There was a time when I was pessimistic about the immediate future of human kind and I viewed my own life in that context. These days although I think about such issues on a daily basis I am more preoccupied with what is going to happen to me and my work, It is not dying that I fear but the nature and circumstances of that death and that is also so for those of the next and subsequent generations, although for them there is the sense of unfairness should they not have the opportunity to see, hear, feel and touch and experience the same level of joy, more so than I have been privileged, and then there is the hope that they will be also not be subject to the same levels of pain, unhappiness and discontent.
I was reminded of that time, the time when the main preoccupation was not with my own experience and destiny but the immediate welfare of everyone else when finding the 2000 remake for TV of Neville Shute's On the Beach, the apocalyptic 1959 film of the book set in 1963, the film used 1964, when the northern hemisphere was destroyed by and East West nuclear exchange. However global air currents were moving lethal radiation clouds blown across Africa and the southern hemisphere.
Suddenly a Morse code message is received which suggests a survivor(s) and Gregory Peck goes off as captain of a nuclear submarine which has taken refuge in Australia to investigate leaving behind a woman with who he has had a relationship (Ava Gardner). He is the not the only one in this situation.
One sub plot is that of an Australian Naval Officer (Anthony Perkins) assigned to travel with the submarine and who is forced to leave behind wife who dos not accept the likelihood of death from radiation and the need to use the suicide pills issued by the Australian government to the population. Could any government which had substantial populations of religious believers reach that point and could those who believe ever reach that point, not for themselves I would like to believe, the way of the cross for Christians, Jews and Muslims again, me thinks. But what of their dependents? In the film remake film the captain watches in great horror as a young parent in a car with his wife and two adorable happy children, drives them straight off a cliff. It is a sickening stomach churning moment designed to register with the audience the reality and horror of the predicament without reminding of the reality of Hiroshima and Nagasaki experience by all those innocent, guiltless non combatants destroyed and mutilated in the name of saving the lives of combatants in a war that the majority of the USA nation did not want and was forced on them by the other side. Such decisions are never black and white, especially for those in government.
The expedition in the original books and film to find the source of the Morse signal, hoped that that the radiation level at the Artic would be less but instead the levels are found to be intensifying. One crew members jumps ship when they reach San Francisco and is last seen fishing off shore in his craft waiting to die in his home town. Then they discover on reaching the signal that it has not been caused by a human being but a Coca Cola bottle wedged at hitting the Morse key from time to time, hence the incoherent nature of the message. Bitterly disappointed the submarine returns to Australia. This was the moment in the film which most affected people because it meant there was no hope for any loved ones, no hope for any of the human kind on the planet.
When they returned the issues was how to spend those final days. Some organise a dangerous motor race in which several die. The population began to line up outside hospital for the suicide pills The wife cannot bear to think and understand, does so but asks her husband to take responsibility for her and their child. The captain of the submarine has an affair but is troubled sufficiently to seek spiritual guidance from the Salvation army and elects to return to the USA with the majority of the crew to die at home than in a foreign field.
The film was directed by Stanley Kramer and unlike the novel suggests that the destruction was caused by accident. In the book the submarine is taken out to sea to be scuttled while the character played by Ava Gardener in the film sits in a car watching and then takes her suicide pill. The book is therefore more angry and pessimistic to make its point while the film tried to show some people not giving up despite the inevitability of what was to happen. It was this form of fighting on which had a great influence on me and others whose resolved to take action to try and prevent such an event occurring. It was very sad when we were pilloried and misrepresented as to why we were doing what we then did. Now I can understand and have long since forgiven.
