@MercuryRis Am guessing an actual Et toy. I think (and am sure someone else has said this) Et was maybe realised around the same time this was broadcast
@SCE2AUX For you and the Americans maybe, but for all the victims of Atomic blast and post deats from radiation i don`t think so ... And don`t tell me now please how this have saved 1 milion Americans, and how important was to kill so many civilians to save the soldiers. I talking about the moral use of Nuclear devise on civilians, i repeat Nuclear , bec the bombing of Dresden is like a child game in front of Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
@Danmara Hey smart guy, the Japanese government had already mobilized millions of its citizens to fight off an American invasion. While our estimates ranged from 1-5 million dead Japanese civilians, their own Navy estimated as many as 20 MILLION civilian casualties. Instead, the bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki took the lives of about 250,000. You want to tell the remaining millions that they should have died to save the world from nuclear weapon usage?
@Aelfgeft I dont know who is playing smart here, but i ment that they have to use it on a military targets, or not to used it at all. 250000 civilians i repeat civilians, tell me how many American civilians are died in both world wars. Who was Truman to deside who need to die and who need to live a god or .....
@Danmara When civilians are mobilized to fight - they are no longer "civilians." In any case, civilians are fully responsible for the actions of their government. Tojo was also a civilian.
Truman decided who would die on the basis that they were the enemy - and they were not surrendering.
@Danmara First of all, when civilians are armed by the government and told to kill the enemy's soldiers, they are no longer civilians. Secondly, did American citizens have to die to make the bombings right? Seems you're a bit bloodthirsty, and missing the point. 250K Japanese civilians died so that millions of Japanese civilians and soldiers, AND American soldiers did not die. Less died so many, many more could live. What don't you get about that?
Anyone exposed to significant amounts of fallout would experience radiation poisoning. Victims' hair would begin to fall out, their ability to fight infections and clot blood would wither, and their flesh would begin to decay from necrosis. The people that died from the initial fireball would be lucky.
@jasonthedragon73 and also America or 'the west' as you call us havent 'attacked' anyone, were we 'attacking' Germany when the nazis were murdering millions of innocent people and invading everywhere in Europe? Were we 'attacking' Iraq when we liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein? Who are you? Have you been under a stone for the past hundred years? You sound like an idiot!
I say Iran is a rogue state because this is blatently obvious, the country is run by muslim extremists, they have shariah law which causes some appauling human rights atrocities, they sponsor insurgents in Afghanistan / Iraq who kill tens of thousands (including coalition soldiers) with their improvised explosive devices, their foreign diplomacy record is a joke, many of their diplomats worldwide have been expelled, they are creating nuclear weapons in secret, what else d'yah wanna know?
Only these so-called 'rogue states' - Iran / North Korea and maybe some crazy islamist extremist groups would be stupid enough to dabble with using nukes as they have nothing to lose. I very much doubt that the U.S / Russia / China etc would consider using their nukes for any purpose, and certainly not against one another, these countries economies are too intertwined and to nuke each other, aside from mutually assured destruction, would be too economically costly. I dont have nightmares anymore
@airedaleauctioneer Why do you consider Iran to be a "rogue" state?. The USA is the only country that has actually used them..Iran hasn't attacked anybody for hundreds of years. Unlike the west..
Since I saw this film I joined CND and I went on demonstrations (and got to go to Glastonbury Festival for free - which was nice!) and invaded American airbases to protest against them using our country as a nuclear launch pad. You cant not know the destructive power of nuclear weapons, there are constantly tv programmes / documentaries / films about their destructive power. Thankfully the really big nukes have now gone, but still there are thousands of smaller, more accurate nukes still.
I recall back in 1987 for our Friday afternoon double English lesson we were 'treated' to a viewing of this harrowing docudrama. Kids were running out of the library puking and some of the girls were sobbing... Of course this was when the cold war was still very much in full swing and the threat of nuclear annihilation was all too present. I had recurring nightmares about WW3 for years afterwards. Fortunately the cold war is over, yes nukes still exist, but a full scale exchange is not likely.
All that whimpering and crying..what about this "stiff upper lip" thing? I guess it makes for better drama to show those visibly upset. But I should think the pure shock of an event like this would curb weeping and wailing for at least the first few days.
Used to shit me up this film, its alot more grim than the American film "The Day After" though that is of a bigger scale. Both very good anti-nuke movies.
Part of the classic set of 80's nuke films: the day after, testament. I wish some had done an interview of the cast; they've done a fantastic job in their respective roles!!!!
"The survivors of the nuclear fire called the war 'Judgement Day'. They lived only to face a new nightmare.. The war against the machines...." Linda Hamilton - Terminator 2
n 1938 many people feared that Hitler would build an atomic bomb after word spread that German scientist had split the uranium atom , one of Hitlers mistakes was his persecution of Jewish scientists. This persecution resulted in numerous scientists seeking asylum in the United States. One such scientist was Einstein. Einstein, abandoning his belief in pacifism, urged president Franklin Roosevelt to develop an atomic bomb before Hitler . Roosevelt agreed
Einstein developed the theory that made the bombs and peaceful uses of nuclear power possible. Though a longtime pacifist, he was instrumental in persuading Pres. Franklin Roosevelt in 1939 to initiate the Manhattan Project for the production of an atomic bomb, a technology his own theories greatly furthered, though he did not work on the project himself .... Im partly right without einsteins theory maybe there would be no bombs... I do however accept my inaccurate comment
@scatteredmist Einstein didn't invent the nuke and split the atom you dummy. Leo Szilard discovered how to split the atom. The first nuke was invented by a whole team of physicists headed by Julius Oppenheimer. the nuclear program was considered necessary because of Hitlers rise to power, should he learn how to split the atom first - in which he tried but failed
@joyandian If you read "The German Atomic Bomb" by David Irving you will see that the Germans too had split the atom, but they simply did not have enough heavy water to build an atomic weapon large enough to be of value.
