Testament (1983) User Reviews

A real horror film

[cosmic_quest · 8/10 · 1 November 2005]

Forget Freddie and Jason, if you want a real horror film then I recommend this because I think it will keep most normal people awake long into the night. This film doesn't rely on gore or violence to get its message across; instead it takes the very familiar scene of a loving young family living in a close-knit town and dumps them into the harsh, harrowing realities of nuclear war where there is no mercy for either the good or the innocent.

'Testament' is a tale of what would happen if a nuclear strike devastated America and how average people, who have no military training or the like, would cope. There is no computer virus to fix things nor is there some hunky, muscular hero to save the day; people are left to fend for themselves in a world forever changed, in conditions that are unforgiving and demoralising. The film revolves mainly around the Wetherly family, made up by parents- Carol and Tom - and their three children, fourteen-year-old Mary Liz, twelve-year-old Brad and six-year-old Scottie and it packs no punches for the fate of this little group.

For a film that couldn't have had a massive budget, not only is the script of good quality but so was the acting. Jane Alexander was excellent as a Carol, a mother striving to see her family through this disaster, watching as the town around her dwindles as people die of radiation poisoning or flee for safer pastors. But Ross Harris definitely deserves recognition for his part as young Brad. Through him, we are able to see how a child would deal with such an event and how the innocence of childhood is brought to a sharp end as Brad is forced to take the role of an adult for the sake of his family.

After seeing 'Testament', I don't think I'll ever really stop pondering the issues it raised and how it is vitally important that the governments of all countries do anything and everything to ensure we never have to deal with such an event in real life. It is very thought-provoking and terrifying in a way no horror flick can be. And if you want to add to your trauma, I recommend checking out 'Threads' (the same situation only set in England and so chilling that it makes this film out to be a bag of laughs) and 'The Day After'.

Dad leaves for work and everything goes to hell

[Mr-Fusion · 7/10 · 20 June 2016]

I've seen this movie twice, and "Testament" still lingers in my brain as an atom bomb movie. And it's not really about that - the bomb comes and goes fairly quickly - but more about how a community comes together during the aftermath. It's kinda funny how the movie flips from TV commercial suburban life to sobering angst, where precious resources are rationed and then dry up completely.

But it is a powerful movie, thanks largely to the characters and the performances. Even as death loiters nearby and the losses keep piling up (god, this movie just keeps taking), there's Jane Alexander hanging on til the bitter end. Despite the climate of that period in the early '80s, subtlety is really this movie's strong suit. Characters die off, one by one, but it's never staged or theatrical. Very subdued; we'll just get a single image and put the horrifying pieces together.

It's kinda hard to believe there's a (tiny) ray of hope at the end of this thing. But man, it's a punishing journey.

7/10

What is making love like?

[Lele · 7/10 · 22 February 2015]

I have a daughter the same age of Mari Liz (Roxana Zal) and I can't even imagine what I'd do if something bad were to happen to her. The scene where the young girl asks the mother what is making love is one of saddest scene I ever saw.

I was 25 when the movie was released and I perfectly knew that my town, like hundred of other Western towns were possible targets. I was born when Cold War was very cold and the fear for WW II was still in the air. And actual bombs were still in our ground.

But IMHO in this movie nuclear war is a metaphor. Almost nothing related to the bombing is really seen on the screen, but a blinding light for some seconds. No sound, nothing. This movie is far away from "The Day After": this film is hopeless.

There is no after! People die, even if they do it in a gentle way. The subject of the movie is what does people leave after dying. What people lose dying.

Anyway I think I had killed myself much earlier, after the death of the little kid: I would not be able to resist as did the protagonist of the film

A small, brilliant gem of a film that still holds up after 20 years

[michaelsev · 4 August 2004]

I first saw "Testament" when it came out in 1983. At the time, I was 30 years old and the mother of a two year-old son. As a child of the Cold War years, I have always been interested in films about that most unthinkable event: the detonation of a nuclear bomb or bombs somewhere on our fragile planet. If you are, too, you must watch "Testament" (and another small gem of a slightly earlier era called "Fail-Safe.")

This is a wonderful film that slowly, unbearably reveals what happens in the small, idyllic town of Hamlin after a full-scale nuclear exchange between the superpowers wipes out a large part of America. The town and its citizens, including the Weatherly family, escape initial destruction. But slowly the bonds that hold western societies together (electricity, communication, fresh food, medical help) begin to fray and ravel. There is no television. Batteries to power transistor radios suddenly become more valuable than $20 bills in a town where, suddenly, there's nothing left to buy.

