Benutzerrezensionen

Nice little gem here on what it would be like to have to handle family safety and security in case civilization failed. The movie is believable and holds up even though it was made in the 50"s. The survival themes don't change and it does get realistic to see how far a civilized person will go when faced with tough choices. This movie takes you there. I got some stomach wrench meaning tension during some scenes where you might find yourself rooting and taking sides. The question of what would you do just ropes the viewer in and the movie itself takes us there when the two main players disagree on main issues. I couldn't help but think that I would become a little more ruthless than portrayed but then again, everyone handles emergency differently. Check yourself out while watching. It is important to note that food, shelter and clothing become extremely important in a crisis with money and certain material items becoming near worthless until order is restored. This is a good reminder of that subject. There is rape, killing and theft plus more handled very well allowing the viewer to know what happened instead of seeing it. That's the way it was back then in the movies. Today, they go all out leaving this viewer in a tight spot. I don't like to see in your face certain subjects for the thrill factor. I am more supportive in this as long as what takes place is critical to the story-line and to keep in credible but with class not crass. Enjoy Ray Milland and his supporting actors who do the job fairly well. Good movie to snack with and of course have a tasty drink on standby. Sandwich works too. Enjoy and don't "panic"....

Los Angeles family vacation is interrupted by nuclear war. Now they must escape into the mountains to avoid the radiation, the panic, and the rapists.

Despite the insipid nuclear holocaust effects (looks more like a thunderstorm), this is a surprisingly effective movie. Milland elicits effective performances from each and every member of his cast (Frankie Avalon has never been better). The menace, humiliation and sheer terror of rape has never been more poignantly depicted on the screen, and all without nudity. A minor classic.

Shot in nice moody black-and-white CinemaScope, starring Ray Milland, Jean Hagen (a far cry from Lina Lamont here!), and Frankie Avalon getting the chance to do a serious role. Interestingly it was also directed by Ray Milland, and is a fairly accomplished little cinematic parable, again dealing with the threat, and here the after-effects, of atomic warfare.

Milland and his family set off on a weekend camping/fishing trip and a flash in the distance they think at first is lightning turns out to be an atomic mushroom cloud over Los Angeles. The rest of the film they attempt to survive and maintain some resemblance of civilized behavior while rationalizing their lapses into violence against the panic-stricken populace, looters, and opportunists who suddenly appear. It might easily have been handled as the exploitation film promised by the trailer (it's an American International production, after all), but is actually a very thoughtful and well-structured meditation on how people might react in the event of the massive nuclear attack everyone was fearing at the time.

Sure it didn't have a huge budget or major-league stars, but it's a bleak and realistic little drama that has an authentic tone and a sense of desperation that feels utterly genuine. There's undoubtedly a "you-had-to-be-there" reaction that I had to it, being from Los Angeles and knowing the mountain area and easily being able to imagine seeing that mushroom cloud in my own mind. I was eight when this originally came out -- not sure if I saw it in the theater but it's possible -- and that creepy Conalrad radio tone is still in my head after all these years.

Nobody -- except maybe Charlton Heston -- can look quite so anguished and masculine and bearing-the-weight-of-the-world-on-his-shoulders-in-the-face-of-civilization 's-downfall as Ray Milland does in this movie.

It looks like we dodged the nuclear war bullet back in the 1960s, but I'm sure that anybody living today can still identify with the terrifying prospect of a devastating nuclear war and what could happen if you were one of the lucky/unlucky survivors. This may not be "The Day After" but it's a plucky low-budget version of the same theme and worth seeing alongside other 60s nuclear nightmare movies.

This is a genuinely enjoyable example of a "post-nuclear holocaust survival

film." It may seem a bit campy by modern standards, but is actually well thought- out and acted. The early 60's were an era in which it seemed possible to

contemplate a nuclear war that broke down civilization's normal function

withOUT reducing the entire countryside to rubble. A man takes his family out into the country to escape the chaos, still clinging to the hope that normalcy and order will soon return. His wife is horrified at his newfound ruthlessness, and the kids seem willing to go with the new rules of the jungle.

Ray Milland was at one time an acclaimed actor, but his academy award for

"Lost Weekend" seems to have cursed his career. Now regarded as a "serious"

actor, suited only for "down" roles, he wasn't given much chance to work in the more "up" big-studio roles of the fifties. By the time he wound up at AIP, he was little more than a "has-been" to the public. But he retained real talent, as his directing and starring in this and other Sci-fi pictures of the period shows. When given a free hand, as in "Panic In Year Zero!" he took on challenges others

would have shied away from and showed that he still had a lot to offer. Sadly, big time directors continued to ignore him and the end of his life was defined by roles in "Frogs" and "The Thing With Two Heads" - films far worse than anything with Corman's name on them.

