Konterr Brilliant and touching

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Married Baby Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

alexanderdavies-99382 This film isn't what I would describe as a typical science fiction film. The plot serves as a prediction as to how our world has evolved into the place it has become.Edward Judd - hardly remembered now - is a savagely witty and cynical journalist whose newspaper he works for, provides the latest news with regards to the rather unusual weather that takes place.The screenplay is an excellent one and is brought to life by a gallery of familiar character actors, including Leo McKern, Michael Goodliffe amongst others.

Prichards12345 Director Val Guest made some good stuff in his time. He did not deserve to end his career stooging for Cannon and Ball that's for sure! I really like his directorial style; he seems to have decided a documentary-style approach was the best way to present outre material; and what worked so well in his Quatermass movies works equally well here.What a refreshing change to have believable characters compared to the one dimensional stereo-types we get today. Having just watched SPECTRE, where the screen writers appear to never have met a real human, it was so good to watch this: well rounded, flawed guys trying to make sense of the momentous events.Edward Judd usually played slightly disagreeable types (at least in most of the movies I've seen him in) and this is no exception. He plays a journalist at the Daily Express who stumbles upon a story that the world is about to end due to twin nuclear missile tests forcing the earth from its orbit, and he does it very well. Slacking off as he's depressed over the failure of his marriage and only able to see his kid for a few hours once a week, hitting the bottle a bit too much, full of sarcastic rejoinders and bitterness, I found him totally convincing, much like the movie, in fact.Leo Mckern is also a stand out as Judd's colleague, who frequently covers for him and despite his acerbic nature is actually soft-hearted. Janet Munro has some quite sexy scenes as Judd's love interest, her near toplessness is surely the only reason I can think of for the film's original X certificate. Munro is very good, too.There is also plenty of historical interest as the film was actually shot in part at the real Daily Express print offices. Indeed, the paper's then editor, Arthur Christensen, also has a role in the movie!It's only real fault is the beatnik riot towards the end. This is just bloody silly and was injected only to add some false drama to the end. This movie didn't need it.The film is superb. Hollywood please don't remake it. I don't want Tom Cruise saving the world, or teenagers uncovering adult conspiracy theories amidst ten thousand special effects shots.

jane_coburn I first saw this movie when I was a child. I loved it then and now I have it on DVD I watch it when I want a good story rather than wall to wall cgi. It is one of the best for its time. It is well thought out, well written, well acted and well directed. Even the Express editor was good as he isn't an actor at all. He added authentication to the story. There is not to much in the way of personal love story and what there is does not interfere with the main story to much. No sad "I love you" lines. No hysterical kids or women. It is a wonderful look at the sudden and total collapse of society and how people deal with the high possibility of the end of the world. The end of movie was made with two endings of the possible outcome of the solution to the problem. only one was used. I leave to those wanting to see to find out which end it is.

spotlightne Someone said to me, 'have you seen The Day The Earth Caught Fire - it's excellent.' So I got hold of a copy and I knew in the very first 10 minutes I wasn't going to like it.First up, I didn't like the acting. The film wasn't compelling at all. And none of the characters were likable either. Particularly Edward Judd's character. He comes across as a big creep, especially when he's chasing the affections of a young Janet Munro. In one scene he manages to burst his way into Janet's flat, having begged for a date SEVERAL TIMES. But it's not a date he wants. After looking oddly at her underwear on the bed, Janet loses her senses and eventually gives into this creep. He gets his way with the girl in the most nauseating manner. What a thoroughly distasteful man.Well that had me almost vomiting. I tried to concentrate on the film, but it was so mind-numbingly boring. And it doesn't help one's concentration when the central character is nauseating.I could only stomach this rubbish for 45 minutes before switching off. It's bleak, DATED and highly overrated. Simply not for me, despite my usually liking sci-fi films from this period.