@joyandian Thank goodness for smart people like you. lol. the bomb was meant to end all wars until the Soviets changed the Balance of Power with their development of the bomb based on communist spies, I believe. than along came the H bomb...and a "my dick is bigger than yours" war...thanks again for posting this.
@scatteredmist Einstein didn't create the nuke, the USA did. All Einstein did was work out the mathematics behind the splitting of the atom. He was a genius, but others turned his work into the Nuke.
@honkdalonk You're right, animals "don't make holocaust and nuclear wars." They just eat each other alive while those preyed upon scream in helpless agony. Seriously, stop pretending that the animal world is like Disney's Bambi. It's not.
Which begs the question, if you hope all humans die and "leave animals alone," why haven't you set an example yet?
Oh, that's right, you really mean "I hope all humans except me die," because you think you're the only sensible human on the planet.
@honkdalonk My point is that the nature is inherently cruel and unforgiving, and that's something misanthropic animal lovers such as yourself seem to forget. Animals experience horrifying, painful deaths all the time in the wild, by the actions of other animals. Your hopes for the death of every human on the planet will not make that better.
In fact, by hoping for the death of every human on the planet, you are more of a monster than the people who would cause a nuclear war. Imagine that!
@ph1980 Why do you say Ruth is a bitch?.... I think Ruth is a really good character especially after the attack. It can't be easy to survive a nuclaer war then give birth in a derelict barn with an ferocious dog outside then provide food and shelter for her child in a radioactive post-apocyliptic wasteland to eventually drop dead 10 years later from exhaustion, starvation and culminating effects radiation
@Mrbrianjohnson951 How can you "bend down and kiss your ass"?.... No ones that flexible, but maybe our deformed mutant radioactive children will be able to.
Film - 10/10, Chances of the BBC showing this at primetime/something as hard-hitting as this? - 0/10. Threads was effectively banned after it's second showing in 1985, it was repeated on BBC4 20 yrs later and that was it. Too scary.
Insane bastards who sought the creation of this! What ever happened to two armies meeting on the battle field with their kings leading them? Why do the rest of us have to suffer. What if they gave a war and nobody came?
King Arthur fucks up by executing the King of a nearby realm.
The Queen of the victim declares war on Camelot and advances her army which could easilt kick Arthur's arse.
Arthur apologises to the irate queen and offers to settle the matter by single combat, where the war will be decided by one champion from each side (he selects himself of course).
I call that "Modern International Sport". The perfect substitute for war.
note to filmmakers: huge budgets and spectacle do not equal more effective drama. Threads uses stock footage but still does the job better than any Cameron/Bruckheimer/Hollywood mess ever did. This movie scares the shite out of me. (But there's still some pretty hilarious comments here!)
@StrahaoftheRace what amazes me is that both the yanks and brits make a very harsh realistic film about the effects of nuclear war...the aussies???...well there answer to surviving in a post apocaliptic world is to drive around the countryside on motorbikes in full leather clad bondage gear with an ex-brutalised cop in pursuit, oh and not forgetting some fuckwit peodophile in a gyro copter!
This BBC film gave me Nightmares and THE DAY AFTER also, Both of these films is Chilling and True. i have no words to describe but just to be shocked.
The scene at the end of this part is actually a little bit subtle but very hard hitting ( 9:22 - 10:00 ). The despair on the man's face, as it cuts to the picture of presumably his wife, when he asks about how safe she could be at the various locations on the map. Wow.
@anisete46 Not quite. He was chief exec of the local council; she went to the location in the country (Botley from memory - I have the DVD) to be with family - as the assumption was that she'd be safe while he had to stay and help pick up the pieces... or they so thought on the training he'd been on.
The Soviets and the US each had over 3000 nuclear missiles at the time and still possess roughly the same number. Do you really think the Soviets would fire only a few at the UK and throw away the other some 2900 nukes? If a nuclear war really took place, you can expect at least 10 nukes on the UK as bare minumum. Although one would be enough to annihilate it for good. The other thousands are heading straight to the US and the rest of West. Don't even kid me here.
@UnitedKorean The Russians had over a hundred ICBMs aimed at the UK, I've seen the map of their intended targets, there were 10 for London alone. I doubt one would be enough to annihalte the UK for good.
I'm pretty sure that every part with the soundless burning and flashes of light upset me. The cat was sad, the faceless people were sad... I felt so badly for the grandmother. To the people who only care about the animals because they are innocent victims, what about the young babies and children? Pretty much everyone are innocent victims, especially the kids. I would cry if I saw both a dog (or cat or whatever) and a child (or teenager or adult or elder) suffering because of this.
The day after is a hollywood film. Threads was created with help from scentists and psycologists. Threads was banned from the Uk when it was created due to fear of causing panic to the public. Eventually it was allowed to be shown. Theads is a documentary not designed for entertainment but to show the horror of nuclear warfare and what follows it when law and order breakdown and not enough food, fuel, education, health treatment to go around.
@NielsShoe While you are right that scientists were involved in making this as consultants, it was not banned. You are probably thinking of The War Game, a 1960s docu-drama that Peter Watkins was commissioned by the BBC to create based on the aftermath of a nuclear attack set in and around a town in Kent.
Watkins did so with accuracy, and the resulting film was so harrowing that when goverment ministers saw an advanced screening they ordered the BBC to never broadcast it for fear it would lead to calls for unilateral disarmament. It languished in the vaults of the BBC until the ban was finally lifted relatively recently...
