TDA
hal...@houxz.uucp
the effects at ground zero, but otherwise I thought Earthquake was
gorier and more disturbing. Certainly Special Bulletin was far better
as a sober rendition. I felt sure I was watching an Irwin Allen flick.
On the other hand, I felt the pannel discussion afterwards well worthwhile,
and worth the wait. More was said every five minutes there than was said
in the entire movie.
Re: freeze oriented? I really did not see anything objectionable. Of course
there is the implication that people do not want siloes nearby, so they should
stop them, but in reality, those locales should be safest. Since the missiles
will be gone by the time they are hit, why should they be targets?
(N.B. I am a freeze opponent and am conservative to hawkish on defense issues,
so do not assume that my lack of objection is due to my politics.)
sow...@ihuxn.uucp
The movie totally ignored the current feeble attempts from the US government in
their crisis relocation plan (even though it won't work). The movie also failed
to should how the US's only valid attempts at sheltering occur where large
govermental bodies work (i.e. Springfield, Illinois and it underground
interlaced tunnels). TDA never admitted the existance in this country of how
the survivalists in this country will make out.
The producers decided not to make any attempt at being an educational film and
did not show any of the actual time lapse in order to have the radiation levels
reduce but instead showed one scene at 50 rad then switched to an announcement
of limited exposure at .4 rad? (What happen to the other weeks?) Why not show
the size of the blasts or the actual time involved why not try to educate the
people instead of only fightening them.
For all of the media hype that went along with the showing the movie did very
little to accomplish anything in this country except get many peope away from
other networks in order to increase their ratings.
J.J. Sowa
ihnp4!ihuxn!sowajj
bal...@ihuxv.uucp
only bored, but disappointed in the way the movie was done. Characters
were introduced and then never seen again. And other characters were
introduced and then popped in at the end of the movie as if to get in
another appearance.
There must be something wrong, because this newsgroup was created
for the great amount of discussion this movie was supposed to generate
and I think this article is only about the 5th in 2 days.
921...@houxa.uucp
> for the great amount of discussion this movie was supposed to generate
> and I think this article is only about the 5th in 2 days.
Let me take the liberty to quote the last paragraph of
today's New York Times editorial "All Noise on the Western Front."
"For all pompous pretense, this [TDA] was entertainment.
Yes, entertainment: as in horror show, disaster movie,
Grimm fairy tale. A hundred million Americans were
summoned to be empathetically incinerated, and left on the
true day after without a single idea to chew upon."
--
Orlando Sotomayor-Diaz /AT&T Bell Laboratories, Crawfords Corner Road
Room HO-3M-325 201-949-1532 Holmdel, New Jersey, 07733
Path: {{{ucbvax,decvax}!}{ihnp4,harpo}!}houxa!9212osd
p...@houxh.uucp
Although I generally agree that TDA itself was a let-down, I was
surprised to find out how few people watched the panel discussion
which followed. The film's only usefulness was to stimulate people
to discuss the problem and possibilities for avoiding it.
I found that contrary to my impressions, Henry Kissinger seemed
to be a realistic pacifist: he seems to want elimination of nuclear
weapons (like all sane people) but realizes the real problems standing
in the way of doing so. I was surprised that the content of the discussion
*was* so good. How come most of the people I talked to simply turned
the TV off after the film (which should have simply been a teaser).
Did *you* watch the panel discussion?
Pete LaMaster NJ (201)949-0040 ihnp4!houxh!pvl
Clyde W. Hoover
covered better and with less American sitcom psuedo-drama.
In particular, "The War Game", produced for the BBC by (name forgotten)
but not shown because of its grimness, does this theme one better. Hell,
even "On the Beach" left a much darker pall than "The Day After".
There was also a real annoying techincal error - that the EMP effect would
knock out automobile ignitions. Most auto ignition systems (except
for the newer 'computerized' versions) have nothing
more electronically complicated than a capacitor, and from what I have
read about EMP, nothing that simple would get fried.
"The Day After" retrod already well-sodden ground and didn't contribute
anything new. The media hype was just so much finanicially-inspired
hot air. Surely this could have been done more effectively.
