The Bubble

Yes this is a awful movie however I was in it: This was my first movie I play(name not on credits) the little girl walking around and riding on the carnival ride in a complete trance. My uncle was a producer and assisted Arch Obler on this film. I was only 7 years old but what memories. Gilligans Island,Big Valley ,Its about Time were all being filmed and I hung out with all of the actors. Michael Cole and Debra Wally were in the Bubble and were great to me. I will never forget that time. I continued on until into my 20 in the Hollywood scene and then decided to move on. I now own a successful Ice Sculpting and Event Decor company on the West Coast. I was so surprised to see this on the amazon.com I had to laugh. I even went to the opening it was at a theatre in Hollywood i got to walk down the red carpet and could barely write my name when another child asked if i was in the movie and wanted my autograph I only new how to print not write.

This was not the first polarized 3-D movie by a long shot, as over 50 3-D movies were released in polarized 3-D in 1953 and 1954. Some of those were later downconverted to the inferior red/blue anaglyph format but they were not seen that way upon their initial release.

However, this was the first film widely distributed in a single strip/one projector 3-D process instead of the dual strip/dual projector system used in the fifties.

The film has been compared to an overlong "Twilight Zone" and that is an apt description. The widescreen 3-D is quite good. It's a bit slow, and the film was cut from the original 112m version to 90 mins for a wide 1976 3-D re-issue under the title FANTASTIC INVASION OF PLANET EARTH. Later 3-D video versions cut it further to 75 mins.

Rhino's DVD restores the original title but is the 90 min version, and has been downconverted from polarized to inferior red/blue anaglyph. Still, the red/blue presentation is better than most; and is worth a purchase for 3-D fans. Just don't expect it to look as good as the original polarized glasses version.

The film maybe would have been able to escape its B-movie limits if Oboler gave signs of being a really good filmmaker, but the film is still burdened with a weak cast, or at least one Oboler can't get much from, and not much creativity in making the limited effects budget stretch. It has a tremendously weak ending and while the 3-D camera work is decent (the restoration looks nice), the filmmakers don't do much other than push things at the audience's face or do a couple other trick shots. As someone who likes both 3D and weird sci-fi, I found myself wanting to like this a lot more than I actually did.

If I recall correctly, this movie, when shown "flat" on TV has some perplexing moments when characters inexplicably move objects toward and away from the camera, apparently for no reason other than to create a 3D effect, like in the old Second City TV skit "Doctor Tongue". If you're looking for a big budget aliens attacking flick like Independence Day in 3D, you'll be disappointed. It's a little more cerebral, creating atmosphere and suspense instead of thrills. In order to appreciate this kind of a movie, you have to be willing to work with it.

I have a real soft spot for this awful movie. I had nightmares for weeks after seeing it on its release; I was 6 years old. I remember ripping the 3D glasses off my face in abject terror. I would have run screaming from the theater if I had not been in the company of a large group of friends. Years later, I still had a rather vivid memory of the images that had terrified me and I searched high and low for this movie. When I finally found a VHS copy I was astounded at how cheesy and tame the whole thing was, though when I came to the part that had originally traumatized me, I still found it rather unnerving. I can't recommend it to the average viewer, but genre fans (that bad 60's horror genre) and 3D enthusiasts might want to take a look.