@divinedegenerate I think you might be thinking about 'The War Game' the 1960's BBC drama. This was originally broadcast on BBC2 shortly after being made. If I recall correctly The first broadcast of Threads was after the first ever broadcast of The War Game.
@WilliamHook9 Er.... that's what I said... The War Game was banned, not Threads. I think you are confusing me with the comment I am replying to originally...
@NielsShoe Threads was not banned. I remember watching it aged 9 on its very first broadcast in 1985. I think you are thinking of the BBC 1960's production called 'The War Game'. This was only broadcast for the first time just before 'Threads'.
The bit where the sound cuts out and everything burns is terrifying. That said, I'd rather die in the blast than survive, judging what comes after it. TV would never show something this hard-hitting nowadays.
@nemzz9st Let me guess, its better because it happen to north americans, isn't it? if something the post-nuclear and post-apocalyptic north americans movies show us is when all ends, their country will fall in hands of armed rednecks and vicious preachers taking the chance to turn a race to another.
What's bad is that these are initial strikes from subs and ICBMs. The worst damage is when the Russian Backfire bombers come in later and clean up what's left. If it's 3:30 in the morning in the U.S., most people would die in their sleep -- or worse yet, wake up to the horrific chaos of a night-time attack.
I agree. I always felt that Threads, as grim as it was, was a little optimistic about the follow on events. I really do think it would have been the end and there would have been no chance of survival. Personally, if this happened tomorrow, I'd find reason to go and live next to a strategic target, and get it over with quickly. No hanging around dying or radiation sickness or starvation. The thought of living in a post nuclear world. Not for me thanks.
@lukequixotesanjose Yep. Even though "Threads" and "The Day After" showed the horror and the breakdown of civilization -- none of them showed that there was no hope of survival. I don't think we'd survive as a species. I live about 5 miles from a major city. That means that my family would suffer severe burns and a grisly death from the immediate radiation expended from a bomb. Not a pleasant thought. I pray that the world never sees another nuke go off. But I'm afraid that we will.
@MasterJediDude Well the only scenario as I see it is if terrorist gets their hands on nuclear weapons...I really dont see fullscale nuclear war happening, not when everyone knows that it would be mutual assured destruction, and end of life as we know it....that balance of fear was the thing that prevented the cold war from escalating into nuclear war in the first place
But in case of fullscale nuclear war it would be just better to get as close to place that would most likely get direct hit
I was not alived in 1984 so I haven't lived through this, but I really do find this film trully haunting. While I'm not an extreme lover of animals, the part that affects me the most is where the cat is struggling. I really hope that our world NEVER comes to this.
I like that they emphasise the fires quite strongly, because if you've read Lynn Eden's book about this, Western war-planners almost entirely ignored that almost all of the damage caused would be incendiary. The open air anywhere within several miles of a nuclear detonation would be hot enough to boil water. The firestorms would suck the oxygen out of any shelters, incinerate everything, and super-heat the rubble so that no-one could walk in the open for days without being cooked.
For me, the worst part of this movie is seeing the Kemps huddled in the smoking ruins of their house, and how badly burned Mrs Kemp is, in such pain that she can't even tolerate her husband's attempt to gently press a cloth to her face and hands. And hearing the voices of their neighbors trapped and calling for help.
Are you ppl fkn serious? 'oh the poor innocent cat'? All the human suffering and ppl are bothered about a fkn cat. I'm just as much an animal lover as anyone else, but ppl really need to get their priorities right. Shiggityblam is spot on, to all the ppl who agreed with that comment, 'oh it was the cat that upset me most', if you were in this situation, your family were dead, or suffering or dying, would you think yeah well I totally desrved this cos i'm a human, and the humans are to blame!
@gaff69 Well the people who made this movie obviously put the single shot of a cat in it for a reason. They obviously knew it would really upset people, so I think you're the odd one out.
If they had / have the intelligence to know exactly where to pinpoint for maximum damage, then they've the intelligence to realise that we will know what they know and exactly how to hit back,. And that the whole thing's pointless.
They should have used an unoccupied interior room in the basement as a bomb shelter. Some cheap pieces of wood in combination with fabrics and blankets will do NOTHING to block alpha, beta, and lethal gamma radiation from fallout.
@MIKON8ERISBACK Who has a basement in the UK? Most people live in small 2 storey homes, no cellar. Better to have dug up the back garden, install a shelter there
@MIKON8ERISBACK They were following the official advice for the event of a nuclear attack. I remember the public information films before the TV started in the mornings. You were supposed to take all your doors off their hinges and build a ridged tunnel with them, cover it over with mattresses and blankets, fill it with cushions, bedding and enough supplies to last several days and then seal yourself in. Of course it'd do no good, but that was what they told us to do if we got nuked.
@MrGibbonici I have an unfinished and unused room in my finished basement that would do better than that crap. Do any houses in the UK have basements with interior rooms?
@MIKON8ERISBACK Some have cellars but most don't. Not that a cellar would be much safer in any British city in the event of a nuclear attack. At the time everyone knew that the official government advice was useless; the point of showing it in the film was to show the futility of it. All that had to be done in 4 minutes too, which was the expected warning period.
@ 00:44 and 00:45 that thing burning looks like E.T.
magic1969ify 3 days ago
@MercuryRis Am guessing an actual Et toy. I think (and am sure someone else has said this) Et was maybe realised around the same time this was broadcast
85flintstone 1 week ago
@85flintstone
Exactly true - I remember queueing around the block for ET in 1982.
jazzx251 2 days ago
Shit they got E.T.!!
85flintstone 1 week ago
@85flintstone yeah at.45 what was that?
MercuryRis 1 week ago
I just hope that Harry Truman is burning in Hell right next to Hitler, Stalin, Mao and bomber Harry...
