Ion Cristoiu: How come the People do not believe that the nuclear Apocalypse can come
- Ion Cristoiu: Unlike Threads, The Day After also captures characters who notice the fatal course of events, such as Dr. Oakes and his wife Helen.
- Ion Cristoiu: Although they take into account a possible nuclear war, the lucid characters reject the hypothesis, based on the belief that the greatest of the world cannot be so stupid.
- Ion Cristoiu: The strength of the film lies in the reflection of the effects of the Apocalypse on some strongly defined characters. There are some unforgettable sequences.
Ion Cristoiu: How come the People do not believe that the nuclear Apocalypse can come
I finished the movie The Day After from the series of productions about the Apocalypse, which include Threads, not long seen. Actually from Threads started everything. After talking in several video pills about the fear produced on me by Threadssomeone sent me a message recommending that I see and The Day After. According to the Internet, The Day After was released in 1983. It went down in history as the movie with the highest TV rating. In the evening of November 20, 1983, when it was broadcast at ABC, 100 million viewers from 39 million homes watched it. The film was criticized by patriots in the American press. They do not point the finger that the USSR struck first, as if in the case of the Apocalypse it would matter who and why it started. The New York Post writes that director Nicolas Mayer works for Andropov, too National Review, that the film weakens Americans’ confidence in America’s strength. Those reactions do not surprise me. This is what happens today, when the Western press has become the frontline press, quite simply. One of the strongest moments in the film is the one in which, after the nuclear strike, the voice of the US president is heard. Until then, the viewer had seen horror after horror. Even while the president is speaking, sequences of the Apocalypse are playing in the background. Only the president says something like this:
“Dear fellow citizens,
Although the extent of the damage is not yet certain, and likely will remain so for a long time, preliminary reports suggest that the main points of impact include military and industrial targets throughout the United States of America. We have currently signed an armistice with the Soviet Union, which has suffered equally major damage. Many of those listening to me today have been injured, suddenly separated from their loved ones or lost their families. I share your pain because I too have lost loved ones. And in this hour of sorrow I want to assure you that America survived this terrible ordeal. We have not capitulated, we have not renounced the principles of freedom and democracy, thanks to which the free world accepts us as leaders.”
To see! The world is radioactive ash, and he rejoices that he did not give up the principles of democracy and freedom!
The film is clearly superior to him Threads. The two have in common the coming part of the Apocalypse defined by the People’s indifference to the increasingly alarming news on television. In contrast to the Threads, The Day After it also captures characters who notice the fateful course of events, such as Dr. Oakes and his wife Helen. Although they consider a possible nuclear war, the lucid characters reject the hypothesis, based on the belief that the world’s greatest cannot be so stupid.
They forget that they are stupid!
The film’s strength lies in mirroring the effects of the Apocalypse on some strongly defined characters. There are some unforgettable sequences, such as, for example, the one in which Denise comes out of the shelter deliriously delusional that nothing has happened, or the sequence at the end, when the voice of a specialist from the Kansas research center asks on the air if she is heard by someone. No one has heard it. One of the film’s posters has an unusual force. Above the title, write:
“They told us it would be impossible for us to make such a film.
They told us that it will be impossible for you to watch such a film.
We hope that nothing is impossible.”
*
I was writing on July 17, 2024. A Right-wing USL has appeared!
So, things are nailed down. The new party will appear under an old name: PNL. At least for me, it will be difficult for me to get used to a new party, made up of two parties, to which I can call one of the two. If the PDL disappears into the PNL, what will we call Traian Băsescu: former member of the PNL? What about Petre Roman? Will they move to Modrogani, the headquarters of the new party, and the portrait of Ionel Brătianu? I am sure that the portrait will also be claimed by the party of Călin Popescu Tăriceanu. What about Guță Tătărăscu? Will this be one of Vasile Blaga’s predecessors? The great, spectacular event will still be constituted by the appearance of a new couple of friends: Vasile Blaga and Klaus Iohannis. In a year or two, the new party will be a kind of right-wing USL: separate leaderships, separate parliamentary groups. As in the case of USL, there will be new co-presidents, Vasile Blaga and Klaus Iohannis. Since February 2011, when USL was established, a couple has been active on our public stage: Victor Ponta and Crin Antonescu. The two appeared together on Antena 3, congratulated each other with the caress of friends, made decisions together, called each other by their first names. What will happen to the new couple? The two will go together to B1 Tv? Will they hold joint press conferences? Will they call each other by their first names: Vasile and Klaus? Will the two proclaim themselves friends?
NOTE: This editorial is taken in its entirety from cristoiublog.ro
Source: www.mediafax.ro
