User reviews

Good old-fashioned, black & white Science Fiction/disaster-movie classic that effectively emerges two giant contemporary fears at once, namely the Cold War and the rapidly evolving nuclear science. Whereas most other 60's Sci-Fi movies used the versatile side-effects of nuclear testings for grotesque apocalypse stories, involving mutated animals or even people, the premise of "The Day the Earth Caught Fire" is much more realistic and genuinely disturbing. A duo of Daily Express reporters discover, with the help of a weather girl, that the earth has been tilted off its axis because both the Russians and the Americans ignited their H-bombs simultaneously. The unusually high temperatures in Londen, as well as other inexplicable weather phenomenons, indicate that our planet is moving towards the sun very fast. Despite an obvious lack budget, director Val Guest (creator of other genre milestones such as "The Quatermass Experiment" and "The Abominable Snowman") did everything possible to make this film look like a captivating and paranoid drama. The images of a dying Londen, enshrouded in fog and heat, are truly atmospheric and there also are some very intelligent extra elements added, like new epidemics as a result of water shortness. Surprisingly enough, there's even room for an honest (and credible, for once) love-story between the cynical reporter and the overly-emotional weather-girl. Personally, I didn't really like the ending but it does typify 60's cinema greatly. The acting performances are splendid, with Leo McKern ("X-the Unknown"), Edward Judd ("Island of Terror") and the adorable Janet Munro (former child star of "Swiss Family Robinson"). The Day the Earth Caught Fire is a vastly underrated Sci-Fi gem, probably because it wasn't a Hammer production, and genre fans should urgently re-discover it. Highly recommended!

Surely one of the best - and most realistic - sci-fi dramas ever made: sober, unflinching and totally absorbing (at the time, I'm sure it must have also been quite scary) - yet the script, delivered at breakneck speed as befits its journalistic milieu, is extremely witty (in an obviously darkish tone). While the film has garnered a cult reputation along the years, it hasn't been given its due in my estimation and seems mainly to be appreciated by connoisseurs - though when released it was certainly well-received, copping as it did the BAFTA award for the year's Best Screenplay!

Director Guest had already dabbled in sci-fi and even then, despite the fanciful plots concerned, he gave it a ring of truth by approaching the genre more or less as semi-documentary; this time, however, with paranoia about nuclear obliteration at its highest during the early 60s, it seemed more feasible than ever before and that anything was possible! The opening and closing moments are orange-tinted (the rest of the story is told in monochromatic flashback) in order to convey the tremendous heatwave which has enveloped Planet Earth - caused to spin off its axis by a number of simultaneous nuclear blasts! - on its way towards the Sun.

The film also incorporates the human element in the form of a blossoming romance (but given the appropriate tension by making it a love/hate relationship!) between maverick reporter Edward Judd (undergoing divorce proceedings from wife Renee' Asherson, who turns up for a 30-second bit!) and spirited meteorological employee Janet Munro; while both actors proved charismatic leads here, playing very well off each other, their careers faltered pretty quickly - Judd seemed to be typecast in sci-fi roles and was also something of a hellraiser, while Munro unfortunately fell prey to alcoholism and died quite young!

Leo Mc Kern is simply marvelous as the burly yet dynamic Science Correspondent of the "Daily Express" who sees his pragmatic theories about Armageddon (which he still admits to being largely guesswork on his part) realized to their most horrific extent and Arthur Christiansen (Editior-in-Chief for many years of the real newspaper featured here), actually brought in as technical adviser, was persuaded to appear in it more or less as himself - which further adds to the film's striving for complete authenticity (extending also to the meticulous recreation of Fleet Street - London's famous newspaper sector - on a studio set, though some of it was shot on actual locations). All of this, then, is superbly captured by Harry Waxman's stark cinematography; also, though no official score for the film was composed, sparse use is made of appropriately ominous library cues chosen by Stanley Black (with the beat-nik rhythms of one particular scene provided by Monty Norman, who immediately afterwards became world-famous for composing the James Bond theme!). The film, too, manages some very effective crowd scenes (one featuring a pre-stardom Michael Caine as a copper!) - as are the various manifestations of catastrophe the world over (despite relying heavily, in the latter case, on the use of stock footage).

