Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 15 (click to see context) from:
* {{Narm}}: To audiences from Eastern Europe, specifically citizens of USSR and its vassal states, this movie entered this area quite often, making various scenes -- meant to be totally serious -- unintentionally funny and grotesque. And it wasn't because those people found anything amusing in horrific deaths of evil, capitalist Americans (they certainly ''did not''). It's because many hardships that characters in the movie are going through, portrayed as a gruelling ordeal brought onto them by nuclear apocalypse, were just daily bread for people living under Soviet rule. The scene where a nurse shares an orange with a doctor and grimly remarks that this might be the last orange in next half of a year is a perfect example -- citizens of aforementioned states, who got to eat oranges ''exactly twice a year only'' (during Easter and during Christmas -- if ships from Cuba arrived on time, that is) without the need for nuclear war, usually reacted to scenes like this one by bursting into (bitter) laughter.
to:
* {{Narm}}: {{Narm}}:
** To audiences from Eastern Europe, specifically citizens of USSR and its vassal states, this movie entered this area quite often, making various scenes -- meant to be totally serious -- unintentionally funny and grotesque. And it wasn't because those people found anything amusing in horrific deaths of evil, capitalist Americans (they certainly ''did not''). It's because many hardships that characters in the movie are going through, portrayed as a gruelling ordeal brought onto them by nuclear apocalypse, were just daily bread for people living under Soviet rule. The scene where a nurse shares an orange with a doctor and grimly remarks that this might be the last orange in next half of a year is a perfect example -- citizens of aforementioned states, who got to eat oranges ''exactly twice a year only'' (during Easter and during Christmas -- if ships from Cuba arrived on time, that is) without the need for nuclear war, usually reacted to scenes like this one by bursting into (bitter) laughter.
** To audiences from Eastern Europe, specifically citizens of USSR and its vassal states, this movie entered this area quite often, making various scenes -- meant to be totally serious -- unintentionally funny and grotesque. And it wasn't because those people found anything amusing in horrific deaths of evil, capitalist Americans (they certainly ''did not''). It's because many hardships that characters in the movie are going through, portrayed as a gruelling ordeal brought onto them by nuclear apocalypse, were just daily bread for people living under Soviet rule. The scene where a nurse shares an orange with a doctor and grimly remarks that this might be the last orange in next half of a year is a perfect example -- citizens of aforementioned states, who got to eat oranges ''exactly twice a year only'' (during Easter and during Christmas -- if ships from Cuba arrived on time, that is) without the need for nuclear war, usually reacted to scenes like this one by bursting into (bitter) laughter.
Added DiffLines:
** The atomic test StockFootage of structures being destroyed and trees being blown around during the attack scene loses its impact if you've already seen the footage before. Said footage is so common it was even seen in the documentary ''Film/TheAtomicCafe'' a mere ''year'' before ''The Day After'' aired.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Likewise, the part where survivors stand in a long queue to the military truck dispensing supplies to civilians -- only for them to run out before most of awaiting people get any -- may be hilariously reminiscent of queues in front of stores, which were ''very'' common in Eastern Bloc. That's because there just wasn't enough goods for everyone, shops were very often totally empty and you couldn't just walk into one and buy what you wanted, but instead had to stand in one such queue and ''hope'' that something useful for you will be left (when a word spread out that there's going to be a fresh delivery to a store, people stood in front of it since early hours -- i.e. ''before sunrise'' -- just to get their place in a queue). Yes, life in [[BlatantLies "working class paradise"]] was ''that'' crappy.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* {{Narm}}: To audiences from Eastern Europe, specifically citizens of USSR and its vassal states, this movie entered this area quite often, making various scenes -- meant to be totally serious -- unintentionally funny and grotesque. And it wasn't because those people found anything amusing in horrific deaths of evil, capitalist Americans (they certainly ''did not''). It's because many hardships that characters in the movie are going through, portrayed as a gruelling ordeal brought onto them by nuclear apocalypse, were just daily bread for people living under Soviet rule. The scene where a nurse shares an orange with a doctor and grimly remarks that this might be the last orange in next half of a year is a perfect example -- citizens of aforementioned states, who got to eat oranges ''exactly twice a year only'' (during Easter and during Christmas -- if ships from Cuba arrived on time, that is) without the need for nuclear war, usually reacted to scenes like this one by bursting into (bitter) laughter.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* AccidentalAesop: Part of the reason for the death and suffering in the movie is that the authorities never properly prepared for the fallout, both literal and economic, of a nuclear apocalypse. The movie makes a strong case for proper disaster preparation in the event of something as horrific as a nuclear war, though as the U.K. film ''Film/{{Threads}}'' features a government and a town council that, while not completely prepared, at least has taken some precautions, and they're still overwhelmed, and really don't fare that much better.
