Dr. Strangelove, (and other than by implication On the Beach (1959), for that matter - which Arch Oboler did better in Five (1951), in my opinion), show weapon effects, so their minimal use here is not an issue in and of itself. The problem is how much they, and the social dislocation, are attenuated: there is no sense of real chaos because the movie never fully allows the thin veneer of civilization to flake off, (something done very effectively in the last fifteen minutes of Miracle Mile (1988)), and so the theme of these four being the maintainers of ethical standards amongst a collapsed society rings false. And in the same sense, the finale finds the protagonists essentially having passed through the crisis and gives the movie rather a happy ending. My guess is AI, as usual, wanted to give the audience a good entertaining scare but not seriously frighten anyone.

Still, a very worthwhile movie in many ways - certainly worth watching if one enjoys these types of dramas - and deserving of inclusion in the Nuclear Disaster film canon. And it's always nice to see Ray Milland acting and directing after he found that weekend he misplaced.

XYZ
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed