The Night the World Exploded

A 50's Sci Fi. Is it good? No. It's not good. There's far better sci fi even back in the 50's. It's a pretty short movie too. Short on length. Short on Story. Short on character development. Yeah I know I am stingy. 4/10.

And IMDB has now made it so a review has to have 600 characters before it can be entered. I really don't expect that to last very long because people are sure to complain about it. But until that happens I guess we have to expect reviews to be long winded and sometimes about absolutely nothing to do with the show in question.

It's really not even worth the time reviewing some of them.

While "The Night the World Exploded" is a very low-budget film with no-name actors, it is enjoyable. It also manages to make a ridiculous plot seem plausible--and that is no small feat.

The film begins with a seismologist creating a new machine that would help them predict earthquakes. However, the equipment is either faulty OR the Earth is royally screwed!!! Soon, after the big quake, they discover a new element--#112. And here is where it gets crazy. There is a lot of it and the element is VERY explosive--so explosive that the planet may soon go kaboom! That is, unless they enact a crazy plan that just MIGHT work.

While this film offers few huge thrills, it works well. The miniature sets work well and the acting is good. Most importantly, the film is written well and will probably hold your attention.

Dr. David Conway (William Leslie), with the assistance of Laura "Hutch" Hutchinson (Kathryn Grant), is in a race to stop a series of earthquakes that threaten the entire world. It seems that a newly discovered element, Element 112, expands and explodes when dry and mixed with nitrogen. And, because of mining and oil exploration, Element 112 is making its way to the Earth's surface.

By no means is The Night the World Exploded a great film, but I found it reasonably entertaining. It's slow, lacks big-budget special effects, and the lead is a bit dry, but it's got something about it that worked for me. The sci-fi elements are presented believably enough to be effective. And there's some nice slow-burn suspense that's built throughout that worked on me. Other aspects that helped the film include a perky female lead in Kathryn Grant, real life disaster footage nicely blended into the film, and a short runtime.

I called William Leslie "dry", but it's not just him, it's his character also. I know his Dr Conway is a driven professional, but come on - how could not not see Hutch has feelings for him? It's not until the world is about to end that he pays any notice to her. What a dolt!

Dr David Conway shows his assistant Laura " Hutch " Hutchinson a new machine that predicts Earthquakes . This machine predicts a large quake is about to hit California in 24 hours and it does . Things go from bad to worse as a series of violent quakes tilt the world of its axis by three degrees and Dr Conway finds its caused by a new found element called " one twelve " which is a highly unstable element that expands and explodes when it becomes dry

This is nothing more than a sci-fi B movie and viewed for what it is it isn't at all bad . It's done in a documentary type way and a massive non prize for guessing this is due to the practicalities of not having a big budget rather than any stylistic imagination of director Fred Sears who does managed to make the most of what little he's got and everything races along at a tight , brisk pace . What tends to bring things is that there is a romantic subplot between Conway and his assistant Hutch who is supposed to be a ballsy independent female but as soon as there's the slightest sign of danger turns in to a blubbering girly girl in need of rescue by the male lead . Considering the period it was made in where the world was split in to two superpower camps both of whom viewed each other with mutual suspicion it's nice to see a film where the international scientific community put aside the politics of the state and work together . Some people might be put off by the lack of outlandish plot devices like aliens and the science never seems entirely credible but I've seen a lot of SF B movies from this era and this is far from being one of the worst

If you're looking at the reviews for Night the World Exploded, you are probably already a hopeless 50's sci-fi addict. But it's OK, you're in good company.

This is actually a pretty engaging film that may hold up to some repeated viewings. Although the props and sets are not as good as they could be, they still support a very interesting story with good production values and some very good B movie acting.

I would actually recommend this film above The Unknown Terror and Flame Barrier. These two are probably better films with bigger budgets but have a very boring script with little to no action.

Also, if you're into 'End of the World' flicks, don't miss Crack In The World - one of the best!!