Even if I was perfectly happy with Anchor Bay's R1 SE DVD - apart from the bland cover art, that is - I decided to purchase Network's R2 disc (though not before its price-tag had reasonably scaled down) due to an additional 8-minute interview with Leo McKern (recorded shortly before his death)...and a wonderful little extra it turned out to be too which, circumstances as they were, gave it added poignancy (and since then, even Val Guest himself has gone - who, of course, recorded an enthusiastic full-length Audio Commentary for the film moderated by Ted Newsom); that said, I miss the typically exhaustively-researched talent bios supplied by Anchor Bay - the biography section on the Network DVD is actually a misnomer, as it only provides filmographies for the director and the major cast members!

The idea that the world's superpowers could cause the end of the world with nuclear testing is only too real and this film attempts to portray the subject quite well for 1961. The only real problem I have with this film is the dialogue. The actors are very well known and established but it seems as though they have to fill every second with rushed dialogue, there are no spaces between lines. The newsroom scenes are the worst, I know that in real life, newsrooms can be quite busy, but the rushed, monotone, ceaseless dialogue is annoying and seems quite amateur at times.

1961's "The Day the Earth Caught Fire" must be judged according to the parameters of classics as 1951's "The Day the Earth Stood Still", and not today's special effects mega productions in which the perspective of the disappearance of planet Earth is taken with cynic humor.

The idea came to director Val Guest during the Cold War in 1954, and it is under that decade's spirit that the movie is better appreciated. I remember seeing it when it opened, and I have never forgotten that experience, specially its tinted sequence. Sixty years later I am able to see it again, and it is still the same notable film, not the least affected by today's cinematic technology, because, in its core, Guest's motivation -the worry for the actions of mindless men who struggle to control the Earth- is still relevant.

If it is not highly regarded today as "The Day the Earth Stood Still", I think it has to do with the fact that Universal sold it as a B movie in the United States (although not so by British Lion in the UK, where it was a huge success, and won the film industry's top prize for its screenplay) and because not too many critics paid attention to it and wrote positive reviews, establishing it as an important science-fiction movie since then. Although there are very few re-enacted disaster scenes and it relies upon footage of real catastrophes, the tension is handled effectively in the newspaper's office where most of the action takes place, with its overlapping dialogues and constant flow of new information; and in the development of the romantic story in the midst of violence and terror in the streets. Edward Judd, Janet Munro and Leo McKern contribute good performances to this fine movie, shot in wide-screen Dyaliscope.

After the explosion of nuclear bombs by the United States and the Soviet Unions, the weather in London and in the rest of the world changes. The Daily Express alcoholic reporter Peter Stenning (Edward Judd) meets the telephonist Jeannie Craig (Janet Munro), they fall in love with each other and have a love affair. When Jeannie overhears a conversation, they learn that the explosions have altered by 11 degrees the Earth nutation, changing its orbit. Now the only chance to mankind is to explode bombs again so that the rotation shaft returns to its position. Will Earth be saved or doomed?

"The Day the Earth Caught Fire" is a disaster movie with an interesting storyline and an ambiguous conclusion. Peter Stenning is a non-likable character and his behavior betraying his girlfriend is the weakest part of the story. The conclusion with the newspaper showing two front pages written "World Saved" and "World Doomed" is fantastic. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "O Dia em Que a Terra se Incendiou" ("The Day the Earth Caught Fire")

This has got to be one of the best sci-fi films ever made. Great plot, snappy and witty script, characters with real depth and histories, and a (debatably) great ending. What more could you ask for?

Although the plot is quite similar to that of 'When Worlds Collide', the realism of the characters and setting really lift the whole film far above its contemporaries. Its use of journalists to tell the story is similar to that of many of the classic works of literary science fiction (HG Wells' War Of The Worlds or John Wyndham's Kraken Wakes for example) and it follows a similar apocalyptic template as well.

The theme of mankind's actions causing havoc for the globe, which was originally a criticism of the cold war, is still very relevant today for quite different reasons. The parallel with global warming is obvious, and the graphic depiction of the effects of this are all the more disturbing because we see similar effects, on a smaller scale, around the world on a day to day basis. The film is shocking in its bleak vision of the havoc that mankind has brought upon himself.

Basically, this is the benchmark for all serious science-fiction, and makes a perfect partner for the other great of the cold war era, "The Day the Earth Stood Still".

Don't be fooled by the schlocky title of this 1961 British science fiction disaster film, it's actually one of the best apocalyptic films of its era. Told through the eyes of British reporter Peter Stenning (Edward Judd), we learn that both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. have simultaneously set off nuclear explosions to test their efficiency, causing the Earth to go off its axis. Directed by Val Guest (The Abominable Snowman / The Quatermass Experiment), it offers a sobering look at a country staring the end of the world in the face. It uses matte paintings to create images of abandoned cities and desolate landscapes, as well as incorporating real London locations create a movie that is heavy on atmosphere (heavy rains buffet the windows of buildings, thick fog wafts through the city, a raging hurricane crashes into the British coast). The production even features the real Daily Express, using the paper's own then headquarters, the Daily Express Building in Fleet Street. The film was made in black and white, and in the original prints the opening and closing sequences are tinted orange-yellow to suggest the heat of the sun. Monty Norman wrote the "Beatnik Music" score, and would become well known one year later when his James Bond Theme was used in the title sequence of Dr. No. Look out for a before he was famous appearance by Michael Caine in an uncredited role as a police constable.

It's a good movie, if you get passed the mass of cynical dribble the main character Peter spills at every step, the script must have been as big as the sun. Once that calms its quite a frightening film, could this happen? Or will the sun more likely burn out.? With similar disastrous results. Recent BFI version of this film has been massively cleaned up and now looks superb. Worth watching.

This 1961 classic is truly underrated. Performances by Janet Munro and the great Leo McKern (Rumpole of the Bailey) are quite good, and Edward Judd, whose career is introduced in this movie come together to create a create a sense of building tension as the audience finds out the reason for the strange changes in weather.

Judd plays his character a little roughly, but that is to be understood, given his problems with his divorce and visitation with his young son.

Leo McKern's dialogue and facial expressions are superb and create the perfect persona of the seasoned veteran science writer who interprets and unravels the mystery for us.

Janet Munro, who died prematurely in her thirties gave a very acceptable performance for a young starlet, who keeps reporter Pete Stenning (Judd) at bay, then feeds him the critical information that blows open the story. I have two copies - One I taped from TV in the 80's, and another that I bought new. My sci-fi collection wouldn't be complete without it.

As sci-fi films go, it's a not bad example of 1960s Cold War era apocalyptic movies but it will someday be viewed as a good example of how old-time print newsrooms operated. "Stop the presses", "replate", and more classic scenarios from an era where deadlines and solid sources ruled, before digital news-on-demand relied more on rumours and tweets.

I find it strange this flick has gotten such over all good reviews. I just viewed it from DVD, having checked it out of the public library and found the dialog almost incomprehensible.

People speak in short bursts and gush out essentially nothing. The script is horrible, the science deplorable.

Yes, the flick may have some historical appeal to fears of the cold war and environmental Armageddon. However, the style was absolutely dated and campy. Although the issues addressed, may insight fears even today, especially with global warming, I have to give this film a 2 and say it was a waste of time.

Thoroughly recommend this film as one of the classics of British sci-fi. The look and feel of this film is superb and the director, Val Guest, delivers a piece that demonstrated perfectly the end result of nuclear games.

Some of the acting is a little wooden but the key players deliver a quality performance.

recommended....the DVD is well worth the investment.

Rather surprisingly I had never heard of this. It was on a list of recommended sci-fi films on some website. I had seen a few on the list that I wasn't particularly thrilled by, so I didn't know anything about this, which stymied me, but I also learned that it could be seen through a site called Kanopy which shows films from my local library. The site cannot seem to save things to saved "my watch" list, but the assortment of films available is astonishing. Films that are very hard to find were plentiful. A delightful surprise. This film was digitally restored and while it is obviously a low budget film, it looked brand new. It's an apocalyptic type movie and it's not bad and pretty strong stuff for 1961. It's also well acted by its three stars particularly Leo McKern. I was familiar with Janet Munro, despite her death at a young age, I assume from Disney movies when I was a youngster. She's solid as is the lead, Edward Judd, who I am not familiar with at all either. This would have been hypnotic stuff for me had I seen it when I was a kid. It's still not bad.

This is truly an all-time classic. It is a genuine gem from beginning to end. Its date of 1961 should not be allowed to put you off as you will find here a gripping film with truly serious overtones and a very worrying conclusion. The acting is excellent and the story-line convincingly brought out. The tension builds up throughout the duration of the film and the end of the film really makes one think. The special effects are more-than-adequate - indeed, no more is needed. Shot in dramatic black and white this film deserves a place on everyone's DVD shelf. If you haven't yet seen it, then don't hesitate a moment longer as you are missing one of the best sci-fi films of all time.

A solid end-of-the-world morality tale from Val Guest, in his realistic tone and setting. The dialogue is crisp and the story moves along briskly. Nice effects work by Les Bowie's underrated crew make mist and cyclones batter London as the earth is propelled toward the sun. The performances are spirited and Munro is sexy as the love interest to answer everyone's question -- what would YOU do at the end of the world?

After more than forty years, this film is still a milestone in the science fiction genre. In its day, it was years ahead of its time. It had characters that acted like real people, instead of like John Agar and Lori Nelson. It contained a clearly implied sexual relationship between the two main characters, in an era when filmmakers were still routinely depicting even married couples as sleeping in separate beds. It was filled with shocking insinuations that the government is not all-wise and benevolent, that science doesn't really have all the answers, that the military is capable of blunders that put new meaning into the phrase "friendly fire," and that all may not be well, after all.

The film's greatest strength is in its understated, matter-of-fact presentation of the characters' various reactions to the relentlessly deteriorating situation. The performances are consistently honest and compelling, from the principal players down to the smallest walk-on parts. The award-winning script by Wolf Mankowitz is at times almost too clever for its own good. If there is one criticism that may be leveled against it, it is that most real people are not that consistently witty. Occasionally they are at a loss for words. Occasionally they say things that are lame, stupid, and altogether inappropriate. And this is the one element that was pretty much absent from the dialogue.

In an age when movies are being strangled to death by their own special effects, and character development often does not extend beyond the crudest bodily functions and four-letter expletives, it is genuinely refreshing to return to a film such as this one. Not only does it not rely on visual effects to tell its story, it is really so little dependent on the visual that it could have been equally successful as a radio drama (a forgotten art form nowadays), and might very well have caused an even greater panic than Orson Welles' "War of the Worlds."

This film holds a special place for me.....it was the inspiration to get into news broadcasting...no lie. I saw this film in the earl 60's and always was fascinated by the "newsroom", the teletype machines and, the reporters. The story was typical sci-fi but instead of filling the film with bug eyed monsters or giant creatures(which ain't bad by the way), it delved more into characters, emotions, plot... The idea of the world coming to an end has been done time and time again, but this was very well done. The black and white added to the dismal attitude, you could "see" the heat on the screen and feel it...Edward Judd, Leo McKern and Janet Munro were all excellent....kudos to director Val Guest. I understand that a re-make is being considered...please don't...you'll ruin it....