--
Clyde W. Hoover @ Univ. of Texas Computation Center
Austin, Texas
clyde@ut-ngp.{UUCP,ARPA} clyde@ut-sally.{UUCP,ARPA} ihnp4!ut-ngp!clyde
Dave Sherman
I thought that was kind of nat. The rest of it was just so-so.
And I've already griped elsewhere about ABC not being able to
write correct English.
Dave Sherman
--
{allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!dave
Gary Benson
boat. The film was scary but left me thinking that they could have done so
much more in the way of education. There was not even an attempt to tell
the folks what a rad is, much less the relative importance of the figure
50 and 0.4 when associated with the unit. Nothing about MAD or LAW, other
than a perfunctory reference, apparantly included to show that they'd done
their homework. Not enough, though. Also, nothing about the (hopefully)
sincere attempts by both sides to limit nuclear weapons (sic).
My own opinions are:
These monstosities are not weapons. They are unusable both at the stategic
and the tactical level. Not being weapons, it is a short logical jump to
my conclusion that it must be evident to both major protagonists that they
cannot be used. After all, if I figured it out, surely they can. Arms
control is a survival necessity, and if planetary survival is at stake, no
power merchant is going to do something that will chance losing power.
However, a good friend tells me that we are 6 minutes from Armeggadon
with the introduction of Cruise missiles to Europe. I am wary enough of
the fallibility of computers to be afraid that something accidental could
happen, and believe that we are trusting an awful damn lot to people who
program "Fail-Safe" systems.
Perhaps strategic arms limitation talks should be changed to nuclear
weaponry control talks, and focus on ways to insure that accidents don't
happen, rather than always arguing over how many you can have where, and
how many we get. Numbers are pointless indicators of power in this new
age; the real indicators can only be realized by avoiding a nuclear
confrontation.
I seriously do not believe that a deliberate nuclear war will happen. The
new battles are still fought with guns and tanks, jet fighters, napalm,
and all those other conventional weapons, with more emphasis all the time
on 'psychological' weapons. What scares the **** out me is the possiblity
of accidental global nuclear holocaust. The depressing part of it all is
that, there doesn't seem to be much interest either in Moscow or
Washington in initiating such talks.
Gary Benson
John Fluke Mfg. Co.
Everett, WA, USA
Mark Callow
discussion to show their local news broadcast. It annoyed me too, so
after changing channel to the San Francisco affiliate, KGO, who didn't
cut off the discussion, I called KNTV to complain.
--
Mark Callow, Saratoga, CA.
...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!
...{ittvax,amd70}!qubix!msc
decwrl!qubix!m...@Berkeley.ARPA
Byron Howes
and vice president when he is not being Senator) cut off the network debate
after a half hour to present its own local debate. Fortunately, those of
use with cable television could turn to the ABC affiliate in High Point,
N.C. which stayed with the network.
I thought the debate to be fairly informative, with more than a few points
of high humor, and was reasonably impressed with Robert McNamaras determin-
ation to bring constructive solutions to a panel largely imbued with tunnel
vision. On the other hand, I abhorred William F. Buckley's efforts to
move away from the discussion at hand to expound on his favorite topic:
Those Nasty, Nasty, Russians. It strikes me that no matter how nasty we
feel the Soviets may be, they aren't going to go away tomorrow, or any time
in the near future, and we need to find ways to get along with them at least
at a diplomatic level.
--
Byron Howes
UNC - Chapel Hill
decvax!duke!mcnc!unc!bch
David Geller
but increase ABC's ratings for the evening. What's wrong with this. I'm
sure that was their original intent in showing the film. Had they decided
to show a highly educational film they might have employed the talents of
such people as Cronkite, Ustinov (he was good on NOVA), or Sagen to explain
in detail the many things that would happen if should a tragedy were to
occur.
The show was extremely entertaining. I enjoyed it very much. I felt that
there were several minor flaws (acting, script, facts) in it but such is
life. Why are we all dwelling on this subject so much. The best way to voice
your opinions so that they have some causal effect would be for you to write
to your congressmen, state lobbiests, state educational directors, the major
networks, etc.
We can't watch PBS all the time...
David Geller
Washington, D.C.
{seismo}!rlgvax!geller