SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

alex-85794 I watched Threads again yesterday, my 3rd time, firstly at school in the mid-80s, then again a few years ago, then most recently yesterday evening.Without doubt this is the most horrific film I have ever seen, even with multiple viewings and knowing the ending, its shock value does not decrease at all.I've watched a lot of post-apocalyptic type films (incl. The Day After) and Threads is the *only* one that truly gives me nightmares with scenes that will never ever go away from me.Kudos to the writer, director, production staff, actors and the BBC for making this film. As others have mentioned, this film should be required viewing for everyone, and especially those who have their finger on the button.Yes it seems a little dated now (33+ years on) in terms of production values, special effects etc, but actually it's all the better for this.In my mind Threads is one for the best films ever made and should certainly be near the top (or at the top) of everyone's must-see list. Just have a box of tissues and some emotional support nearby when you do watch it.

Robert Ivey I don't know where to begin with this movie. It's really good, but it's also really frightening. I assume their goal wasn't to scare, but to actually depict a realistic nuclear scenario, and by golly they've done it. I watched the entire movie and the events depicted in it burnt into my memory like no other movie has.Where to begin? Well Ruth and Jimmy are apparently going to get married due to an unexpected pregnancy, but there are rising conflicts between America and Russia, and they are really beginning to get into a nuclear skirmish. Where the UK, where this movie is set in, fits in I have no idea. But much of the public is aware of this, and they start having peace protests and vendors start selling food for more money. The explosion itself occurs about halfway into the movie, and after that is a bunch of people trying to survive after it. As much of us know, being in a nuclear explosion zone certainly isn't a walk in the park. You have to deal with fire, radiation, all that stuff. But it appears society there is beginning to gradually recover over the next few years, with some subsistence farming and a few new children being born. But times may not be too well. Kids only learn English through an old, deteriorated television program, and when Ruth's daughter has a child, well... Maybe civilization may not fully recover. All in all, I highly recommend this movie for anyone interested in nuclear weapons, or citizens of Sheffield. It's very realistic and very frightening, and it's so good I give it a 9.

AliasPseudonym Possibly a contender for bleakest film ever made, Threads follows a young expectant couple and their families in the suburbs of northern UK city Sheffield, in the days leading up to and aftermath of a nuclear strike on the city.With a screenplay written by Barry Hines (best known for his novel and award-winning film adaptation "Kes") Threads is a made-for-TV film, shot with mostly unknown actors, and which forgoes flashy effects for a low-budget, gritty documentary style interspersed with stock footage.All of this however merely adds to the overwhelming sense of realism depicted in the unfolding events, and has the added bonus of allowing the film to perhaps age better than some of its apocalyptic contemporaries. As has been pointed out by a number of other reviewers, more than one scene in this film still have the impact to stay with you for a very long time after watching.Despite tailing off a little towards the end, Threads is both utterly depressing and thoroughly compelling in equal measure, and is probably one of the strongest indictments of the folly of nuclear war ever committed to celluloid and absolutely worth a watch.Although probably only once.

aequus314 Mick Jackson's BBC docu-drama opens with one implicit warning:"In an urban society, everything connects. Each person's needs are fed by the skills of many others.Our lives are woven together in a fabric, but the connections that make society strong also make it vulnerable."His warning concludes with a fragile strand of spider silk and fades into a fully woven, menacing orb of spider web.I saw this post-nuclear apocalypse film on the force of Guardian's recommendation for scariest horror films. But I don't consider it the scariest horror I've seen for two reasons: Threads is not really horror by formalistic standards as it can't be qualified by the usual sub-genres (slasher, supernatural, psychological to name a few). Second, it didn't induce a sense of mounting dread (so keenly attempted by most horror movies) in all 112 minutes of running time.Yet it gave me a nightmare the same night I was done watching.So what's the big deal? There are tonnes of shows (about wars, nuclear disasters, end-of-the-world) trying to frighten us with gruesome make-up and special effects anyway: Pearl Harbor, The Hills Have Eyes, Children of Men… Well it is here that the film's choice of fictional news footage and anti-aesthetic photography by Andrew Dunn and Paul Morris deserve mention. Amplified by the context of nuclear radiation in a densely populated urban centre, human disfigurement occurring in the thick of those post-disaster scenes were absolutely disturbing to witness.I haven't seen imageries this persistent and lasting since defective humans and severed limbs in movies by Jodorowsky. The video's grainy resolution — likely the result of analogue format on Super VHS back in the 1980s — adds to the tone of cinéma vérité very well. Overall effect is creepy like a scratchy washed-out video in Hideo Nakata's Ringu, combined with the haunting cruelty in war photos captured by James Natchwey.Screenwriter Barry Hines hypothesizes the fate of people living in Sheffield when the Soviet Union detonates a warhead above the North Sea. I will not delve into details with a blow-by-blow account of the fictional brinkmanship in Threads, but essentially, a failed US- led coup in Iran escalates into armed confrontation with the Soviet Union. This crisis culminates in nuclear attacks on NATO bases throughout the region, with the city of Sheffield being one of several targets.Three narrative viewpoints drive the film: documentary aspects are narrated by an omniscient man whom earlier, had warned us of the vulnerability in a system held by connections that interlock too closely. He explains in chronological sequence: how early days of the crisis lead to the melt down of society's economic, social, medical and environmental conditions. And finally, the ultimate collapse of humanity itself. Dramatic arcs are painted through the story of young lovers, Ruth Beckett and Jimmy Kemps. An unplanned pregnancy introduces their respective families (the Becketts and the Kemps) in the mix, effectively setting up these ordinary characters as victims who will suffer for generations to come, acutely and chronically, the full blown effects of this event when nuclear radiation rises and peaks after 3000 megatons of TNT. Another viewpoint follows a small group of council members in Sheffield's Emergency Operations Team.All three units engineer in full force; a scientifically eloquent, nightmarish and realistic narrative of total devastation caused by a nuclear holocaust.Threads may be a faux-documentary but still, it makes for a terrifying watch. Miles ahead of fly-by-night Hollywood disaster flicks, this is a deeply intense social realist drama anchored in credible visual tone and political language. Don't let the fact that it was made back in 1984 fool you into thinking otherwise. Not for the squirmish or faint-hearted.cinemainterruptus.wordpress.com