Die letzten Fünf

In authoritative books about science fiction in the movies, Five is generally dismissed as crude and simplistic. There is justification for this, but somehow I found the picture interesting anyway. The fact that it was shot on a shoestring may even have helped. Being forced to use only five actors and a single ready-made set--his own Frank Llloyd Wright house in the California hills--director Arch Oboler created an intimate self-contained world.

This narrow focus increases the intensity of the drama, which, as an end-of-the-world story, has its own inherent interest.

The plot doesn't bear much looking into. The way these five people--out of the entire world population--came to be together amounts to wild coincidence. There is a certain amount of sermonizing of the why-can't-we-all-get-along variety. And so on--it's hardly a great movie.

But it's interesting nonetheless and worth looking into.

My first and only viewing of this film was over 25 years ago on New York's old Million Dollar Movie channel 9. Its theme of how the human race almost put an end to itself was presented in a very simple, bleak and thought provoking manner by its director Arch Obelor. I often remember that movie as my first and most impressionable "end of mankind" movies. It was made on a shoestring budget, with unknown actors and yet I consider it the most powerful film of that genre. I have not seen it on television since and cannot find it on video. I still can envision that night as a young teen, after having viewed that movie, thinking of our world, our future and what humankind is capable of. Wherever a print of that film is, I wish our present generation could view it as food for thought. Thank-you for allowing me to express my opinions on a forgotten "little" film.

This movie starts off with a mushroom cloud and pictures of what were the greatest cities on earth. It then shows a young woman named "Roseanne Rogers" (Susan Douglas) in a disheveled condition walking down a lonely road in a state of shock and disbelief. She happens to see a cabin perched upon a mountain top and decides to take shelter there. Once inside she meets a man named "Michael Rogan" (William Phipps) who is as startled to see her as she is to see him. They think they are the last two people on earth. Until two more men show up and then a third. One of these men, "Eric" (James Anderson), believes that they have developed an immunity to the radiation and that they should drive to a city a few days away to look for more survivors. Michael believes that the city is dangerous due to high levels of radiation and unsafe. Now, rather than give the entire plot away I will just say that this is a surprisingly good movie for its time and it is rich in drama and tragedy. Definitely worth a watch for those who enjoy dystopian films of this nature.

Post-nuclear-war dramas centering on a small group of survivors now constitute an entire genre in science-fiction films. All of them, in some way or another, can be traced back to this seminal film from 1951 in which five people deal with the possibility they are the only human beings left alive on the planet.

While most of the later movies exploited this possibility for B-movie thrills, "Five" adopts a quiet, contemplative tone which some may find dull but which thoughtful viewers are more likely to find, for want of a better word, haunting. There is something about this movie which gets under the skin and which lurks in the corners of the mind long after it's over.

Especially memorable is the trip to the city made by two of the survivors. The images of skeletons sitting in cars and buses still have an impact with their silent, disturbing, even horrifying beauty.

Some of the musical score now seems obtrusive and the dialog tends, at times, toward the pretentious -- perhaps a lingering effect from Arch Oboler's radio background -- but this low-budget, no-name, black-and-white production remains a landmark film which richly deserves to be rediscovered and honored.

A bit overwrought and florid, but very enjoyable. Several reviewers pick on it because they seem to think that the characters are walking around in a totally depressed state throughout the movie. I don't see this at all. In fact, I perceive them as incredibly upbeat and positive about their situation, all things considered. One of the aspects of this film that I enjoy the most is the pure villainy of the bad guy. It's rare nowadays to see such an uncompromising and ungrateful jerk written into a script. He's human and believable, but he has no redeeming qualities at all. Also, he accomplishes this without the aid of technology, secret weapons, or even any sort of clever scheming or evil plans.

The cinematography is pretty good, with some startling shots and quite a bit of hand-held camera.

Finally, and I simply can't pass on this, the title is numerically correct for the majority of the movie. A couple other reviewers have stated that it is incorrect and I'm not sure if they're numerically challenged or what.