The story and scenes are permeated with a sense of enormous loss. A family loses its husband and father who simply walked out the door, waving a breezy goodbye one morning, and disappeared into the holocaust. All his wife, Carol, and two children have left of him are their memories and some flickering images on home movies, glimpses not just of a lost loved one, but of a lost -- and loved -- world.

A school play about the Pied Piper was in rehearsal before catastrophe hit, and, desperate to recapture some normalcy and to divert the children's attention from a reality to horrible to contemplate, the town decides to go on with the show.In the earlier rehearsal scenes, life was normal, the future shone brightly in the children's faces. Now, as the parents watch the performance, they see no future for these beautiful innocents. To me, this is the key scene of the film: the contrast between what these people once had and what has been lost is staggering. It makes you want to go outside, smell the air, marvel at the full supermarket shelves and the working telephone lines. (This is a gift that the movie gives its audience which goes far beyond entertainment and approaches enlightenment.)

Beyond the wonderful writing, direction and performances, I love the tiny touches in the story. For example, there's the foreshadowing, the implicit warning contained in the presence of a minor character, a little Japanese boy with Down Syndrome who is cared for by the town after his father dies. The child's name is Hiroshi. Pay attention, the script commands us in a whisper: Hiroshima happened once, but it can happen again, and it can happen to you as well as "them."

In the end, the movie is a testament to this undeniable fact, a testament to the stupidity of men who continue building ever-larger, more lethal means of mass destruction, and finally, a testament to the strength of mothers like the character of Carol Weatherly who have no choice but to love and protect their children no matter what comes.

Devastating

[WriterDave · 9/10 · 5 October 2003]

This small film from 1983 might actually be more emotionally devastating than "Schindler's List" because it presents us with a horrific "what-if" scenario that I imagine scared the be-jesus out of viewers in the Cold War era that it was made and will send shivers down the spine of anyone who watches it today. The threat of nuclear holocaust may not be so looming now, but the threat of bio-terrorism or any other level of terrorist attack or all out war is very real in the post 9/11 era. This film is so stark and intimate that it really doesn't matter what these people are dying from (it could just as easily be biological warfare as it is nuclear fallout). I was so deeply effected by this film's portrayal or one family in one small California town getting cut off from the rest of civilization (which we can only assume is in the midst of WWIII) and slowly falling apart while one by one loved ones succumb to nuclear radiation that I couldn't watch it all. I had to flip the channels to watch a few minutes of "The Simpsons" before I turned back to watch the end. This is possibly the most depressing film ever made. Jane Alexander running frantically around the house searching for her youngest son's favorite stuffed animal and refusing to bury his body (wrapped in bedsheets) in the backyard until she found it is so heartbreaking that it made me sick. As such, this is the film that every politician the world over should watch before declaring any kind of war. War is not about winning or losing or politics or doing what it right, war is about the death of our children. Everyone needs to be reminded of that before making the war cry. In the end we all die.

Powerful and horrible

[MeYesMe · 7/10 · 27 November 1998]

There's nothing technically wrong with Testament. It's a story of nuclear fallout, the result of which is terror, loneliness, fear, and death. The acting was impressive – I usually have to give children a little leeway, as I often catch them mouthing the lines of the person speaking or committing any number of acting crimes, which can only be blamed on immaturity. But the acting here was not a problem; it was first-rate all the way around. And the story seemed real. With the threat of Y2K looming near, this didn't seem like a fairy tale.

So what IS the problem with Testament? Relentlessness. I was physically exhausted and emotionally drained by the time the credits were finally rolling. Pretty impressive for a movie only 89 minutes long! It is a powerful, horrible film. I am still haunted by the dull-eyed image of Jane Alexander going through the motions of yet another death in the house – too spent to break down. It's a good movie but depressing as hell. See it, just don't expect to be entertained.

I'm in serious need of antidepressants after seeing this film!