to:
* AccidentalAesop: Part of the reason for the death and suffering in the movie is that the authorities never properly prepared for the fallout, both literal and economic, of a nuclear apocalypse. The movie makes a strong case for proper disaster preparation in the event of something as horrific as a nuclear war, though as the U.K. film ''Film/{{Threads}}'' features a government and a town council that, while not completely prepared, at least has taken some precautions, and precautions in advance of potential nuclear war. Even with those preparations, they're still overwhelmed, and really don't fare that much better.better. No matter how prepared anyone is, the fallout and supply chain disruptions are just going to be impossible to overcome and lethal.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* AccidentalAesop: Part of the reason for the death and suffering in the movie is that the authorities never properly prepared for the fallout, both literal and economic, of a nuclear apocalypse. The movie makes a strong case for proper disaster preparation in the event of something as horrific as a nuclear war.
to:
* AccidentalAesop: Part of the reason for the death and suffering in the movie is that the authorities never properly prepared for the fallout, both literal and economic, of a nuclear apocalypse. The movie makes a strong case for proper disaster preparation in the event of something as horrific as a nuclear war.war, though as the U.K. film ''Film/{{Threads}}'' features a government and a town council that, while not completely prepared, at least has taken some precautions, and they're still overwhelmed, and really don't fare that much better.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 18 (click to see context) from:
* SlowPacedBeginning: The nukes don't start flying until about 45 minutes in. There is still a [[{{Foreshadowing}} a lot of stuff leading up to it,]] starting with the Russians violating the Warsaw Pact.
to:
* SlowPacedBeginning: The nukes don't start flying until about 45 minutes in. There is still a [[{{Foreshadowing}} a lot of stuff leading up to it,]] starting with the Russians violating the Warsaw Pact.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
* FandomRivalry: A number of viewers are split over whether ''The Day After'' or ''Film/{{Threads}}'' is the superior film. Fans of ''The Day After'' often dismiss ''Threads'' as excessively bleak and feel that the {{Bowdlerisation}} in the US film actually gave enough hope in it to spur a push towards nuclear disarmament, while fans of ''Threads'' criticize ''The Day After'' as too unrealistic and praise the UK film for its greater research. Then there's a third camp that appreciates both films and views the rivalry as a huge case of MisaimedFandom, given that the movies were never meant to be compared to one another like that.