The US department of Defence and Navy refused to cooperate in the making of the film which was shown in several cities around the world including Moscow. The nuclear scientist in the film was played by Fred Astaire at the age of 60 in his first straight role. While critics agreed the Gregory peck had the right approach for a serious disaster movie there was general agreement that Ava Gardener and Fred Astaire had been miscast. The made for TV version concentrates more on the relationships and has the possibility of survivors ending as the submarine sets off. It lacked the emotional impact and political force of the original film despite its shortcomings. I have a vague notion that the local CND group went off together to a special showing at the Odeon Cinema.. I had hoped to se part two of Apocalypse 10.5 the disaster movie about the force of nature destroying the world but it was part one again which has been shown several times over the past week without part two. This is irritating and probably intended to achieve what I am doing which is keeping one eye on the channel, although I do not watch other films being shown, always on the look out for those film from the past or those which cover a theme which is of interest and relevance to my work.
The weather was dreadful again, worse than autumnal because it was also cold reminding of the Winter to come, Winter again without summer. Nasty.
In contrast earlier in the day I gave full attention to Brief Encounter in a way I do not recall from all the previous viewings which commenced when taken a young boy by the Aunties to see the film at the Wallington Odeon. This beautifully made film with a background score of Rachmaninoff has a message just as important in today's liberal society as it did after World War II when the traditional approach to marriage and extra marital relationship had softened and those behind the film, including Noel Coward who wrote the script were anxious to establish the need for self sacrifice and doing duty in ones personal life as had been necessary in wartime. As with Casablanca the film is so well written and acted that it transcends its time, and because the story is deeper than its obvious message. The relationship between the married to other partners is nearly consummated except for the unexpected return of the owner of the apartment which the General Practice Doctor uses on his day a week working at a hospital which brings him to London while the bored and unappreciated wife nearly throws herself on the line before an express train rather than return to her life before the two met. Such relationships are never simple, always potentially dangerous because individuals when in the grip of emotion and passion lose their rationality. I have to admit it was the first time that I was truly caught up in the emotions of the two particular characters because of their reserve and gentility, so removed from the experience of my childhood and much of my life as an adult.
On my way to the supermarket in the afternoon during a brief respite from the rain I listened to a very talkative Cliff Richard full of self justification and pushing his book and forthcoming Tour as if there was no tomorrow. He was talking about his faith and his loneliness and how he has become less judgemental over recent years and it struck me that he was another soul who grasped the approach of death and its potential finality and that all his previous experience, his wealth, his possessions would come to naught. Or perhaps not!
I was reminded of that time, the time when the main preoccupation was not with my own experience and destiny but the immediate welfare of everyone else when finding the 2000 remake for TV of Neville Shute's On the Beach, the apocalyptic 1959 film of the book set in 1963, the film used 1964, when the northern hemisphere was destroyed by and East West nuclear exchange. However global air currents were moving lethal radiation clouds blown across Africa and the southern hemisphere.
Suddenly a Morse code message is received which suggests a survivor(s) and Gregory Peck goes off as captain of a nuclear submarine which has taken refuge in Australia to investigate leaving behind a woman with who he has had a relationship (Ava Gardner). He is the not the only one in this situation.
One sub plot is that of an Australian Naval Officer (Anthony Perkins) assigned to travel with the submarine and who is forced to leave behind wife who dos not accept the likelihood of death from radiation and the need to use the suicide pills issued by the Australian government to the population. Could any government which had substantial populations of religious believers reach that point and could those who believe ever reach that point, not for themselves I would like to believe, the way of the cross for Christians, Jews and Muslims again, me thinks. But what of their dependents? In the film remake film the captain watches in great horror as a young parent in a car with his wife and two adorable happy children, drives them straight off a cliff. It is a sickening stomach churning moment designed to register with the audience the reality and horror of the predicament without reminding of the reality of Hiroshima and Nagasaki experience by all those innocent, guiltless non combatants destroyed and mutilated in the name of saving the lives of combatants in a war that the majority of the USA nation did not want and was forced on them by the other side. Such decisions are never black and white, especially for those in government.
