MovieChat Forums > Threads (1984) Discussion > Questions about Threads

Questions about Threads

posted 7 years ago by MovieManCin2 (26342)
21 replies | jump to latest

1. Quote from movie: "Returning sunlight will now be heavier with ultra-violet light." WTF?
That doesn't make any scientific sense, does it?

2. WTF was that image about five minutes before the end of bodies hanging in some sort of building?

3. Did you realize Carl Sagan was a consultant on this film? I saw his name in the credits.

Btw, the irony of this film is that five years after it was made, the Soviet Union collapsed. So it could not be an adversary now as it was depicted in the film. Of course, Russia could.

😎

[–] dolemite72 (150) 7 years ago

As for question 1, I think it was trying to imply that even though the clouds had started to clear, they were still full of so much radiation, that the sun was more of a bright light (as opposed to a source of heat) as it seemed to turning everyone blind (notice how the female protagonist's eyes were all clouded over, in her final scenes)

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 7 years ago

No, I don't think that's it, thanks. Another poster suggested that perhaps it was due to depleted ozone. I think that's a more logical explanation.

😎

[–] Levtones (593) 5 years ago

Her eyes were clouded over because of cataracts - nothing to do with the sun.

[–] huwdj (4567) 5 years ago

Not seen this since it was first shown but yea, damage to the atmosphere would explain higher UV and I'm guessing the hanging bodies meant cannibalism.
The things I remember most strongly was the birth scene at what passed for the hospital.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 5 years ago

Okay, thanks.

😎

[–] littlebigman (5) a year ago

I think the hangings are basically frontier justice!

[–] [deleted] a year ago

2. could have been some kind of mass suicide or killing due to lack of food.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) a year ago

Wow! A blast from the past! Thanks.

😎

[–] [deleted] a year ago

i just watched this for the first time. a very bleak movie and one that is becoming relative again.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) a year ago

Fair enough, carry on.

😎

[–] moviechatterer (15697) a year ago

You mean "relevent" ?

I dont think so , there is still nowhere near the "defcon" now that there was back then , even with Putin and Norks running their mouths

[–] AndyKing1967 (38290) a year ago

Let’s hope so.

[–] SickSpazmoid (845) a year ago

It means that the ozone layer will be depleted.

The movie is the bleakest scenario possible. It is an alarmist story and should be taken with a grain of salt, no different from the doomy climate fiction fashionable these days.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) a year ago

Thanks, but I think the film was conservative. I think the real result of a nuclear war will be worse.

🤨

[–] AndyKing1967 (38290) a year ago

Unfortunately, I agree.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) a year ago

Let's hope it never comes to pass.

🤨

[–] AndyKing1967 (38290) a year ago

I wouldn’t want to survive, although it’s unlikely any of us would.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) a year ago

I would want to survive out of pure stubbornness.

🤨

[–] AndyKing1967 (38290) a year ago

Full on nuclear war = Nuclear Winter - virtually everything would die. I don't see the point in surviving that.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) a year ago

As I said, pure stubbornness.

😎

[–] AndyKing1967 (38290) 2 months ago

On tonight!
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/tv/bbc-viewers-given-rare-chance-30106092