[Coventry · 9/10 · 14 March 2021]

I've been a fanatic of disaster movies and post-apocalypse Sci-Fi for practically my entire life already, but I have deliberately been avoiding the actual "nuclear bomb impact" films. There were several of these released during the early 80's. Apart from "Testament", there's also "The Day After", "Threads", "Letters from a Dead Man" and "When the Wind Blows". All these aforementioned films have high ratings, favorable reviews and impeccable cult-reputations. So, then why haven't I seen them before? Because the impact of these films, pretty much like the H-bomb itself, is downright devastating, and yours truly is a very sensitive person!

There's a world of difference between sci-fi films set in post-nuclear wastelands, where a handful of human survivors drive around in dune buggies and battle each other over a tank of fuel, and actually witnessing the long and excruciatingly painful process which leads to the complete extinction of mankind. And even though writer Carol Amen and director Lynne Littman absolutely restrain from turning "Testament" into a sentimental tearjerker, the film is inescapably harrowing, and numerous sequences caused me to burst into tears.

The story takes place in the peaceful little community of Hamlin, a suburb of San Francisco, and introduces the model family of Tom and Carol Wetherly and their three children. Everything they love and worked for literally vanishes in a bright and sudden flash. Hamlin's unusual geographical location, in a sort of mountain bowl, safeguards the town from instantaneous destruction, but this rapidly proves to be a curse instead of a blessing. Without any form of sensationalism, or raising idle hope, Littman depicts how the townspeople and loved ones succumb around Carol, whilst radio contact with the rest of the world fades even further away.

The aptly titled "Testament" is a beautiful, frustrating, haunting, infuriating and noble film all at once. The performances are stellar, and the use of music is staggering. The only remote default, according to me, isn't even a shortcoming in the film itself. I find it unjust that so many people must emphasize in their reviews that "Testament" was directed by a woman, and hence make the film somewhat of a monument of feminism. As far as I'm concerned, gender equality is incontrovertible, and women are just as skilled and talented as directors as males. Lynne Littman did a fantastic job as a director; - period!

Low key post-nuke drama

[fertilecelluloid · 7/10 · 25 December 2005]

Low key, post-nuke shocker in "The Day After" genre directed by a doco filmmaker. As expected, the emphasis is off special effects and on performances and mood. There's quite a cast -- William Devane, Jane Alexander, Kevin Costner, Rebecca de Mornay and Lukas Haas -- and they're all very solid. The scope of the movie is small. It focuses primarily on one family's efforts to deal with the psychological and physical ripples triggered by a nuke. We're not told who dropped the bomb and we don't see widespread devastation. Unlike "The Day After", the characters in this more theatrical drama slowly come to terms with their dark future. Steven B. Poster's cinematography is exceptionally good, as is James Horner's unusually subtle score.

Revenge of the 80's "I Love the Bomb": Testament

[Captain_Couth · 9/10 · 26 February 2009]

Testament (1983) was one of the few films that came out during the 80's that dealt with the Nuclear War scenario seriously. Jane Alexander stars as the matriarch of your typical middle class family. One day when the father (Bill Devane) is on a business trip, life as we know it was ended when the missiles were launched. Who or what caused this holocaust was never explained. But the only that thing that matters now is survival and trying to keep the family together. What tragic world lies ahead for the family now that life as they knew it was changed forever?

A real heartbreaking film that shows the side of the human condition that we all have deep within us. There's no big budgeted effects or over the top acting in this film. Just raw emotion, great acting and a real good script and direction that fuels this drama. I strongly recommend this movie for all the reasons I have stated.

Emotional vacuum

[martinjlane2003 · 7/10 · 22 May 2005]

Firtsly let me say I think this is a fine movie. The acting is first class especially Jane Alexander & Lucas Haas. The basic premise of what happens to those who aren't caught up in the blast is also commendable, and I will say that the film does some moments of genuine impact as well as being thought-provoking. But, I cannot believe some of the comments on this site about how the film has left them emotionally drained and in floods of tears. I say this as a father of two young children I found it to be a little too glossy. The film doesn't show any of the true horrors of watching your children slowly die from radiation sickness as you continue to look after them. On only one occasion do we get any sign of illness from any of the children (Lucas Haas). His bathtime scene is one of the better moments (along with his funeral & Costner carrying the drawer). What simply happens is the daughter just isn't alive one day. No warning. One day comfortably playing the piano, next day wrapped in a blanket. Where's the horror in that? I found it impossible to gain any emotional impact from this. Jane Alexander does her best to give the film an emotional core, as does director Lynne Littman, but it just didn't work for me. Also some of the script is clichéd and far too close to soap opera material at times. The continued use of home video clips was somewhat heavy handed in places. We know what has been lost as the first 1/3 of the film shows us. Some of that made me cringe slightly.

