Michael Aspel, Peter Graham

Peter Watkins' The War Game, which was filmed in handheld documentary fashion, speculates on the aftereffects of a nuclear war. Some of the images are almost impossible to look at; they truly illustra...( read more  read more... )te the theory that, in the wake of such a holocaust, the living will envy the dead. The most heartwrenching scene is the simplest. Asked what he wants to be when he grows up, a sullen young boy, physically unhurt but with obviously deep emotional scars, mutters I don't want to be nothin'. Filmed for BBC television, The War Game was rejected by that august concern as being too graphic. The 47-minute film was released to theaters, making it eligible for the Best Documentary Academy Award, which it won in 1966.~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide

Flixster Users

86% liked it

880 ratings

Critics

92% liked it

12 critics

Unrated, 48 min.

Directed by: Peter Watkins

Release Date: January 1, 1966

Invite friends to see

Stats: 81 reviews

Photos


None yet... Got one?

Your Rating



clear rating

Flixster Reviews (81)


  • February 9, 2008
    A faux documentary on the aftermath of a nuclear attack on a city in Britain. Watkins's use of montage editing with his multi-perspective narrative is extremely effective and powerful. The film is very well researched and enacted, and become even more horrifying because everyth...( read more)ing depicted in the film has happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and is within the realm of possibility, even for today. The film is very powerful even today, and it seems no surprise that it was banned from TV for 20 years during the Cold War. (so much for BBC's independence from the government)
  • March 30, 2007
    A disturbing fictional account of a nuclear attack on Britain. The level of detail this "documentary" goes into would be called "enlightening" if it wasn't for the positive connotations that word implies.

    The grim newsreel style documenting the horror of a post-nuclear emergency...( read more) is firmly based in factual extrapolations based on the Dresden Bombings as well as Hiroshima. The film moves fluidly and effectively from the blast all the way to food riots, disposal of bodies and corpse identification.

    Amazingly effective for a low-budget TV movie, with amazing acting for a cast of total unknowns.

    Graphic and socially unnerving. One of the few films that transcends the age of Atomic Paranoia in which it was made and focuses upon.
  • April 20, 2009
    A film which, though dated, warrants five stars because of its courage and because it attempted to deliver an essential message in the face of extraordinary opposition.

    This is Peter Watkins' graphic account of a potential nuclear strike on the UK. Intended for showing in 1965...( read more) it was banned by the BBC until 1985 on the basis that it was too horrifying for public viewing - the BBC denied that it had come under political pressure to cancel the broadcast. The film was widely shown in art cinemas and in colleges, and private viewings were arranged by many anti-war activists.

    The film (made in b&w and running for less than 50 minutes) takes a drama documentary approach, explaining systematically how widespread would be the destruction should a Soviet nuclear attack be launched. The film opens by identifying the likely targets for a nuclear strike - making clear that in the UK, because of the density of its island population and proximity of military / air force bases to the country's cities, any first strike would eradicate a third of the population and reduce the UK to ashes.

    Survivors of a first strike would be exposed to crippling injuries - blindness, first degree burns, blast and shrapnel injuries. Within two months many would die through the effects of nuclear fall-out. The disruption and destruction of gas, electricity, water, sewage, road, rail, and distribution networks would have lasting effects. There would be no radio, television, or telephone communications left operable (except, potentially, for a few limited military ones).

    Fire storms would ravage cities, there would be few houses left undamaged, few left habitable. Food stocks would be confined to what survived the attack - there would be little prospect of food imports being available. Within months there would be severe malnutrition, the lasting effects of radiation, plus dysentery, typhus, cholera, plagues of rats and vermin. Psychiatric disorders and post traumatic stress would be widespread.

    The economy would come to a standstill. Food would be the only acceptable currency. Fire services, medical services, emergency services would be overwhelmed and functionally useless. Martial law would be declared - surviving military and police personnel would adopt extreme measures to try to preserve a semblance of order.

