5 years ago

@moonkodi the film is so anti-nuclear war I don't know how you can miss it. This and a lot of other films of that era (threads, the day after etc.) where aiming to show that nuclear war would mean the end of civilisation and not the simple thing that government propaganda tried to make out. There was a generation who lived through WW2 who thought that nuclear war would be like the blitz and this is what the film is portraying and at the same time showing that they were so, so wrong. These were the same people who believed that the government wouldn't try to hood-wink them. To us now, this seems completely laughable but my grandparents were of that era and still had confidence in the government and believed the official notices about surviving the holocaust through putting doors up against the wall and that government and the emergency services would resume to normal within a matter of days!! <br /> <br /> The fear the film is meant to instil in the viewer, and did to many, was that of the prospect of nuclear war. Yes the enemy is Russia, but at the height of the cold war in the 80s that threat was very real - nobody thought of the threat from China/North Korea/Iran and rogue states. That is just the facts of the time - it's not an anti-Russia film.<br /> <br /> This film and its ilk are vital pieces of social and political history although now they look laughable. They got the message out that nuclear war would basically end the world! President Reagan is cited as saying that his viewing of The Day After prompted him to change his hardline stance with the Soviet Union and try to start a reduction in nuclear weapons as he wasn't aware of the true impact of a nuclear war. We have a lot to be thankful for...