I feel this film will have far more impact on a U.S. audience as like 'The Day After' this film shys away from showing any gritty reality and instead opts for a sanitised and TV friendly feel which tends to be easier acceptable to mainstream audiences in the U.S.A. whereas the British made films like 1963's 'The War Game' and 1985's 'Threads' are much darker affairs are are done deliberately in a documentary style to avoid allegations of emotional manipulation. They simply say: this is how it would be. 'Threads' itself is the single most disturbing thing (not just film) I have ever experienced. It is unflinching, gritty, repulsive and genuinely nightmarish. Watch, but don't watch it alone. As for 'Testament' a good movie, a well intentioned movie and a must see film for all those interested in this genre but not the best. Incidentally my wife's opinion is even lower than mine on this film and originally I thought it was because of the films feminine feel that I didn't connect, but I don't believe that to be the case.

Emotional and depressing but not your typical nuke film

[vocklabruck · 5/10 · 1 September 2007]

I read many other comments comparing this film with The Day After and Threads, saying this film is more powerful or less than those others. If you make that comparison you are wrong. Why? Because Testament has a very different point of view about the disaster. This film is not a ground zero flick, it is not focused on blasts or Cold War exchange. Some people say it is more realistic. I don't think so. Some people say the others are more realistic. I don't think so either.

This film is actually symbolic. It was not made according to science knowledge. Otherwise everything would have been devastated, no trees, no sunlight, no water, no nothing. This film is focused on the family and their feelings, not in the nuclear disaster itself. In fact, if you watch it with a science point of view you will be disappointed because what it happens looks more like an epidemic, not like a nuclear winter.

Testament is intended to capture your feelings, not to show you shock waves or gore. It's drama, not sci-fi or documentary.

Beautiful... and horrific

[funnygy · 10/10 · 3 February 2006]

I never thought a film about nuclear war could be more moving than "The Day After" or "Threads". Now that I've viewed "Testament", I know I was wrong.

Frankly, I thought the film would seem mild in comparison with the former two, which are very graphic and horrific. In fact, it was even more disturbing and difficult to watch. Several times I considered shutting the film off, thinking "What good is it doing me to watch this depressing movie?" But each time I convinced myself to stick it out, and I'm glad I did.

I don't know what it was; the strength of Jane Alexander's performance, the combined performances by the younger actors playing her children, the excellent and artistic (yet remarkably matter-of-fact) cinematography, the haunting beauty of James Horner's score, or all of the above, but "Testament" just got into me and tore my very soul apart. There's no graphic "ground zero" scenes like in the other two films, just the story of a family struggling to survive, trying to stay hopeful beyond all hope.

The scene that I think will stick with me forever is the shot of Jane Alexander tearing apart bedsheets. That's all I'll say about this scene for now since I don't want to give anything away, but watch the film and you'll know what I'm talking about.

As other reviews have alluded to, "The Day After" and "Testament" both came out around the same time, yet "Testament" is far less known and remembered among the two films, even though most consider it the better of the two. I think the reason for this is that "The Day After" was presented on television, while "Testament", though originally made for public television, was instead released to theaters. With a movie like this, I think it's easier to just watch it on TV than to bring yourself to actually go out to a theater to experience this type of film.

"Testament" is one of those films like "The Hours". It's beautiful, breathtaking, unforgettable... and so heartrending I'm not sure I can ever bring myself to watch it again. But if you haven't seen it, you should. Trust me, it will be worth it.

normal life fading away

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 20 March 2015]

Carol (Jane Alexander) and Tom Wetherly (William Devane) have three kids Brad, Mary Liz and Scottie (Lukas Haas) living in the quiet suburb of Hamlin near San Francisco. Some of their neighbors are the elderly Abharts with a shortwave radio, Mike (Mako) and his mentally challenged son Hiroshi at the gas station, Cathy (Rebecca De Mornay) and Phil Pitkin (Kevin Costner) with their baby, and preacher Hollis. Then nuclear war breaks out of the blue in the middle of the day. Tom is missing while driving home. They are joined by neighbor kid Larry whose parents are also missing.