"Panic in Year Zero!" displays the basic conflict of compromise: Ray's character must compromise his beliefs and code of behavior in order to preserve what he cares for. His constant conflict with his wife displays the conflict between

differing ideas of what needs to be preserved - to her, saving the family by acts of savagery is unacceptable, and the only way to preserve civilization is to apply its rules in every situation. The ending seems to redeem Ray, but the fact is that the questions raised are answered by each viewer in the course of the film in his or her own way. Events in the film are not one-sided, and Ray's relation to the hardware store owner calls into question his position and correctness: perhaps by allying himself earlier with other decent people trying to survive, Ray could have saved his family from some of what it endures.

As we now re-acclimate ourselves to an era in which the possibility of "limited" nuclear attack (from national or independent terrorist groups) seems more likely than Mutual Assured Destruction, it is possible that films such as "Panic in Year Zero!" offer us important ethical problems. Problems we hope never to have to solve in real life, but which the screen offers a means to wrestle with in a safe environment.

A family struggles to survive the anarchy in a world devastated by nuclear war. This is a believable story by the standards of the time it was produced; the possibility of a nuclear winter had not yet been considered. There are no bands of mutants roaming around eating the survivors, just ordinary criminal types. Yes, I'm afraid that circumstances like that do bring such people out of the woodworks. Ray Milland's character makes intelligent, and sometimes hard, decisions to ensure his family's survival.

Ray Milland directs and stars in this gritty, cold war tale of a family trying to survive in the mountains after a nuclear war. Milland emphasises an 'everyone for themselves' survival ethic as his character struggles to keep his family alive at the expense of anyone who stands in his way. The movie was a low-budget project, so don't expect to see vistas of destroyed cities (you see one distant mushroom cloud) or any massive military presence (you see one jeep), but despite the cost-cutting "Panic in the Year Zero" is an effective early entry into the post-apocalyptic genre. Although mostly bloodless (a person shot at close range with a shotgun just hugs himself and topples over), the film is quite adult, with several cold-blood killings (on and off screen) and rapes (all off screen). The jazz music score, which is dated and excessive at times, detracts from the bleak tone of the movie, and the ending, while likely 'realistic', may not be a good match for some modern viewers' worldviews. Worth watching, even if only as only a celluloid relic of the cold-war.

Harry Baldwin (Ray Milland), his wife Ann (Jean Hagen), son Rick (Frankie Avalon) and daughter Karen (Mary Mitchell) leave L.A. for a camping trip out in the country. They see nuclear blasts hitting the city. While Ann wants to go back to find her mother, Harry foresee a coming chaos and set off with ruthless survival instincts.

It's a well-made B-movie. The biggest takeaway is Harry's callous ruthlessness. He both foresees and bring about the lost of civility. The movie doesn't make him a heroic lead. It is dark, exploitative, and melodramatic. It works.

I can't say I had the greatest expectations for this low-budget post-apocalyptic thriller, directed by none other than Ray Milland. Though his career was undoubtedly in something of a downturn by the early 1960s, the Oscar-winning actor briefly found new life in the realm of B-movies, starring in Roger Corman's 'X: The Man with X-ray Eyes (1963).' The previous year, however, Milland indulged in his occasional interest in directing {in total, he has five features to his name, as well as numerous television episodes} with 'Panic in Year Zero! (1962).' Against all odds, this under-appreciated gem is among the best of its kind, somehow even managing to outclass Stanley Kramer's star-studded 'On the Beach (1959)' of three years earlier. Ever since I read Arthur Conan Doyle's "The Poison Belt" in 2007, I've wanted to make my own post-apocalyptic film, and, fascinatingly, this is exactly the sort of production I'd envisioned; sparse in action and characters, but utilising the family's isolation to bring home the terror of their predicament.

The theme of nuclear apocalypse was most common in the early 1960s, when relations between the United States and the Soviet Union were at their most hostile. Some films, such as Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove… (1964)' and Lumet's 'Fail-Safe (1964),' chronicled the events leading up to such an incident, whereas Kramer's 'On the Beach (1959)' took place in the following months. What these big-budget offerings have in common is that they focus primarily on the big-players in the Cold War, particularly the government and military officials. 'Panic in Year Year!' deals, out of budgetary necessity more than anything else, with ordinary people in an unfathomable situation, and is all the better for it. When Harry Baldwin (Milland) takes his family on a fishing trip, the sudden flash of light emanating from Los Angeles is initially mistaken for lightning, followed by the mundane remark that "I hope it doesn't rain." The Baldwins are a regular American family who don't deserve to have their lives and lifestyles exploited like cheap pawns in a game of chess.