to:
* FandomRivalry: A number of viewers are split over whether ''The Day After'' or ''Film/{{Threads}}'' is the superior film. Fans of ''The Day After'' often dismiss ''Threads'' as excessively bleak and feel that the {{Bowdlerisation}} {{Bowdleri|se}}zation in the US film actually gave enough hope in it to spur a push towards nuclear disarmament, while fans of ''Threads'' criticize ''The Day After'' as too unrealistic and praise the UK film for its greater research. Then there's a third camp that appreciates both films and views the rivalry as a huge case of MisaimedFandom, given that the movies were never meant to be compared to one another like that.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* FandomRivalry: A number of viewers are split over whether ''The Day After'' or ''Film/{{Threads}}'' is the superior film. Fans of ''The Day After'' often dismiss ''Threads'' as excessively bleak and feel that the {{Bowdlerisation}} in the US film actually gave enough hope in it to spur a push towards nuclear disarmament, while fans of ''Threads'' criticize ''The Day After'' as too unrealistic and praise the UK film for its greater research. Then there's a third camp that appreciates both films and views the rivalry as a huge case of MisaimedFandom, given that the movies were never meant to be compared to one another like that.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* SpiritualSuccessor: Like its transatlantic counterpart, ''Film/{{Threads}}'', it's essentially ''Film/TheWarGame'' updated for the '80s.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
** After the announcement that the US armed forces were on DEF-CON 2, one character remarks that she would only be worried if this was over oil in the middle east. In 1991 the US actually did go to DEF-CON 2 during the start of Desert Storm, only 2 years after this movie took place.
to:
** After the announcement that the US armed forces were on DEF-CON 2, one character remarks that she would only be worried if this was over oil in the middle east. In 1991 the US actually did go to DEF-CON 2 during the start of Desert Storm, only 2 years after this movie took place.place InUniverse.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
corrected misspellings
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
* NightmareFuel: It has it's own [[NightmareFuel/TheDayAfter page]], and let's just say that it's '''well earned.'''
to:
* NightmareFuel: It has it's its own [[NightmareFuel/TheDayAfter page]], and let's just say that it's '''well earned.'''
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
The official Nightmare Fuel page has most of the info under this entry. Moving it to the proper page.
Changed line(s) 14,17 (click to see context) from:
* NightmareFuel: While this entry is required to be on YMMV by TV Tropes rules, there is zero doubt that everyone with half a brain who was alive [[UsefulNotes/ColdWar at the time it was shown]] found it ''extremely'' disturbing to know it could happen for real at any moment. There's a reason many stations had to run hotlines to calm down viewers after it aired.
** As a made-for-TV movie, broadcast in prime time, many parents refused to let their kids watch.
** Among those affected included US President Ronald Reagan, who said he had been profoundly shocked and deeply disturbed by the movie. By Reagan's own admission in his memoirs, the experience motivated him to pursue policies which more effectively limited the proliferation of nuclear weapons on the world stage, and stated that it was the reason why he signed the INF Treaty alongside Soviet leader Gorbachev four years later.
** As mentioned elsewhere, this film and ''Threads'' are very realistic interpretations of nuclear devastation. Most horrifying of all, even now the world's governments still have some amount of nuclear weapons in their arsenal (although they had largely disarmed), or are still researching nuclear superiority. Even if the Cold War is over, even if something to the implied level of devastation this film shows probably won't happen, even if it's just a regional nuclear war between, for example, India and Pakistan,... the possibility still exists that ''somewhere'', ''someone'' will end up suffering the horrors of this film '''for real'''.
** As a made-for-TV movie, broadcast in prime time, many parents refused to let their kids watch.
** Among those affected included US President Ronald Reagan, who said he had been profoundly shocked and deeply disturbed by the movie. By Reagan's own admission in his memoirs, the experience motivated him to pursue policies which more effectively limited the proliferation of nuclear weapons on the world stage, and stated that it was the reason why he signed the INF Treaty alongside Soviet leader Gorbachev four years later.
** As mentioned elsewhere, this film and ''Threads'' are very realistic interpretations of nuclear devastation. Most horrifying of all, even now the world's governments still have some amount of nuclear weapons in their arsenal (although they had largely disarmed), or are still researching nuclear superiority. Even if the Cold War is over, even if something to the implied level of devastation this film shows probably won't happen, even if it's just a regional nuclear war between, for example, India and Pakistan,... the possibility still exists that ''somewhere'', ''someone'' will end up suffering the horrors of this film '''for real'''.
to:
* NightmareFuel: While this entry is required to be on YMMV by TV Tropes rules, there is zero doubt that everyone with half a brain who was alive [[UsefulNotes/ColdWar at the time it was shown]] found it ''extremely'' disturbing to know it could happen for real at any moment. There's a reason many stations had to run hotlines to calm down viewers after it aired.