Val Guest directs this gritty film about the effects of what might happen after nuclear testing. Apparently some bombs were exploded at the pole(I think) and it shifted the Earth's axis and some areas of the world that were cold in general become much hotter. In many ways if has some compatibility with what happens(oppositely) in The Day After Tomorrow. Anyway Guest is a very competent director and manages to convey some startling realism as England becomes the hot spot - temperatures rising to epic heights, water having to be rationed, and no end in sight except becoming cinders and ashes. We are in the company of two newsmen and a woman who becomes romantically involved with one that works in the government service as a secretary. Edward Judd plays the leading man - a bit too "angry" from Britain's Angry young man tradition. Judd does overact but is saved by the earthy acting of his friend/newspaper mentor Leo McKern and Janet Munro as the attractive woman Judd falls for. McKern is the conscience of the film - it is through his eyes we see much of what is going on and it is with his heart and mind that we are carried into the impending doom of the situation. This is a rather good film. Scientifically it seems plausible and does never try to go for the cheap special effect or easy storyline. The film has almost a documentary feel about it which greatly adds to its credibility. The film gave me pause as one might ponder what effects man's playing with the world will eventually wrought. Change will not be slow but rather abrupt - the end result of something that had been going on for some time. The Day the Earth Caught Fire is a fine science fiction film in the British tradition of the Quatermass series, and it has solid performances, lively, innovative direction, and some philosophical points to make as well.

What an absolutely devastating movie! I am still completely engrossed in it, and it has been a while since I took the DVD out of the player.

Was any science fiction movie ever more ambitious than this one? The staggering opening, tinted in reddish yellow and brilliantly composed in widescreen, looks like Tarkovsky and Lars von Trier, and has the same dry wasteland quality to it. Callous and unpublicized nuclear tests by both the Soviet Union and the US have upset the environment, causing record-breaking heat waves, floods, cyclones, eclipses, and what not, and we gradually find out that Earth has tilted and is hurtling towards the Sun where, in four months' time, the universe will savor "the delightful smell of charcoaled mankind", as put by a cynical newspaperman. The largest nuclear bomb ever made will now be detonated in Siberia, and no one knows what will happen now ... The environmentalist discourse seems extremely contemporary to us today.

Now, how to make intelligent, thoughtful entertainment out of that pulp?! Leave it to writer-director Val Guest who more than rose to the task. He put a heartbroken, newly divorced and slightly alcoholized reporter in the center, working for the London Daily News. He tries, with his science editor and surrogate father, to delve into what went wrong and who is responsible, and he falls in love with a switchboard girl with a cleavage. All this to keep the movie grounded, the drama realistic. All of this naturalistic drama is cross-edited with stock newsreel footage of natural disasters, and it works. It works supremely well, and you are sucked into the action, as the end of the world approaches.

All the actors are brilliant, not least Edward Judd as the main reporter, cynical, witty, vulnerable.

Val Guest directed this apocalyptic sci-fi thriller that stars Edward Judd & Leo McKern as newspaper journalists in Britain who come to the awful conclusion that the world has been tilted on its axis, hurtling toward the sun after both American & Russian forces conduct nuclear tests that backfire badly, threatening the entire human race. Janet Munro plays Judd's contact and love interest, as things start to heat up... Talky film is well acted, with some memorable scenes, and a most striking(if understated) ending, but is marred by a slow pace and dry, arid atmosphere that makes film a hard(but still worthwhile) haul. Doesn't quite live up to that title...

Someone said to me, 'have you seen The Day The Earth Caught Fire - it's excellent.' So I got hold of a copy and I knew in the very first 10 minutes I wasn't going to like it.

First up, I didn't like the acting. The film wasn't compelling at all. And none of the characters were likable either. Particularly Edward Judd's character. He comes across as a big creep, especially when he's chasing the affections of a young Janet Munro. In one scene he manages to burst his way into Janet's flat, having begged for a date SEVERAL TIMES. But it's not a date he wants. After looking oddly at her underwear on the bed, Janet loses her senses and eventually gives into this creep. He gets his way with the girl in the most nauseating manner. What a thoroughly distasteful man.

Well that had me almost vomiting. I tried to concentrate on the film, but it was so mind-numbingly boring. And it doesn't help one's concentration when the central character is nauseating.

I could only stomach this rubbish for 45 minutes before switching off. It's bleak, DATED and highly overrated. Simply not for me, despite my usually liking sci-fi films from this period.