Danmara 2 weeks ago
@Danmara Hiroshima and Nagasaki were fully justified. Dresden was more morally questionable.
SCE2AUX 1 week ago
@SCE2AUX For you and the Americans maybe, but for all the victims of Atomic blast and post deats from radiation i don`t think so ... And don`t tell me now please how this have saved 1 milion Americans, and how important was to kill so many civilians to save the soldiers. I talking about the moral use of Nuclear devise on civilians, i repeat Nuclear , bec the bombing of Dresden is like a child game in front of Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
Danmara 1 week ago
@Danmara Hey smart guy, the Japanese government had already mobilized millions of its citizens to fight off an American invasion. While our estimates ranged from 1-5 million dead Japanese civilians, their own Navy estimated as many as 20 MILLION civilian casualties. Instead, the bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki took the lives of about 250,000. You want to tell the remaining millions that they should have died to save the world from nuclear weapon usage?
Aelfgeft 1 week ago
@Aelfgeft I dont know who is playing smart here, but i ment that they have to use it on a military targets, or not to used it at all. 250000 civilians i repeat civilians, tell me how many American civilians are died in both world wars. Who was Truman to deside who need to die and who need to live a god or .....
Danmara 1 week ago
@Danmara When civilians are mobilized to fight - they are no longer "civilians." In any case, civilians are fully responsible for the actions of their government. Tojo was also a civilian.
Truman decided who would die on the basis that they were the enemy - and they were not surrendering.
SCE2AUX 1 week ago
@Danmara First of all, when civilians are armed by the government and told to kill the enemy's soldiers, they are no longer civilians. Secondly, did American citizens have to die to make the bombings right? Seems you're a bit bloodthirsty, and missing the point. 250K Japanese civilians died so that millions of Japanese civilians and soldiers, AND American soldiers did not die. Less died so many, many more could live. What don't you get about that?
Aelfgeft 1 week ago
Anybody got a cigar????? LOL
timmyk1983 2 weeks ago
Anyone exposed to significant amounts of fallout would experience radiation poisoning. Victims' hair would begin to fall out, their ability to fight infections and clot blood would wither, and their flesh would begin to decay from necrosis. The people that died from the initial fireball would be lucky.
TheZairae 1 month ago
@cadwalauni OMG SPOILERS
antourte1 1 month ago
E.T at 0:44
MyMerlin1 1 month ago
@MyMerlin1 I think that's supposed to be a cat.
raphael44ify 1 month ago
@raphael44ify Cat at 2:12 and 2:17
MyMerlin1 1 month ago
Hot damn at :35.
Only movie that ever gave me nightmares.
Purge187 1 month ago
@jasonthedragon73 and also America or 'the west' as you call us havent 'attacked' anyone, were we 'attacking' Germany when the nazis were murdering millions of innocent people and invading everywhere in Europe? Were we 'attacking' Iraq when we liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein? Who are you? Have you been under a stone for the past hundred years? You sound like an idiot!
airedaleauctioneer 1 month ago
I say Iran is a rogue state because this is blatently obvious, the country is run by muslim extremists, they have shariah law which causes some appauling human rights atrocities, they sponsor insurgents in Afghanistan / Iraq who kill tens of thousands (including coalition soldiers) with their improvised explosive devices, their foreign diplomacy record is a joke, many of their diplomats worldwide have been expelled, they are creating nuclear weapons in secret, what else d'yah wanna know?
airedaleauctioneer 1 month ago
all that screaming is disturbing
alexander5860 1 month ago
the power of e=mc2
tiasarahellielorna 1 month ago
Only these so-called 'rogue states' - Iran / North Korea and maybe some crazy islamist extremist groups would be stupid enough to dabble with using nukes as they have nothing to lose. I very much doubt that the U.S / Russia / China etc would consider using their nukes for any purpose, and certainly not against one another, these countries economies are too intertwined and to nuke each other, aside from mutually assured destruction, would be too economically costly. I dont have nightmares anymore
airedaleauctioneer 1 month ago
@airedaleauctioneer Why do you consider Iran to be a "rogue" state?. The USA is the only country that has actually used them..Iran hasn't attacked anybody for hundreds of years. Unlike the west..
jasonthedragon73 1 month ago
Since I saw this film I joined CND and I went on demonstrations (and got to go to Glastonbury Festival for free - which was nice!) and invaded American airbases to protest against them using our country as a nuclear launch pad. You cant not know the destructive power of nuclear weapons, there are constantly tv programmes / documentaries / films about their destructive power. Thankfully the really big nukes have now gone, but still there are thousands of smaller, more accurate nukes still.
airedaleauctioneer 1 month ago
I recall back in 1987 for our Friday afternoon double English lesson we were 'treated' to a viewing of this harrowing docudrama. Kids were running out of the library puking and some of the girls were sobbing... Of course this was when the cold war was still very much in full swing and the threat of nuclear annihilation was all too present. I had recurring nightmares about WW3 for years afterwards. Fortunately the cold war is over, yes nukes still exist, but a full scale exchange is not likely.
airedaleauctioneer 1 month ago
Haha as if got 2 watch this for my English homework :s
chazlotte15 1 month ago
Did that woman loose her hair?:S
Ijsutwv 1 month ago
Comment removed
Ijsutwv 1 month ago
This is what happens when we have niggers.
89murph 1 month ago
This gives me boners.
Weeman44444444444444 1 month ago
at 44 seconds ''ET the extraterrestial'' is burning ?
it looks just like it , what sort of animal is it supposed to be ?
back2steel2 2 months ago
@back2steel2 "Ouch!"
jm04206 2 months ago
@back2steel2 I don't know what it is either. Does anybody know?
mikeS8590 2 months ago
All that whimpering and crying..what about this "stiff upper lip" thing? I guess it makes for better drama to show those visibly upset. But I should think the pure shock of an event like this would curb weeping and wailing for at least the first few days.
