On the Beach
|
List Price: Our Price: $5.99 You Save: $8.99 (60%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $3.91 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of On the Beach
Movie Review: On the Beach DVD
Summary: 5 Stars
This is one of my all time favorite classics, they don't make movies like this anymore.Movie Review: bold for its time, and still thought provoking today...
Summary: 4 Stars
Those who have never experienced the Cold War may find the concept of a thermonuclear war ending all life on earth, something that is hard to come to terms with. Back in 1959 however, it was something weighed on the minds of many. While global nuclear war doesn't seem likely, the possibility of a nuclear disaster still exists, as the recent post-tsunami nuclear crisis in Japan reminds us. Looking back some fifty years, it might be easy to discount the fears that the human race might actually destroy itself, but that scenario is the subject of On The Beach (1959), a film directed by Stanley Kramer (Guess Who's Coming To Diner, Ship Of Fools, It's A Mad Mad Mad World), and based on a novel by Nevil Shute. The movie is set in Australia in 1964, where the last survivors of a global nuclear war, await the arrival of radioactive fallout that will end their lives.
The film follows the activities of a group Navy personnel. Commander Dwight Lionel Towers (Gregory Peck) is the commander of the US Navy submarine Sawfish, a vessel that has taken refuge in Australia, and is now under the command of the Australian Royal Navy. There's no war left to fight, and everyone in North America is presumed dead, but when a message emanating from San Diego is received, the Sawfish is dispatched to see if anyone could possibly still be alive. Unfortunately, the faint hope proves fruitless, and humanity's bleak future is confirmed. The mission validates the military component in the film, and nicely captures the poignancy of the situation.
Reflecting the times, the film has a solemn and dignified tone, where the people quietly accept their fate, and don't panic or get violent. Not much attention is given to the local Australian populace, who remain remarkably calm and civilized. While it makes for a good drama, and a thought provoking story, this is probably not a very realistic presentation. If this scenario was played out in a modern film, it is very easy to imagine society degenerating into total chaos, with violence breaking out, and all kinds of destruction and depraved acts taking place. Portraying such mayhem was obviously impossible in 1959, and the most daring activity that occurs, is probably an auto race, where scientist Julian Osborne (Fred Astaire) indulges his fantasy.
Towers refusal to accept that his wife and family are gone, puts a cloud on his budding romance with Moira Davidson (Eva Garner). As in The Guns of Navarone (1956), Gregory Peck is a leader who bears the burden of command, and simply does what needs to be done. Among the moving personal stories is that of young Australian Navy Lt. Peter Holmes (Anthony Perkins), who has to deal with the impending loss of his wife Mary (Donna Anderson in her film debut) and baby daughter.
Meant as a cautionary tale about the dangers of nuclear destruction, the film takes an even keeled approach, without any dramatic hysterics. The acting performances are solid, with some poignant moments. Those doomed to die, carrying on with quiet dignity, helps make the point that man ending his own existence, would be one of the greatest of tragedies. Looking back now, we can of course be grateful that a nuclear holocaust was averted. The film's message is still an important one, as man's propensity for violent conflict, still remains a threat to our long term survival. Those interested in films from this era that examine similar subject matter, might want to consider Failsafe (1964), Dr. Strangelove (1964), or The Bedford Incident (1965).
Movie Review: Not So Much the End of the World as The End of Worlds
Summary: 4 Stars
I had not seen On the Beach in a number of years. With the release of the DVD version of the film, I wanted to see it again before deciding whether to buy it. This is a powerful, affecting film that endures. I watched it twice in one weekend, and then watched several scenes a third and a fourth time.Those who argue that the film is not subtle are correct. There is a noticeable element of cinematic heavy-handedness, and the final shot certainly reinforces Kramer's didactic intent. However, whatever its weaknesses, this is an engaging film.
What affected me most is the exploration of how people individually would be able to live while being absolutely certain that the world, and all of its living creatures, is dying. These characters all face the problem in what seem basically honest ways, and that is the enduring part of the film. Visually, the images that resonate are those of absolutely empty cities, making the point that life could be destroyed without physical destruction. Were humans to disappear, would we have any legacy? Would our cities and our industries retain any meaning outside of our consciousness? How long would it be before new life emerged, or would the earth forevermore be barren? All the images of the silent deserted cities say is that there would be no more human involvement in the universe. The only hope in this apocalyptic film lies in the fact that there is not a definitive answer to the question, "What comes after us?"
The characters provide interesting studies of how life might go on until everything stops forever. People for the most part continue on as they have, do what they do, have ups and downs as we all do. An interesting twist is the fact that these people were used to the idea of living in a backwater, but now they are all that is left of everything that we ever were.
Fred Astaire's performance as the scientist Julian is particularly strong. Just before the end, he enters the final Grand Prix of Australia in a Ferrrari that won the race the year before. This becomes a brutal, vicious race where drivers are dying all over the track. There is an interesting tension in the fear that some spectators have that Julian will harm himself, when all people are running a losing race against time. And this is the message I found implicit in much of the film: nihilism is the easy answer, acting like nothing matters is the coward's way out. In the Grand Prix, some of the drivers are overtly suicidal, but in the end it does matter who wins (and how), as shown by Julian's final action.
