AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

gavin6942 A gas is let loose upon the world that kills anyone over twenty-five years old.Coming from Roger Corman, I wanted to like this, but it never seemed coherent and I think not enough thought was put into a plot or story arc. There are things I enjoyed, such as the permit guy with the whip and how this was an alternate version of "Logan's Run" (this film came out after the novel but before the film, so whether or not there was an influence, I have no idea).There was a problem in that almost no one was under 18. This seemed to be teenagers and young adults cutting loose, but who was watching all the infants?

ackstasis Recently I've really come to respect Roger Corman, perhaps the most successful cheapskate in cinema history. Despite an overwhelming passion for economies, Corman was nonetheless able to produce a series of exquisitely-made, atmospheric Poe adaptations, among them 'The Masque of the Red Death (1964)' and 'The Tomb of Ligeia (1964).' His last film for American International Pictures was creatively titled 'Gas! -Or- It Became Necessary to Destroy the World in Order to Save It. (1970)' {or simply "Gas-s-s-s"}. This post-apocalyptic black comedy is a bit of an oddity, more reminiscent of a Coen brothers film than the graceful Gothic horrors with which I've come to associate Corman. Certainly, many viewers are left bewildered by the film's zany comedic scenarios, sprinkled with bizarre humour and social satire, and I think it's a cleverer film than first appearances might suggest.Corman's ponderous title works in two ways. Firstly, it shamelessly rips off Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove (1964),' the post-apocalyptic comedy to which all post-apocalyptic comedies aspire. Secondly, it presents an anti-militaristic agenda – and, more specifically, an anti-Vietnam War message. The second title paraphrases an American general's infamous war-time declaration, following the destruction of Ben Tre, that "it became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it." The film's animated prologue, fronted by a caricatured John Wayne-like general, depicts the military accidentally releasing a poison gas that kills everybody in the world over 25 years of age. Thus, society is left in the hands of the college students, whose free-wheeling, pot-smoking, sex-obsessed ways promise an end to civilisation itself. This new "young people only" world is ruled by cartoonish and irresponsible egos, their behaviour dictated purely by cultural stereotypes: a deranged football captain reduces raping and pillaging to a competitive sport; a posse of black golfers fight non-existent racial inequality and celebrate the "common American." The film treats its dark themes with an astonishing breeziness, typical of the carefree "you only live once" mentality of the 1960s hippie counter-culture. Rape is idly characterised as a sort of recreation, a far cry from the disturbing rape scenes in another low-budget post-apocalyptic film, Ray Milland's 'Panic in Year Zero! (1962).' There's a car-chase on golf-buggies. Even Edgar Allen Poe turns up on a motor-cycle, for no apparent reason other than to reference the director's earlier works. This film is insane. Corman knows this, and he runs with it.

theskulI42 With heedless energy, low-budget freedom and a youthful exuberance befitting its characters, Gas-s-s might be the greatest apocalyptic thriller ever made, specifically because it's neither apocalyptic nor a thriller.The film functions in much the same way Mike Judge's Idiocracy did 35 years later, very funny films that depict silly futures that, if considered rationally, are terrifying and on-point.The film details (well, sort of) the country after a mysterious gas kills everyone over the age of 25, and we follow a select group (including Ben Vereen and Cindy Williams) as they attempt to live, survive and make hilarious non-sequiturs among the southwest desert.The film is a laundry list of psychedelia, societal breakdown, cultural criticism and a lot of silly, clever wordplay. In addition to being spot-on about some of its criticisms about the immaturities and problems a youth-led culture would have (and would be a very relevant critique about all the hippies and their ilk of the time, functioning almost as the voice of reason), it moves quickly and throws joke after joke after joke at the screen, and a lot of it, though delivered and moved on from so quickly that you're barely given the time to comprehend it, and it's just hugely entertaining through its short running time.I've now seen three Corman films, and loved two of them, with this one neck and neck with A Bucket of Blood for my favorite.Don't make me choose.{Grade: B+ (8.5/10) / #8 (of 25) of 1971}

dbrookfield I think if you are into the sixties kind of thing, as I am, you are obligated to waste about 80 minutes of your life watching this barely watchable trainwreck. The saving graces of this oddity include a surprisingly apt social commentary on sixties values along with a number of relatively well known actors caught in early (and embarrassing) footage. It's as if the producers of Laugh-In sat down and decided to write a full length film, covering all the high points (and more) of the issues between the flower children and the establishment, then put it in the hands of a couple of hippies and gave them about a $10,000 budget to complete it. Hardly a classic, but in its own way it does capture how truly strange that time was, the silliness, the over-idealism, and the uptightness of the establishment. Clearly not for everyone.