TimWil 2 months ago
@TimWil ...baka
Zankjuyse 2 months ago
00:43, looks like ET got caught in the explosion.
Timmoux 2 months ago
00:40
MELTY MILK BOTTLES
CSMalaney 2 months ago
Comment removed
CSMalaney 2 months ago
Japan: 'Ha! now you know how it feels!'
Burnzi2 3 months ago
They should've hid in their fridges
LeoFan93 3 months ago
This is a fuckin boring movie:-((((((((( I wanna see nukes that are going to fuck up everything
MrAtomicdude 3 months ago
LOL, he gave you a history lesson and called you a dummy.
SpermCannon 3 months ago
@ph1980 Ruth is evil. She made her grandmother cry when she saw "the accident".
123WhiteHawk123 3 months ago
Mike is the biggest idiot ever. Screw you, finches!
123WhiteHawk123 3 months ago
Any idea where the 3rd bomb @ 4:53 may have landed? Always been curious about that since the 1st time I ever saw this in 1984
wenger1972 3 months ago
Used to shit me up this film, its alot more grim than the American film "The Day After" though that is of a bigger scale. Both very good anti-nuke movies.
andy7666 3 months ago
Part of the classic set of 80's nuke films: the day after, testament. I wish some had done an interview of the cast; they've done a fantastic job in their respective roles!!!!
golfguy214 3 months ago
Man I hate people,,,,,,
golfguy214 3 months ago
"The survivors of the nuclear fire called the war 'Judgement Day'. They lived only to face a new nightmare.. The war against the machines...." Linda Hamilton - Terminator 2
FungawaMan 3 months ago
ET makes a cameo appearance at 0:43 !!!!
MelodyForevercom 3 months ago 3
@MelodyForevercom HAHA im glad im not the only one who caught that! Cheers!
JusticeMercyRain 3 months ago
Comment removed
MelodyForevercom 3 months ago
this day will come if we dont stop pissing about and find an alternative to oil. Fossil fuel will bring about world war 3
doyougototowndriver 3 months ago
Anyway thanks for uploading the videos for us ... threads scared me as a kid in the 80's and the threat of nukes still scares me now
scatteredmist 3 months ago
n 1938 many people feared that Hitler would build an atomic bomb after word spread that German scientist had split the uranium atom , one of Hitlers mistakes was his persecution of Jewish scientists. This persecution resulted in numerous scientists seeking asylum in the United States. One such scientist was Einstein. Einstein, abandoning his belief in pacifism, urged president Franklin Roosevelt to develop an atomic bomb before Hitler . Roosevelt agreed
scatteredmist 3 months ago
Einstein developed the theory that made the bombs and peaceful uses of nuclear power possible. Though a longtime pacifist, he was instrumental in persuading Pres. Franklin Roosevelt in 1939 to initiate the Manhattan Project for the production of an atomic bomb, a technology his own theories greatly furthered, though he did not work on the project himself .... Im partly right without einsteins theory maybe there would be no bombs... I do however accept my inaccurate comment
scatteredmist 3 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Einstein was a psychopathic idiot for creating the nuke and splitting the atom .... genius my arse
scatteredmist 3 months ago
@scatteredmist Einstein didn't invent the nuke and split the atom you dummy. Leo Szilard discovered how to split the atom. The first nuke was invented by a whole team of physicists headed by Julius Oppenheimer. the nuclear program was considered necessary because of Hitlers rise to power, should he learn how to split the atom first - in which he tried but failed
joyandian 3 months ago 15
@joyandian If you read "The German Atomic Bomb" by David Irving you will see that the Germans too had split the atom, but they simply did not have enough heavy water to build an atomic weapon large enough to be of value.
Tom David
Minneapolis
TomDavid88 2 months ago
@joyandian Thank goodness for smart people like you. lol. the bomb was meant to end all wars until the Soviets changed the Balance of Power with their development of the bomb based on communist spies, I believe. than along came the H bomb...and a "my dick is bigger than yours" war...thanks again for posting this.
MercuryRis 1 week ago
@scatteredmist
Wow, you are a fucking idiot, open a fucking book before spewing stupidity.
Einstein did not split the atom and did not create nukes, Chuck Norris did.
mardescrap 2 months ago
@scatteredmist Einstein didn't create the nuke, the USA did. All Einstein did was work out the mathematics behind the splitting of the atom. He was a genius, but others turned his work into the Nuke.
Timmoux 2 months ago
Well I'm certainly convinced...not that it makes any difference.
I don't know why anyone would WANT to survive this sort of thing.
themuffinman12345 3 months ago
Humans are the biggest dumbheads on this world. I hope humans die and leave animals alone. Animals don't make holocaust, (nuclear) wars...
honkdalonk 3 months ago
@honkdalonk You're right, animals "don't make holocaust and nuclear wars." They just eat each other alive while those preyed upon scream in helpless agony. Seriously, stop pretending that the animal world is like Disney's Bambi. It's not.
Which begs the question, if you hope all humans die and "leave animals alone," why haven't you set an example yet?
Oh, that's right, you really mean "I hope all humans except me die," because you think you're the only sensible human on the planet.
HooshIsASoup 2 months ago 3
@HooshIsASoup No, if humans die, so i must die too. And not every animal eat other alive. But animals do it for food and not for money like humans.
honkdalonk 2 months ago
@honkdalonk My point is that the nature is inherently cruel and unforgiving, and that's something misanthropic animal lovers such as yourself seem to forget. Animals experience horrifying, painful deaths all the time in the wild, by the actions of other animals. Your hopes for the death of every human on the planet will not make that better.