It's interesting that the charming rogues of the 1940s, such as Ray Milland and George Sanders, turned into convincing family-orientated men during their autumn years of acting. Milland is excellent in the main role, a dedicated father and husband who, in his determination to persevere, finds himself abandoning the very civilised morals for which he is fighting. Despite creating a strong sense of the chaos and lawlessness that accompanies a national catastrophe, the film's message is still an overwhelingly positive one: that the bonds of family and friendship are a crucial necessity in difficult times. There are, of course, a few unlikely plot turns – by coincidence, the two groups of people who seek refuge in the Baldwins' hideaway are the very two with whom the family had had previously altercations – and the occasional moment that can only be described as B-movie silliness {my favourite is the announcement that the sole outcome of an urgent United Nations meeting was to give this year a dramatic-sounding name}. Even so, 'Panic in Year Zero!' is a gripping and unforgettable addition to the science-fiction genre.

Nuclear war has suddenly broken out as the Baldwin family is returning from a country outing. They're miles from Los Angeles when the bombs hit, they mention multiple bombs, my guess would be a MIRV warhead. The Baldwins have no place to return, mother Jean Hagen just wants to get to her mother who was left in the city.

Under the circumstances father Ray Milland is keeping as cool a head as possible. Knowing they'll be a breakdown of law and order until and if it is restored, Milland makes some critical decisions to save his wife and two children, Frankie Avalon and Mary Mitchel. Hagen goes along with everything he does, but she can't wrap her mind around the concept that her Los Angeles world is no more.

Panic In The Year Zero! is the story of the Baldwin family and what they have to do to survive. It's not a film for the fainthearted, Ray Milland to save his family preserves only the barest trappings of the civilized world he has known.

Milland also directed this film and got good performances out of his cast which also includes farm girl Joan Freeman who Milland's family take in and three punks who are showing the kind of animals they are with no restraints of civilization. The three punks are Richard Bakalyn, Neil Nephew and Rex Holman and they will chill you. Hope for civilization in addition to Hagen is represented by Willis Bouchey who is a small town doctor whom the Baldwins are forced to turn to.

The title refers to the fact from the attack our chronological numeration of years is now starting from this event with the hope that mankind has learned and is stating that he is making a new symbolic beginning. Hopefully it won't end as bad as it showed the potential for in this film.

One's expectations for an early-60s B movie from American International Pictures are never very high. But this movie was a surprisingly well thought out & thought-provoking story.

Just as a family has left LA for a vacation in the woods, the US suffers a massive nuclear attack on all its major cities from, uh, an unnamed enemy. (Wink wink...) But you won't find any marauding mutants here. In fact this film isn't about nuclear war per se. It really wants to explore the nature of civilized society. The father, well portrayed by Ray Milland, is grimly determined to protect his family at all costs for as long as it takes for order & civil authority to be restored, which he's sure will be a long time coming.

The father is a good man, but a little paranoid & controlling. This probably wouldn't be noticeable in normal times, but now they're in a panicked rush to escape the LA metro area & gather enough supplies to last for months in the wilderness - ahead of all the other people who are starting to clog up the freeways & empty out the grocery stores along the escape route. The contradiction between following the rules & protecting your loved ones in desperate times is very effectively illustrated as he makes some reckless decisions along the way.

Normally for a low budget 60's film like this, I wouldn't even bother thinking about how it could've been improved. But since it's so good at presenting a major moral dilemma in a realistic way, think of these nits as a sign of respect: Milland's character could use a little more introspection, but of course so could a lot of early 60's dads! (Not that Milland's performance was wooden - it was great. But his character had a very constricted personality.) His wife could use a little more assertiveness. She actually realizes this, and explains that she's still in shock over the attack - but after Sept. 11 a lot of us understand that after a good catharsis we can deal with a lot of trauma that initially would immobilize us. After having a good cry, she could've acted as a better conscience for some of the father's more paranoid acts. Also the daughter's character needed some fleshing out.

But of course this is an early 60's film, and clearly made on a low budget. And given its time & budget it is an amazing gem of a film. Definitely one to seek out!

American International pics are pretty consistent lesser-grade pleasures. If you have a taste for them, there is a vast library of reasonably entertaining AIP movies out there. And occasionally they even outdo themselves. Panic in Year Zero is one of those better than average movies. Working with a typically low AIP budget, Milland, as director, concentrated on getting really fine performances out of the actors and telling his post-atomic war story by focusing on one family trying to find safety in isolation. Overall, it worked well and makes this a film worth seeing.