** As a made-for-TV movie, broadcast in prime time, many parents refused to let their kids watch.
** Among those affected included US President Ronald Reagan, who said he had been profoundly shocked and deeply disturbed by the movie. By Reagan's own admission in his memoirs, the experience motivated him to pursue policies which more effectively limited the proliferation of nuclear weapons on the world stage, and stated that it was the reason why he signed the INF Treaty alongside Soviet leader Gorbachev four years later.
** As mentioned elsewhere, this film and ''Threads'' are very realistic interpretations of nuclear devastation. Most horrifying of all, even now the world's governments still have some amount of nuclear weapons in their arsenal (although they had largely disarmed), or are still researching nuclear superiority. Even if the Cold War is over, even if something to the implied level of devastation this film shows probably won't happen, even ifIt has it's own [[NightmareFuel/TheDayAfter page]], and let's just a regional nuclear war between, for example, India and Pakistan,... the possibility still exists say that ''somewhere'', ''someone'' will end up suffering the horrors of this film '''for real'''.it's '''well earned.'''
** As a made-for-TV movie, broadcast in prime time, many parents refused to let their kids watch.
** Among those affected included US President Ronald Reagan, who said he had been profoundly shocked and deeply disturbed by the movie. By Reagan's own admission in his memoirs, the experience motivated him to pursue policies which more effectively limited the proliferation of nuclear weapons on the world stage, and stated that it was the reason why he signed the INF Treaty alongside Soviet leader Gorbachev four years later.
** As mentioned elsewhere, this film and ''Threads'' are very realistic interpretations of nuclear devastation. Most horrifying of all, even now the world's governments still have some amount of nuclear weapons in their arsenal (although they had largely disarmed), or are still researching nuclear superiority. Even if the Cold War is over, even if something to the implied level of devastation this film shows probably won't happen, even if
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* AccidentalAesop: Part of the reason for the death and suffering in the movie is that the authorities never properly prepared for the fallout, both literal and economic, of a nuclear apocalypse. The movie makes a strong case for proper disaster preparation in the event of something as horrific as a nuclear war.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 19 (click to see context) from:
* SlowPacedBeginning: The nukes don't start flying until about 45 minutes in. There is still a [[{{Foreshadowing a lot of stuff leading up to it,]] starting with the Russians violating the Warsaw Pact.
to:
* SlowPacedBeginning: The nukes don't start flying until about 45 minutes in. There is still a [[{{Foreshadowing [[{{Foreshadowing}} a lot of stuff leading up to it,]] starting with the Russians violating the Warsaw Pact.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* SlowPacedBeginning: The nukes don't start flying until about 45 minutes in. There is still a [[{{Foreshadowing a lot of stuff leading up to it,]] starting with the Russians violating the Warsaw Pact.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
* HarsherInHindsight: Any announcement concerning countries continuing to seek out nuclear superiority long after the Cold War has ended or making threats toward each other, meaning that even now this film ''still has a possibility of happening for real''. Not to mention the threat of nuclear terrorism (which, while it wouldn't be as bad as what happened in the movie, could still easily claim millions of lives).
to:
* HarsherInHindsight: HarsherInHindsight:
** Any announcement concerning countries continuing to seek out nuclear superiority long after the Cold War has ended or making threats toward each other, meaning that even now this film ''still has a possibility of happening for real''. Not to mention the threat of nuclear terrorism (which, while it wouldn't be as bad as what happened in the movie, could still easily claim millions of lives).
** Any announcement concerning countries continuing to seek out nuclear superiority long after the Cold War has ended or making threats toward each other, meaning that even now this film ''still has a possibility of happening for real''. Not to mention the threat of nuclear terrorism (which, while it wouldn't be as bad as what happened in the movie, could still easily claim millions of lives).