In fact, by hoping for the death of every human on the planet, you are more of a monster than the people who would cause a nuclear war. Imagine that!
HooshIsASoup 2 months ago 4
Oh yay, the bombs drop on my birthday.
TheWhiteFox1 3 months ago
@TheWhiteFox1 Don't you hate it when that happens
jjobie 3 months ago
is it just me or, before and after the attacks is Ruth, well... a bit of a bitch...?
ph1980 3 months ago
@ph1980 Why do you say Ruth is a bitch?.... I think Ruth is a really good character especially after the attack. It can't be easy to survive a nuclaer war then give birth in a derelict barn with an ferocious dog outside then provide food and shelter for her child in a radioactive post-apocyliptic wasteland to eventually drop dead 10 years later from exhaustion, starvation and culminating effects radiation
cadwalauni 3 months ago 22
In an event of a nuclear war, you better bend down and kiss your ass goodbye.
Mrbrianjohnson951 3 months ago
@Mrbrianjohnson951 How can you "bend down and kiss your ass"?.... No ones that flexible, but maybe our deformed mutant radioactive children will be able to.
cadwalauni 3 months ago
@cadwalauni
Can you take a joke?
Mrbrianjohnson951 3 months ago
@Mrbrianjohnson951 Yer, I know it was a joke, I wasnt being serious either.
cadwalauni 3 months ago
0:44 ET doll
MrOregona230 3 months ago
After a lot of thought, I would have to say that using nukes against cities constitutes a crime against humanity.
wardenphil 4 months ago
Didn't this cause a bit of a hooha when it was aired? I was born the year it aired.
LightLife4 4 months ago
Film - 10/10, Chances of the BBC showing this at primetime/something as hard-hitting as this? - 0/10. Threads was effectively banned after it's second showing in 1985, it was repeated on BBC4 20 yrs later and that was it. Too scary.
richievegas01 4 months ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i'd put all Americans in a concentration camp.
LordRassy 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@LordRassy After hearing the results of their last presidential election, I'm inclined to agree with you.
5thcenturyad 4 months ago
@LordRassy go for it pal, and you'd have a 2nd American Revolution on your hands.
sr71ablackbird 4 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@LordRassy What a bastard you are to make such an evil comment.
HooshIsASoup 4 months ago 2
They should have the nukes coming from the dune coons, not the russians!!!
skudaarkaat1 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@skudaarkaat1 Give it time...
Timmoux 4 months ago
Insane bastards who sought the creation of this! What ever happened to two armies meeting on the battle field with their kings leading them? Why do the rest of us have to suffer. What if they gave a war and nobody came?
rosiethebear300 4 months ago
@rosiethebear300
Or - like in "Merlin" last night.
King Arthur fucks up by executing the King of a nearby realm.
The Queen of the victim declares war on Camelot and advances her army which could easilt kick Arthur's arse.
Arthur apologises to the irate queen and offers to settle the matter by single combat, where the war will be decided by one champion from each side (he selects himself of course).
I call that "Modern International Sport". The perfect substitute for war.
jazzx251 3 months ago
note to filmmakers: huge budgets and spectacle do not equal more effective drama. Threads uses stock footage but still does the job better than any Cameron/Bruckheimer/Hollywood mess ever did. This movie scares the shite out of me. (But there's still some pretty hilarious comments here!)
bradleyhayman 4 months ago
@bradleyhayman Well said..... Also notice the stock footage includes several black and white still photos. These are mostly from WW2.
5thcenturyad 4 months ago 2
the symptoms of radiation sickness are similar to panic
*montage of people throwing up*
nice.....
lofthouse23 4 months ago
Not long now for Israel.
StrahaoftheRace 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StrahaoftheRace what amazes me is that both the yanks and brits make a very harsh realistic film about the effects of nuclear war...the aussies???...well there answer to surviving in a post apocaliptic world is to drive around the countryside on motorbikes in full leather clad bondage gear with an ex-brutalised cop in pursuit, oh and not forgetting some fuckwit peodophile in a gyro copter!
bl0xta 5 months ago
@bl0xta Sounds pretty realistic to me, mate.
Timmoux 4 months ago
@Timmoux I cannot wait for the 4th film to come out actually shame old mel isn't going to star, despite my comment I do love the MadMax franchise
bl0xta 4 months ago
@StrahaoftheRace True.
5thcenturyad 5 months ago in playlist Liked
Comment removed
DickieAnginson 5 months ago
Marshmallows, anyone?
SloreTactician 5 months ago
Poor cat on 2:12
TheSovietSTD 5 months ago
@TheSovietSTD Oh well...if the nuclear blast didn't get him the local kebab shop would of done!
bl0xta 5 months ago
@TheSovietSTD Oh well, if the nuclear blast didn't get him the local kebab shop would of!
bl0xta 5 months ago
i got chills down my spine the first time i saw the part at 0:35 ... the silence hits so hard.
Loftusboi 5 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I hope this happens to Israel soon.
StrahaoftheRace 5 months ago
@StrahaoftheRace I hope you get cooked like that cat real soon
rpcarnell 5 months ago
Is there so much time before the firewave comes to you? I guess not.
TroTLF 5 months ago
It's going to happen sooner or later, either by mistake, terrorism game playing.or some other eventuality.
pointreyes6 6 months ago 2
This BBC film gave me Nightmares and THE DAY AFTER also, Both of these films is Chilling and True. i have no words to describe but just to be shocked.
rexrex118 6 months ago 5
Notice the burnt man up in the tree still sitting on his bicycle @1:57.