Director Lynne Littman can't raise this any higher than a well made TV movie level. Jane Alexander keeps this ship upright. She's a soccer mom in a crumbling society. The tension isn't raised very high. There seems to be avenues that isn't explored. Instead of explosions and violence, this movie shows normal life being hollowed out as the world slowly fades away. It's not the most exciting way to go but it is somewhat compelling to see.

Old ladies dreams about the nuclear war

[the_wolf_imdb · 2/10 · 29 November 2016]

This movie is virtually unknown in Europe and I can see why. The problem is in incredible naivety about how the nuclear war could look like. Behavior of main characters is not only stupid, it is actually suicidal - as for example in the German movie The Cloud (2006).

I'm stunned into disbelief how many Americans do consider this movie to be "realistic" or "better than The Day After or Threads". Actually it is absolutely unreal emotional soap opera written by someone who was not only lazy to get basic information about nuclear warfare, but even didn't bother to get some information from survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I have expected that Americans as expected participants in the nuclear exchange have been trained in basic survival skills. OK, so there is light from the blast, let's crouch behind the couch! And let's go outside for walks and forming orderly line for bottled water. People dying by radiation poisoning look like they have an influenza. Wow. So let's sit, use our last batteries for playing sad music and be sad in general. What's that? Sort of romantic family movie about dying?

Because the nuclear exchange / terrorism still cannot be ruled out, let's sum up what to do in case of nuclear attack that kinda missed your residence. (If you have been hit directly without warning, you will probably evaporate, will be killed by pressure wave, will burn in the fires or suffocate. So any attempt to survive is basically based on assumption you will need to face only secondary effects.)

First you need to try to grab as much water from the water duct as immediately possible because this is likely the very last clean source of water. Then you need to hide in the cellar with protection of at last half of the meter of soil or you need to put as much mass of anything between outside and yourselves. You need to stay at least 14 days inside and that means you cannot even bring out the dead or take a leak. The clean water should be used for drinking only, water outside cannot be used, especially rain water. After 14 days you can spent about 1 hour outside for burials, taking waste outside and searching for food. Keep outside activity for bare minimum and avoid physically intensive tasks at that point. If you do not have gas mask, then use the wet cloth as the minimum breathing protection. The cloths used for going outside must be kept isolated near the exit if you cannot wash it.

This kinda might help to survive. Never ever go immediately outside even for church or children's play, otherwise you will see the real effects of radiation poisoning that is way way way worse than shown in this soap opera. If you plan to behave as people in this "realistic" movie, please save yourselves from the suffering and use your gun to shorten your suffering.

In the end you might survive. Do not expect the remains of your culture to be so nice a clean as in this soap opera, you will end up in pretty messy dark ages. After that you may try to survive the real long term effect as radioactive poisoning of soil, failure of agriculture and general harshness of life. It will be bad but not as bad as this crappy uninformed movie.

I saw this once 20 years ago; I've never forgotten it.

[Sardony · 14 July 2003]

It's been TWENTY YEARS (!) since I've seen this movie in a theatre, and I've never yet forgotten it. If any movie can be said to be life-changing, this is it. TESTAMENT was first shown in theatres, and the film's power became front page headlines for quite some time. People were crying in theatres, and article after article told of how this extremely powerful film affected people. This was not hype; the emotional strength of this movie is genuinely powerful.

For myself, I held back as best I could from crying in the theatre (me being a 23 year old guy seeing it with two (married) friends). But the effect on me was apparently visible immediately: when I walked out of the theatre and passed thru the line of people waiting for the next showing, a woman, who was laughing with her friends, happened to look at me and her face went completely serious. I very nearly hugged her right there, this stranger. When I got home, I cried for about two hours. The film's themes affected my, at the time, concerns about love, relationships, and such like.

One scene I'll never EVER forget, the most devastating: the 13-ish year old daughter asks her mother, "What's it like?" MOTHER: "What's what like?" DAUGHTER: "Making love." The mother (Jane Alexander -- my God, what a performance!) tells her in a very frank and beautiful speech, and the daughter caps off that scene with a devastating remark that just kills you and got my tears flowing (I probably couldn't hold back at that point).

Before making TESTAMENT, director Lynne Littman had made only documentaries, so maybe that "realism" style added to the power and believability of this movie. One of my all time favorite supporting actors is in this film, and he does a fantastic job: Mako. He and the young retarded (Down Syndrome?) boy who plays his son make a phenomenal team. They're my favorite characters: so full of innocence, father so full of love, strength and pain. Agh... my god my god... what a movie. Whew.