    Any missile attack would be likely to offer only a three minute warning of destruction. The film contrasts the planned government reaction (with evacuation of populations from cities and dispersal to the country) and its reliance on individuals building their own shelters (economically impracticable and effectively useless). Official plans for regional government and emergency responses would be overwhelmed and submerged in chaos - even assuming those responsible survived.

    The images are harrowing. The film follows a likely scenario which might have resulted in the Cold War of the 1960's going hot. It made clear the fact that the UK was practically defenceless in the face of a nuclear strike. Nothing has changed, only the scale.

    The film is clearly dated - not least in its style and cinematic techniques. What really dates it, however, is the fact that nuclear weapons are bigger and more devastating than they were in the 1960's. What hasn't dated is the horror it portrays and the blindness of those who continue to insist that nuclear weapons have a moral and political legitimacy.

    It is quite obvious why there was pressure to prevent its showing - and you have to ask why such films are not produced so regularly that no one in the country can be left in any doubt as to what a nuclear war might entail? The film can be seen online - do a search for the title, and be afraid, be very afraid.
  • December 10, 2008
    Amazing banded Documentary. Even forgetting the subject matter and the Time period. This film is Fantastically directed. incredible framing and mise-en-scene. this is the best Emotive documentary i think I've seen and I've gained a new favourite Director
  • February 12, 2008
    The War Game, written by Peter Watkins and starring Michael Aspel, Peter Graham, Kathy Staff and Peter Watkins, is a fictional, worst-case-scenario docu-drama about nuclear war and its aftermath in and around a typical English city. Although it won an Oscar for Best Documentary, ...( read more)it is fiction. It was intended as an hour-long program to air on BBC 1, but it was deemed too intense and violent to broadcast. It went to theatrical distribution as a feature film instead. Low-budget and shot on location, it strives for and achieves convincing and unflinching realism. Part interviews and quotations, part acting, this film simulates the aftermath of a large-scale nuclear attack near a rural area of England. It argues that citizens and Civil Defense authorities are poorly prepared for this eventuality, and describes possible physical, psychological and social damage in graphic detail
  • October 22, 2007
    This is a (thankfully) fictional imagining of post-nuclear Britain. Never seen the whole film, but even a few minutes of it made it the most terrifying film I have ever seen (and I was born in post soviet times!). The way it is presented as a factual newreel or documentary make i...( read more)t seem so realistic, as well as the fact its based on what happened in the bombed-out Dresden and freshly aniliated Hiroshima make it even more covincing. Chills you more then any expensive, CGI enhanced horror blockbuster.
  • May 29, 2007
    nice one worth watching
  • April 7, 2007
    It was interesting to hear the concern of the narator that a nuclear war would probably happen by 1980. All we have to be afraid of are phoney terrorists.

Critic Reviews


October 23, 2004
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

One of the most skillful documentary films ever made. full review

View more The War Game reviews at RottenTomatoes.com

Comments


This board looks lonely. Be the first to talk about "The War Game" !

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

More Like This


Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • The Atomic Cafe
    The Atomic Cafe (100%)
  • Nuit et Brouillard (Night and Fog)
    Nuit et Brouillard (Night and Fog) (50%)
  • Culloden (The Battle of Culloden)
    Culloden (The Battle of Culloden) (100%)
  • Threads
    Threads (100%)

Facts


No facts approved yet. Be the first

The War Game : Watch Free on TV


The War Game Trivia


  • A hacker breaks into the government's nuclear war warning system in this movie. Tagline: Is it a game, or is it real?  Answer »
  • A young computer whizz kid accidentally connects into a top secret super-computer which has complete control over the U.S. nuclear arsenal. It challenges him to a game between America and Russia, and he innocently starts the countdown to World War 3.  Answer »
  • who starred in the china syndrome,had a war with a variety of flowers,had a game while falling down and was in traffic?   Answer »
  • "Do not speak to me of rules. This is war! This is not a game of cricket!" Which war film?  Answer »

Movie Quizzes


No quizzes for The War Game. Want to create one?

Video Clips


No video clips yet. Want to upload one?

Recent News


No recent headlines. Got one?

Most Popular Skin


No skins yet. Interested in creating one?