5thcenturyad 6 months ago
@5thcenturyad
yep. I saw that too. nice touch, eh
Theodorus5 6 months ago
The scene at the end of this part is actually a little bit subtle but very hard hitting ( 9:22 - 10:00 ). The despair on the man's face, as it cuts to the picture of presumably his wife, when he asks about how safe she could be at the various locations on the map. Wow.
TheSuperTown 6 months ago
@TheSuperTown But he did leave her to fend on her own...
anisete46 6 months ago
@anisete46 Not quite. He was chief exec of the local council; she went to the location in the country (Botley from memory - I have the DVD) to be with family - as the assumption was that she'd be safe while he had to stay and help pick up the pieces... or they so thought on the training he'd been on.
alcockell 3 months ago
Comment removed
TheWheels777 4 months ago
The Soviets and the US each had over 3000 nuclear missiles at the time and still possess roughly the same number. Do you really think the Soviets would fire only a few at the UK and throw away the other some 2900 nukes? If a nuclear war really took place, you can expect at least 10 nukes on the UK as bare minumum. Although one would be enough to annihilate it for good. The other thousands are heading straight to the US and the rest of West. Don't even kid me here.
UnitedKorean 6 months ago
@UnitedKorean The Russians had over a hundred ICBMs aimed at the UK, I've seen the map of their intended targets, there were 10 for London alone. I doubt one would be enough to annihalte the UK for good.
Edgey1988 6 months ago
@Edgey1988 Do you how many ICBMs were aimed at Manchester?
qwertasdcfghjklmo24z 6 months ago
@qwertasdcfghjklmo24z over 9000
Latanskaya 6 months ago
@qwertasdcfghjklmo24z Not enough.
MrGibbonici 4 months ago
this is so scarey, why should this happen at all, what a shame...........
kathypell 6 months ago
I'm pretty sure that every part with the soundless burning and flashes of light upset me. The cat was sad, the faceless people were sad... I felt so badly for the grandmother. To the people who only care about the animals because they are innocent victims, what about the young babies and children? Pretty much everyone are innocent victims, especially the kids. I would cry if I saw both a dog (or cat or whatever) and a child (or teenager or adult or elder) suffering because of this.
hufflepuffgirl123 6 months ago 2
The day after is a hollywood film. Threads was created with help from scentists and psycologists. Threads was banned from the Uk when it was created due to fear of causing panic to the public. Eventually it was allowed to be shown. Theads is a documentary not designed for entertainment but to show the horror of nuclear warfare and what follows it when law and order breakdown and not enough food, fuel, education, health treatment to go around.
NielsShoe 6 months ago
@NielsShoe While you are right that scientists were involved in making this as consultants, it was not banned. You are probably thinking of The War Game, a 1960s docu-drama that Peter Watkins was commissioned by the BBC to create based on the aftermath of a nuclear attack set in and around a town in Kent.
divinedegenerate 6 months ago 2
Watkins did so with accuracy, and the resulting film was so harrowing that when goverment ministers saw an advanced screening they ordered the BBC to never broadcast it for fear it would lead to calls for unilateral disarmament. It languished in the vaults of the BBC until the ban was finally lifted relatively recently...
divinedegenerate 6 months ago
@divinedegenerate I think you might be thinking about 'The War Game' the 1960's BBC drama. This was originally broadcast on BBC2 shortly after being made. If I recall correctly The first broadcast of Threads was after the first ever broadcast of The War Game.
WilliamHook9 6 months ago
@WilliamHook9 Er.... that's what I said... The War Game was banned, not Threads. I think you are confusing me with the comment I am replying to originally...
divinedegenerate 5 months ago
@NielsShoe Threads was not banned. I remember watching it aged 9 on its very first broadcast in 1985. I think you are thinking of the BBC 1960's production called 'The War Game'. This was only broadcast for the first time just before 'Threads'.
WilliamHook9 6 months ago
that poor cat. he didn't know who russia was
mrgantz12345 7 months ago
The bit where the sound cuts out and everything burns is terrifying. That said, I'd rather die in the blast than survive, judging what comes after it. TV would never show something this hard-hitting nowadays.
richievegas01 7 months ago in playlist THREADS
Comment removed
richievegas01 7 months ago in playlist THREADS
that poor cat ;-( .... f*k*n commie bastards
RudyKazoootie 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the day after is way better than this cheap remake
nemzz9st 7 months ago
@nemzz9st
WhY?
brethynda123 7 months ago
@nemzz9st Let me guess, its better because it happen to north americans, isn't it? if something the post-nuclear and post-apocalyptic north americans movies show us is when all ends, their country will fall in hands of armed rednecks and vicious preachers taking the chance to turn a race to another.
doarner 6 months ago
@doarner your mother
nemzz9st 6 months ago
@nemzz9st wow kid, real mature answer, you shouldn't be watching this kind of movies, are too much for you.
doarner 6 months ago
@doarner The day after was better, Nuff Said
nemzz9st 6 months ago
@nemzz9st hey, don't forget first strike, that was one of the first ones out there, it even uses scenes from ` frist strike' in The Day After.
sr71ablackbird 4 months ago
@nemzz9st
Look at the firestorm in the day after and dare call this movie cheap again.
And it is not a remake, hollywood doesn't have a copyright on nuclear holocaust movies.
mardescrap 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
0:42 BURN E.T. BURN!!!!
colombianito7123 7 months ago
Comment removed
colombianito7123 7 months ago
yeah you look at later parts and you think; "The guys that died in the blast got off easy in comarison"
Roboshi2007 7 months ago
What's bad is that these are initial strikes from subs and ICBMs. The worst damage is when the Russian Backfire bombers come in later and clean up what's left. If it's 3:30 in the morning in the U.S., most people would die in their sleep -- or worse yet, wake up to the horrific chaos of a night-time attack.