James Horner's roots can be found here.

[atrac · 10/10 · 4 December 2002]

Pretty much all of the positive reviews listed here echo my opinion of this film (subtle, powerful, honest, depressing), so I won't beat the dead horse and describe how terrific of a film this is.

I just wanted to add that James Horner's score, one of his first, is downright brilliant and deserves an official release on CD. Listen to it and treat it as the foundation for most of his future "dramatic" scores, such as "Titanic" and "Apollo 13."

James Horner is one of the few composers that can make me cry with his music alone, and I believe it is because I am reminded of this film when I hear it.

*****SPOILER*****

The scene in which the young japanese boy (a remarkable performance, considering he is mentally handicapped in real life and surprisingly never mentioned in any of these reviews) finds the missing toy bear caused possibly the most emotional response from me that I have ever experienced while watching a movie.

Testament, as of this date, is most definately the saddest film I have ever seen. I have never been more emotionally drained. It's ending ranks up there with the original "Resurrection" as one of the most haunting endings I have ever seen.

Saw it for the first time after 35 years today.

[billking6666 · 6/10 · 17 September 2018]

Definitely a woman's movie. It was very well done, considering two aspects of the film. One, it was shot in 28 days, which is hard to believe, considering the attention to detail (like the yard turning from green to dirt). Two, in spite of the lack of special effects, the time of the blasts was a frightening and real representation of what one could expect just outside the immediate damage zone. That said, the movie lacked any real science or survival instinct. The one thing that simply didn't make sense, was the inability of the short wave radio to pick up anything. Those things can transmit and receive half way around the world and unless this suburban town was the only spot left on the entire planet, someone would answer.. Knowing the movie was written, directed and starred by all women helps to dismiss the lack of things a man would expect in this film and focus on how women feel and react in a situation like this. Sadly, this is an accurate depiction of what would happen, especially today, after an all out nuclear war., but unlike this film , which portrays everyone dying, there will be survivors around the globe and communication, to give hope.

Probably the best of the "triumverent"

[Kylen · 10/10 · 8 May 1999]

There was "The Day After," a U.S. production about as subtle as someone hitting you over the head with a bat going "Nuclear war is BAD! BAD BAD BAD!"

Then there was "Threads," the BBC answer to Day After. Gripping, yes. Also unrelentingly graphic, violent and disturbing with little in terms of acting.

Then you have "Testament," a quiet little American Playhouse production that, quite simply, runs circles around the other two. No mushroom clouds, no graphic scenes of mass destruction and death incarnate. Just simple, raw human emotion. "Testament" handles its subject manner with a surprising gentle touch, understated, yet effective. The film is the best of the three because of its subtlety. A small Californian town isn't hit by the blast, but rather the aftermath.

It works. At first, the town manages to hold together fairly well, even proceeding with the elementary school play. But then the children begin dying, then the grownups. And the film rapidly becomes a story about surviving as best you can, rather than rebuilding and going on. I won't spoil the film by revealing plot details, but there are several twists that are both subtle and heartbreaking.

This film relies on its emotions to tell the story, and the actors are up to the task. Jane Alexander is, in a word, brilliant (how she didn't win the Oscar she got nominated for is beyond me), but she's not the only one. Her children, particularly Lukas Haas and Roxanna Zal (in their movie debuts), are stunning as well, while some of the bit players make the most of what they have.

In the end, it's the gradual NON-appearance of the actors that make the point. Life will go on, yes, but for how long? "Testament" relies on the loss of those we learn to love to make its point in the best way possible: by letting us get it on our own.

My brief review of the film

[sol- · 6/10 · 16 October 2005]

Gloomy, dreary and pessimistic although thought-provoking speculative fiction, the film is effectively narrated and has some powerful moments, but at others times it drags, as not every sequence feels like it serves a purpose. It is mostly just that the total running time is a bit long for it to all stay fresh and it spends too much time building up to the shocking news. Whilst discussing time, it might be worth noting that there is little sense of time in the film. This may serve some purpose to present a sense of futility or something, however it makes it hard to keep an idea of what is happening. Either way, what is good in the film works very well, including a fairly good, even though at times over-the-top, performance by Alexander. The original music by James Horner is appropriately foreboding at times too, but then again, at other times it is awkwardly jolly. Those who often complain about sentimentality in films may not enjoy this. For others, this is worth a look. It is a reasonably good even if not necessarily brilliant film.