The expedition in the original books and film to find the source of the Morse signal, hoped that that the radiation level at the Artic would be less but instead the levels are found to be intensifying. One crew members jumps ship when they reach San Francisco and is last seen fishing off shore in his craft waiting to die in his home town. Then they discover on reaching the signal that it has not been caused by a human being but a Coca Cola bottle wedged at hitting the Morse key from time to time, hence the incoherent nature of the message. Bitterly disappointed the submarine returns to Australia. This was the moment in the film which most affected people because it meant there was no hope for any loved ones, no hope for any of the human kind on the planet.
When they returned the issues was how to spend those final days. Some organise a dangerous motor race in which several die. The population began to line up outside hospital for the suicide pills The wife cannot bear to think and understand, does so but asks her husband to take responsibility for her and their child. The captain of the submarine has an affair but is troubled sufficiently to seek spiritual guidance from the Salvation army and elects to return to the USA with the majority of the crew to die at home than in a foreign field.
The film was directed by Stanley Kramer and unlike the novel suggests that the destruction was caused by accident. In the book the submarine is taken out to sea to be scuttled while the character played by Ava Gardener in the film sits in a car watching and then takes her suicide pill. The book is therefore more angry and pessimistic to make its point while the film tried to show some people not giving up despite the inevitability of what was to happen. It was this form of fighting on which had a great influence on me and others whose resolved to take action to try and prevent such an event occurring. It was very sad when we were pilloried and misrepresented as to why we were doing what we then did. Now I can understand and have long since forgiven.
The US department of Defence and Navy refused to cooperate in the making of the film which was shown in several cities around the world including Moscow. The nuclear scientist in the film was played by Fred Astaire at the age of 60 in his first straight role. While critics agreed the Gregory peck had the right approach for a serious disaster movie there was general agreement that Ava Gardener and Fred Astaire had been miscast. The made for TV version concentrates more on the relationships and has the possibility of survivors ending as the submarine sets off. It lacked the emotional impact and political force of the original film despite its shortcomings. I have a vague notion that the local CND group went off together to a special showing at the Odeon Cinema.. I had hoped to se part two of Apocalypse 10.5 the disaster movie about the force of nature destroying the world but it was part one again which has been shown several times over the past week without part two. This is irritating and probably intended to achieve what I am doing which is keeping one eye on the channel, although I do not watch other films being shown, always on the look out for those film from the past or those which cover a theme which is of interest and relevance to my work.
The weather was dreadful again, worse than autumnal because it was also cold reminding of the Winter to come, Winter again without summer. Nasty.
In contrast earlier in the day I gave full attention to Brief Encounter in a way I do not recall from all the previous viewings which commenced when taken a young boy by the Aunties to see the film at the Wallington Odeon. This beautifully made film with a background score of Rachmaninoff has a message just as important in today's liberal society as it did after World War II when the traditional approach to marriage and extra marital relationship had softened and those behind the film, including Noel Coward who wrote the script were anxious to establish the need for self sacrifice and doing duty in ones personal life as had been necessary in wartime. As with Casablanca the film is so well written and acted that it transcends its time, and because the story is deeper than its obvious message. The relationship between the married to other partners is nearly consummated except for the unexpected return of the owner of the apartment which the General Practice Doctor uses on his day a week working at a hospital which brings him to London while the bored and unappreciated wife nearly throws herself on the line before an express train rather than return to her life before the two met. Such relationships are never simple, always potentially dangerous because individuals when in the grip of emotion and passion lose their rationality. I have to admit it was the first time that I was truly caught up in the emotions of the two particular characters because of their reserve and gentility, so removed from the experience of my childhood and much of my life as an adult.
On my way to the supermarket in the afternoon during a brief respite from the rain I listened to a very talkative Cliff Richard full of self justification and pushing his book and forthcoming Tour as if there was no tomorrow. He was talking about his faith and his loneliness and how he has become less judgemental over recent years and it struck me that he was another soul who grasped the approach of death and its potential finality and that all his previous experience, his wealth, his possessions would come to naught. Or perhaps not!
No comments:
Post a Comment