This is no better than Testament, The Day After, or Time of The Wolf. It's just too quiet, too detached from the horror that one might expect from a film revolving around the mass-detonation of atomic weaponry. The weight of the events is turned gooey, trivial, almost into a soap-opera style drama. Try as actors might, "imagining the unimaginable" (as it's often called) leaves the viewer uneasy at worst. The reporter that traveled to Hiroshima right after the a-bomb was dropped - he was not left uneasy. He was horrified, beside himself with grief and sorrow. Those are the emotions a film on this topic should attempt to evoke. Sadly, Massive Retaliation wimps out like many before and after it. One is invariably led to wonder the reasons this abnormal structure has proved the prevalent one. Why is it, that whenever anyone wants to make a nuclear war film, and get it taken seriously, it's turned into a character study? I can count on one hand the no-holds-barred, "thermonuclear war is not pretty" type of films that have been widely distributed across America. I guess when "The China Syndrome" predicted 3 Mile Island and changed millions of minds regarding nuclear power, the secret was out: to keep making missiles and subs and bombers, don't put the "real deal" in front of the people. Make them think that it will be a mild, slow, thoughtful and sad cancer-type death. Showing the real thing, the eyeball exploding, blood boiling out every hole, organs exploding, teeth melting, ocean boiling, mountain-leveling finality of all life on earth for thousands of years thing would just upset everyone too much. Afraid, but not rioting out of sheer panic - that's the optimum mood. Trauma is not conducive to apathetic behavior, and that's what the death-merchants need from the civilian sector. Hence, the oddly maudlin nature of our mainstream nuclear Armageddon movies. What a sorry excuse for consciousness-raising fare, this tripe known as Massive Retalitation.