A Look at the Human Cost

[Hitchcoc · 10/10 · 22 August 2017]

I will never forget this film. I saw it in a theatre in 1983. I also taught an abbreviated version of the screenplay to my English students. This is about a world without hope and what we do when that happens. I think about "Children of Men" or "Childhood's End" or "On the Beach" and what our human condition is when there is no future. This film with the amazing Jane Alexander has to do with selflessness and sacrifice when there is no endgame. The scene where love and sex are talked about with the dying daughter. The birthday party with the graham crackers and the jam when foodstuffs have dried up. The finding of the Teddy bear and so on. It's horrifying enough when a person knows he or she is going to die, but this is a world. Yet here are are again in 2017, still using the phrase, "if you start something, you will be wiped from the face of the Earth." Let us be diligent and not stupidly think that if it happens somewhere else, it's not going to affect everyone.

"Testament" has the flow of a memoir, but one in which the writer frequently forgot to write about what they were experiencing and what little they truly understood

[TheUnknown837-1 · 6/10 · 5 January 2013]

"Testament," a bold and occasionally brilliant film about the consequences of a nuclear attack, really does have the feel and mindset of a memoir. More specifically, a memoir written by somebody who might or might not have survived a tragic event they never fully understood. One of the movie's surefire touches of genius lies in the fact that its narrating protagonist, a commonplace small-town mother very well-played by Jane Alexander, never learns who triggered the nuclear war that wrecks life as she knows it. In spite of what the movie posters would have us believe, we never see the actual attack—only a bright series of flashes near the beginning. Afterwards, we only observe the after-effects: the radiation sickness, the townspeople turned on one another, the cemeteries and backyards filling up with coffins. In many of these moments, "Testament" has some great power.

However, as a memoir-mindset, it also suffers from a patchy narrative. If we want to consider it like a memoir, then it was one in which the writer only jotted down their experiences in the barest of detail and only once every few weeks. I am completely appreciative that the makers of the film never spoiled their intentions (they never tell us who is responsible for the attack) but I wanted more of the consequences. I wanted to get to know the protagonist better, I wanted to understand her relationship with her three children, I wanted more of a sense of loneliness when her missing husband never returns home. There are a number of characters who succumb to radiation poisoning (we are told several hundred) but only one death registers an emotional impact. The others certainly attempt to make us feel, but I could not stir any empathy, as I felt I had not come to know these people as human beings.

Running down the casualty lists in "Testament" is like scrolling through a list of casualties from a tragic event long before you were born: I certainly felt sorry for what happened to them, but there was no particular level of sympathy from one name to the other. Maybe that says something about me as a human being, but I never really had the impression that I could imagine being in the middle of it myself. In spite of Miss Alexander's wonderful performance, there is not much of a character there. At the end of "Testament," I wanted to know about her struggles and get involved; I wanted to feel heartbroken that she waited so long and so futilely for a loved one to finally return home. Even an attempted suicide scene, something I would expect of a situation like in this movie, could not bring me to care much.

To the movie's credit, it is very well-produced. Lynne Littman, the director, has a solid instinct for placing her camera and instructing actors how to move, where to stand, and how to perform. She also has a very subtle, unpretentious style: something absolutely necessary given the movie's intentions. And the cinematography by Steven Poster (artfully drab with a washed-out lens trick) is absolutely lovely to behold. It just goes to show that the camera does not need to be flourished with strobes and bright colors for a scene to be beautiful. And there are some scenes of great power: an opening moment where a father and son have a bike race, an extremely touching scene where a mother and her daughter, both of whom expect to die soon, have an honest and open conversation about sex. And the movie's occasional usage of Super 8 home-video footage is a great touch. The music by James Horner is very good (it has a haunting quality reminiscent of the soundtrack from "Blade Runner") but is not heard nearly enough. There are a number of very fine moments in which some subtle, in-the-background notes would be really appreciative, to bring the whole sequence full circle. That just might be the movie's problem: "Testament" never seems to come all the way around with its intentions. Despite its artistically restrained mindset and no matter how much I would like to have been moved and had my thoughts provoked by it, "Testament" did not register much of an emotional impact for me.

so utterly unrealistic

[rotter82 · 3/10 · 26 July 2007]

Spoiler warning-intended or not.