Another powerful scene is the final exchange between Peter (Anthony Perkins' character) and Mary, his young wife. As the final time approaches, Mary draws in upon herself, to the point that she is accused of being irrational (which is a bit of sarcasm on Kramer's part). She wants to protect her infant daughter, but there is nothing that can save anyone. In their final scene, Mary draws upon all that is left of her Self to come back to the world long enough to accept the end of everything with dignity, and even cheer. There is a strong element of melodrama in this scene, but I found if honest and touching nonetheless.
In the end, life goes on until the earth no longer sustains humans. While waiting for the end, people go out dancing and still have to rush to catch the last train to the suburbs. I am glad that On the Beach is available on DVD, and this film is a worthy addition to any serious collection. It is a keeper.
Movie Review: Effective Post-Apocalyptic Drama Sets Up an Emotional Catharsis for Facing the End
Summary: 4 Stars
Stanley Kramer, the king of social consciousness dramas during the 1950's and 60's, made an intriguing post-apocalyptic drama in 1959 which served as a warning regarding unmonitored nuclear proliferation. While it's unsurprisingly downbeat in tone, it's also old-fashioned Hollywood-style entertainment with big stars and some heavy-handed soap opera elements. Where Kramer excels here is the lack of sledgehammer messaging about the Cold War and the gradual unfolding of a plot which allows for an uncertainty palpable in creating the necessary tension to drive the story.
Set five years in the future in 1964, the core premise is that a nuclear war has devastated the whole of the Northern Hemisphere with Australia the only known land mass as yet untouched by the massive radioactivity. It turns out to be a matter of time before the same fate befalls Australia. In fact, scientists project complete devastation in five months. A nuclear submarine deep in the Pacific has survived the debacle and voyages to Melbourne to see life going on as normal. Commander Dwight Towers, the submarine officer-in-charge, is then ordered on an international reconnaissance mission on the same submarine to assess the world's radiation levels and finds the possibility of life in a radio signal emanating from the vicinity of San Diego.
Kramer has set up some powerful scenes, especially as he has the crew see the deserted streets of San Francisco, a sequence that recalls Harry Belafonte's wordless reaction to an empty Manhattan in "The World, the Flesh and the Devil". At the same time, screenwriter John Paxton, working from Nevil Shute's novel, provides plenty of human drama to go along with the social messages. The combination, for the most part, works. Gregory Peck is ideally cast as Towers alternating between military authority and personal regret with ease. Just before his turn in "Psycho" overshadowed all his career work, Anthony Perkins plays Towers' callow lieutenant effectively as he deals with the fatalistic consequences on his wife and baby.
Playing one of her shopworn angels during this period, Ava Gardner plays a rather melodramatic role, an alcoholic Melbourne party girl who falls hard for Towers, but she meshes so well with Peck that it doesn't seem as absurd as it sounds. In the oddest bit of casting, Fred Astaire, in his first non-dancing role, plays a guilt-ridden scientist assigned to accompany Towers on the mission. While his British accent is problematic, his performance is surprisingly subtle save for some rubber-faced expressions that had become part of his acting style from all his musicals. The film smartly skirts political issues in favor of scenes that would be appropriate in a "Twilight Zone" episode, for instance, queues of people waiting for their boxes of suicide pills. It's rather overlong at 134 minutes, but there's no denying that it holds interest with the ultimate fate of the characters. The 2000 DVD unfortunately has no extras.
Movie Review: Great Book, Good Movie. A "Non-Threatening" movie about Post Nuclear War.
Summary: 4 Stars
I read this book back in the 1980's and then rented the movie some point later. As usual the book is better but the movie captured the essence of the book. Both the book and movie tell a tale of post nuclear war's deadly effects and of what really matters in humanity that, unfortunately, always seems to take a disaster to make us realize.
The movie (as well as the book) are both "non-threatening" in the sense that there are no gruesome or disturbing scenes, although one may find the movie itself a bit heavy as it deals with humanity facing it's final frontier, one it will not conquer. In a way, the story seems that it could have been about a Neutron (Bomb) War as in a neutron bombing, the buildings are not destroyed but everyone dies(, great). I do not know if neutron bombs would have lingering radiation or some other deadly chemical that could go on killing long after the bombs have been detonated, however a recurring phrase in the book was "nothing appeared wrong with the towns" or something like that. In other words, there was no destruction evident. The towns would simply be empty although the electricity would be on (the lights are on but no one's home syndrome). The book even describes a situation where there appeared to be people sitting in a room as in a meeting or social gathering but as our explorers get closer, the book says something like "they realized the party had been going on for... I forgot how long it said the duration was but what was meant was that the party would go on indefinitely or until the people's bodies rotted away..." they were all dead right were they sat. That sounds more like a neutron bomb. No destruction is mentioned or seen throughout the movie.
The main focus of the movie is not about the destruction but about how humanity deals with it's inevitable extinction. You won't see the absolute bleakness of "The Day After" or "Threads" but more along the lines of a 1980's movie called "Testament". People face their end going on with life resolved to do so until the radiation reaches them.
One thing the movie could have used a little restraint on, was the relationship between Commander Towers and the lady he interacts with in the movie. In the book, their relationship is platonic at the most as Towers is married and wants to believe his wife is still alive even though he knows that is not so. In the book, both him and the lady live in denial until the end but they never get involved romantically. The movie does not so much as hesitate to blow this off and place the two into a passionate relationship.
This post-nuclear war movie would be suitable for a family with young children to view as it does not have the nightmarish imagery as "The Day After" or "Threads". And, it's a Classic B&W.