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
* InferredHolocaust: Aside from the ''actual'' holocaust depicted on screen, there's also the fact that most of the country's, and presumably the world's, farmland is now irradiated to the point of total uselessness (as is most of the seed), all of the livestock is dead (say goodbye to meat and dairy products), and many farmers, fishermen, and animal husbandry experts are now dead or dying. Those who survived the original attack will have done so only to die of starvation later.
to:
* InferredHolocaust: InferredHolocaust:
** Aside from the ''actual'' holocaust depicted on screen, there's also the fact that most of the country's, and presumably the world's, farmland is now irradiated to the point of total uselessness (as is most of the seed), all of the livestock is dead (say goodbye to meat and dairy products), and many farmers, fishermen, and animal husbandry experts are now dead or dying. Those who survived the original attack will have done so only to die of starvation later.
** Aside from the ''actual'' holocaust depicted on screen, there's also the fact that most of the country's, and presumably the world's, farmland is now irradiated to the point of total uselessness (as is most of the seed), all of the livestock is dead (say goodbye to meat and dairy products), and many farmers, fishermen, and animal husbandry experts are now dead or dying. Those who survived the original attack will have done so only to die of starvation later.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Trope being dewicked.
Changed line(s) 17,18 (click to see context) from:
* SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped: There is no way to survive a nuclear attack, period. Even a "limited" nuclear war would cause untold devastation and result in TheEndOfTheWorldAsWeKnowIt.
* TooBleakStoppedCaring: There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to root for any of the characters since they're all fated to die horribly. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Which is the point]].
* TooBleakStoppedCaring: There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to root for any of the characters since they're all fated to die horribly. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Which is the point]].
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
"Free reign" is an eggcorn.
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* AlternateCharacterInterpretation: Is the President just trying to cheer up the survivors? Does he actually believe that the nuclear war was worth it because it was preferable to Soviet oppression? Or is he a callous monster who sees nuclear war as a form of population control and a way to be rid of his opponents in Congress and the senate, thus giving him free reign to do whatever horrible things he wants?
to:
* AlternateCharacterInterpretation: Is the President just trying to cheer up the survivors? Does he actually believe that the nuclear war was worth it because it was preferable to Soviet oppression? Or is he a callous monster who sees nuclear war as a form of population control and a way to be rid of his opponents in Congress and the senate, thus giving him free reign rein to do whatever horrible things he wants?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 17 (click to see context) :
* SoBleakItsBoring: There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to root for any of the characters since they're all fated to die horribly. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Which is the point]].
Added DiffLines:
* TooBleakStoppedCaring: There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to root for any of the characters since they're all fated to die horribly. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Which is the point]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
** As mentioned elsewhere, this film and ''Threads'' are very realistic interpretations of nuclear devastation. Most horrifying of all, even now the world's governments still have some amount of nuclear weapons in their arsenal (although they had largely disarmed), or are still researching nuclear superiority. Even if the Cold War is over, even if something to the implied level of devastation this film shows probably won't happen... the possibility still exists that ''somewhere'', ''someone'' will end up suffering the horrors of this film '''for real'''.
to:
** As mentioned elsewhere, this film and ''Threads'' are very realistic interpretations of nuclear devastation. Most horrifying of all, even now the world's governments still have some amount of nuclear weapons in their arsenal (although they had largely disarmed), or are still researching nuclear superiority. Even if the Cold War is over, even if something to the implied level of devastation this film shows probably won't happen...happen, even if it's just a regional nuclear war between, for example, India and Pakistan,... the possibility still exists that ''somewhere'', ''someone'' will end up suffering the horrors of this film '''for real'''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 3 (click to see context) :
* DarknessInducedAudienceApathy: There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to root for any of the characters since they're all doomed to die horribly. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Which is the point]].
Added DiffLines:
* SoBleakItsBoring: There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to root for any of the characters since they're all fated to die horribly. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Which is the point]].