The American apple pie movie of the Nuke era. Bring out your dead but don't forget to bring a blueberry pie and some milk and cookies to the wake.

I almost cried when i watched this, not because of the grave message of the film to humanity, but because it was so unbelievably unimaginable. MUltiple strikes across the USA, most urban centres hit, but hey this town carrys on functionally and with all the sentiment of a mid afternoon made for TV drama for bored housewives. Utter crap-don't mention the science to these scriptwriters, research was an afterthought. How this was ever nominated for an Oscar i do not know. Some reviewers have suggested that this film is superior to Threads because of the beautiful sentiment within the storyline but surely sentiment is an emotion fatally crushed in the aftermath of the end of the world. The emotionless stark reality and utter despair displayed in THreads is surely all that would be left followed by death. AN admirable effort to "Hollywoodise" the subject but totally inappropriate. Almost laughable if the subject wasn't so grim. Now wheres that cookie jar.

The Ordinary Atmosphere And Lack Of Excitement Actually Makes This Very Powerful

[sddavis63 · 8/10 · 24 January 2014]

One of the things that makes "Testament" so interesting is simply the fact that one expects a movie about the aftermath of a nuclear holocaust to be exciting. But "Testament" isn't exciting. Instead it starts out routinely ordinary. We simply meet the Wetherly family. Mom, dad and 3 kids. They have all the love and all the problems of any family. There's nothing extraordinary about them. And they live in the extremely un-extraordinary small town of Hamlin, California. Everything is un-extraordinary until one day the TV goes out. When it finally comes back on, it's carrying news of a massive nuclear attack on large portions of the United States. Aside from a very bright light coming through the front window of their home, nothing much happens in Hamlin - except for the aftermath.

There's no one to turn to for help, there's hardly anyone left to be in contact with. The bright light, of course, told us that while Hamlin wasn't destroyed, there must be radiation. Can anything be safely eaten? Can the water be safe to drink? Have the people been hopelessly exposed? We watch, as things slowly begin to fall apart in Hamlin.

A lot of this revolves around the children. So many children. Children who had a whole lifetime ahead of them and were busy practicing a school play, when the unimaginable happened. The school play goes ahead, to try to maintain some sense of normalcy, but nothing is normal anymore. People get sick, people begin to die, and there's just no hope. None at all.

It's the sense of absolute and utter hopelessness that permeates this movie and that finally makes it both so sombre and so powerful. It's not at all "exciting" in the normal sense of the word, but it's gripping. You can't let it go once it starts. I actually watched this back in 1983 when it was released. Today, it's a bit of a curiosity. But in 1983 the Cold War was still going on, the Soviet Union still existed, and Gorbachev hadn't come to power to bring a sense that, to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, "we can work with him." In the pre-Gorbachev era, the Soviet Union was mighty threatening, and this movie would have at least been unsettling in its believability. Even today, with the Soviet Union long dead, "Testament" has power. (8/10)

What did I just watch?

[mzshel · 2/10 · 29 December 2022]

This was about as interesting as watching grass grow. This was supposed to be how a family and community survives a nuclear holocaust. I expected to see people coming together, struggling to find food, etc or for the close-knit community to fall apart in the struggle. Neither happened.

I didn't see any efforts by anyone to survive. I saw people waiting around to die. The only one doing anything constructive was the boy. His mother just sat around the house writing in a journal that no one is ever going to read.

I wasn't so much bored as I was infuriated at the lack of anyone actually doing anything.

Powerful, gripping look at nuclear hell

[Ace-38 · 14 March 1999]

1983..The cold war was in full swing and the fear of nuclear armageddon hung over all our heads. ABC released "The Day After", (which I have already commented on) but in all the furor around that, "Testament" was released. This is THE 1980's nuclear war film. It doesn't deal with the effects on an entire community, but rather on one small, close knit family in California. Jane Alexander's performance was one of legend, and is possibly one of the classic dramatic performances of all time. The day begins innocently enough, dad heads off to work, the kids watch "Sesame Street"..then the Emergency Broadcast System cuts in and the world stops. Ignore all the Y2K mumbo-jumbo and put yourself back in 1983 (most of us know where we were) and watch this film. You may not be "entertained", but you will appreciate what you have just a bit more.