MasterJediDude 7 months ago
@MasterJediDude
I agree. I always felt that Threads, as grim as it was, was a little optimistic about the follow on events. I really do think it would have been the end and there would have been no chance of survival. Personally, if this happened tomorrow, I'd find reason to go and live next to a strategic target, and get it over with quickly. No hanging around dying or radiation sickness or starvation. The thought of living in a post nuclear world. Not for me thanks.
lukequixotesanjose 7 months ago
@lukequixotesanjose Yep. Even though "Threads" and "The Day After" showed the horror and the breakdown of civilization -- none of them showed that there was no hope of survival. I don't think we'd survive as a species. I live about 5 miles from a major city. That means that my family would suffer severe burns and a grisly death from the immediate radiation expended from a bomb. Not a pleasant thought. I pray that the world never sees another nuke go off. But I'm afraid that we will.
MasterJediDude 7 months ago
@MasterJediDude
I agree. I think the world will become very dangerous when peak oil occurs and our current energy sources begin to wain. It is a horrible thought.
lukequixotesanjose 7 months ago
@MasterJediDude Well the only scenario as I see it is if terrorist gets their hands on nuclear weapons...I really dont see fullscale nuclear war happening, not when everyone knows that it would be mutual assured destruction, and end of life as we know it....that balance of fear was the thing that prevented the cold war from escalating into nuclear war in the first place
But in case of fullscale nuclear war it would be just better to get as close to place that would most likely get direct hit
Balnazzardi 7 months ago
First a nuclear bomb hits them and then just when they thought things couldnt get any worse grandma goes and shits the bed.
5thcenturyad 8 months ago 20
I was not alived in 1984 so I haven't lived through this, but I really do find this film trully haunting. While I'm not an extreme lover of animals, the part that affects me the most is where the cat is struggling. I really hope that our world NEVER comes to this.
GogglePlex101 8 months ago 4
I like that they emphasise the fires quite strongly, because if you've read Lynn Eden's book about this, Western war-planners almost entirely ignored that almost all of the damage caused would be incendiary. The open air anywhere within several miles of a nuclear detonation would be hot enough to boil water. The firestorms would suck the oxygen out of any shelters, incinerate everything, and super-heat the rubble so that no-one could walk in the open for days without being cooked.
HolyCows154 8 months ago
For me, the worst part of this movie is seeing the Kemps huddled in the smoking ruins of their house, and how badly burned Mrs Kemp is, in such pain that she can't even tolerate her husband's attempt to gently press a cloth to her face and hands. And hearing the voices of their neighbors trapped and calling for help.
honeypie767 8 months ago 9
that one bitch sure loves her irradiated milk...they keep telling her to do stuff and she's like
"bugger off - i need me milk!"
creejay 8 months ago
I have seen Hell, and Thatcher is the Devil.
TheVoiceOfReason93 8 months ago
0:44 what is this?
allboutk 8 months ago
@allboutk i dunno, but its pretty disturbing...
MonkeyIron 5 months ago
Are you ppl fkn serious? 'oh the poor innocent cat'? All the human suffering and ppl are bothered about a fkn cat. I'm just as much an animal lover as anyone else, but ppl really need to get their priorities right. Shiggityblam is spot on, to all the ppl who agreed with that comment, 'oh it was the cat that upset me most', if you were in this situation, your family were dead, or suffering or dying, would you think yeah well I totally desrved this cos i'm a human, and the humans are to blame!
gaff69 9 months ago
@gaff69 Well the people who made this movie obviously put the single shot of a cat in it for a reason. They obviously knew it would really upset people, so I think you're the odd one out.
mellitrom629 7 months ago
Thank God Maggie defeated the moronic CND who were intent on stripping Britain of its defences. Without her, this shit would have gone down
beebisbiasedbigtime 9 months ago
@beebisbiasedbigtime
no - CND wanted us to be like all the hundreds of other countries that don't have nuclear weapons and are therefore not a target.
jazzx251 3 months ago
Oh shit oh shit oh shit
firecraxker 9 months ago
thumbs up for Modern Warfare 3!
GRIEF1712 9 months ago
If they had / have the intelligence to know exactly where to pinpoint for maximum damage, then they've the intelligence to realise that we will know what they know and exactly how to hit back,. And that the whole thing's pointless.
Kelly14UK 9 months ago
Comment removed
xxxHYPNOTISTxxx 9 months ago
They should have used an unoccupied interior room in the basement as a bomb shelter. Some cheap pieces of wood in combination with fabrics and blankets will do NOTHING to block alpha, beta, and lethal gamma radiation from fallout.
MIKON8ERISBACK 9 months ago
@MIKON8ERISBACK Who has a basement in the UK? Most people live in small 2 storey homes, no cellar. Better to have dug up the back garden, install a shelter there
littleniyah 8 months ago
@MIKON8ERISBACK They were following the official advice for the event of a nuclear attack. I remember the public information films before the TV started in the mornings. You were supposed to take all your doors off their hinges and build a ridged tunnel with them, cover it over with mattresses and blankets, fill it with cushions, bedding and enough supplies to last several days and then seal yourself in. Of course it'd do no good, but that was what they told us to do if we got nuked.
MrGibbonici 4 months ago
@MrGibbonici I have an unfinished and unused room in my finished basement that would do better than that crap. Do any houses in the UK have basements with interior rooms?
MIKON8ERISBACK 4 months ago
@MIKON8ERISBACK Some have cellars but most don't. Not that a cellar would be much safer in any British city in the event of a nuclear attack. At the time everyone knew that the official government advice was useless; the point of showing it in the film was to show the futility of it. All that had to be done in 4 minutes too, which was the expected warning period.
MrGibbonici 4 months ago