Ray Milland stars in and also directed this end-of-the-world melodrama for American International Pictures concerning an ordinary Southern California family who head for the hills after Los Angeles is one of many cities in the US hit by a nuclear missile (the film is very shy in saying who our enemy is, possibly European or Asian!). Detailing the family's quest for isolation from the looters and trigger-happy crazies, Milland obviously had to cut some corners--and the middle portion of the picture is filled with second-unit shots and obvious studio set-ups. Still, points are cogently made about the need for survival under the most civilized of circumstances, and Milland handles his cast efficiently enough. A well-dramatized Doomsday story, though one which may seem overly-familiar now in the wake of similar movies and TV shows. **1/2 from ****

Directed by and starring Ray Milland, "Panic in Year Zero!" is the story of a family of four whose planned camping vacation is interrupted by the onset of nuclear war. The husband (Milland) decides they should be proactive and head for the hills, away from the predictable hazards that will accompany the breakdown of civilization. As they struggle to survive, they make difficult choices that may change them.

Shot in black and white, which helps add gravity to the story, the film features a jazz soundtrack by Les Baxter--accomplished and celebrated arranger--that is misplaced. On occasion, it detracts from the somber tone of the film.

Besides Milland, the film also features Jean Hagen as the wife, and Frankie Avalon as the son. The entire cast is credible, though a group of three hoods is portrayed in a predictably stereotypical fashion.

This is no "Lord of the Flies", but its depiction of what happens when civility is removed from civilization is just as revealing. There are always those for whom lawfulness is merely a thin veneer or a well-acted façade.

Here's a great apocalyptic movie filled with traditional, strong family values and core societal morality, but still putting the characters in a position of "how far am I willing to go to protect my family, my supplies, my life". It's a breath of fresh air against much of the crap put out today. Watch as the family tries to collect, and then save supplies as thugs are gunning for them. Who can be trusted? What grave consequences must this family endure on their road to survival?

This is a good watch and I encourage you to check it out.

QUESTION: Is there anything you would have done differently to the way the father handled the situation?

As luck would have it, "Harry Baldwin" (Ray Milland) and his family are leaving Los Angeles to go camping and fishing. While they are traveling, an atomic war starts and destroys all of the major cities, to include Los Angeles. Harry then acquires a single-minded focus to keep his family alive and comes up with several innovative decisions to ensure their survival. Now, rather than revealing the entire story I will just say that, although certainly dated, this is a pretty good film dealing with the subject of the aftermath of a nuclear war. And while I thought Harry was correct in adopting a survivalist mindset, I didn't care for his autocratic "father knows best" attitude or for the way his wife "Ann" (Jean Hagen) continued to question every single decision he made. It got old after the first few times. Still, the movie remained fairly interesting and I recommend it to those who enjoy films of this particular genre.

A real surprise for the time it was made: well thought out, and frighteningly logical as well as dramatic. Other surprises: Milland directing himself in a rather harsh role, and Frankie Avalon playing Milland's son... hey, I know he was in (too many) movies, but who would've thought the guy could actually act?

I can't forget this film due to it's honesty and simplicity in dealing with a man who protects his family at any cost. Milland and cast are absolutely superb.Milland also directed. Suspense with no surcease from beginning to end. I believe that any man would do just as Milland's character did. This is truly a classic and much better than some so called "A" films.

An intriguing piece of history, but not at all a good film. Panic in Year Zero is the story of a nuclear family living in the aftermath of a nuclear attack. It's fun to wonder what audiences at the time thought of it, themselves, we imagine, living with the fear of a nuclear attack. I'm guessing it wasn't even considered much at the time, seeing as it's relatively unknown now. It's very cheap-seeming, and poorly written. The most notable bits of silliness come when two sets of characters who were introduced earlier in the film pop up later to encounter the protagonists in a place far removed from their first appearances. That, or the fact that fugitives from a nuked L.A. stop to get breakfast at a roadside diner and whine about their being out of eggs. I love the way the classic American family is depicted. Ray Milland, who directs and stars, is the patriarch determined to keep his family together. The script thought a post-apocalyptic America would immediately dissolve and that it would be everyone for themselves. And I don't think the script feels that that's the scary part, just the necessary part. Milland doesn't even make much attempt at civilization. The movie is only a half a step removed from being a satire on American selfishness. Late in the film, the drama becomes somewhat more potent when Milland's daughter is attacked, and he and his son (teen idol Frankie Avalon, who racks up a couple of kills with his trusty shotgun) save a teenage girl who's being held hostage by three rapists. Jean Hagen, a decade removed from the cinema firmament, is unrecognizable as a stereotypical '50s housewife. A weird time capsule of a movie, for sure.