jay@umcp-cs.UUCP (12/05/83)
Subject: TDA article Newsgroups: net.tv.tda This article is excerpted from the Show section of this past Sunday's (12/4/83) Washington Post, by Tom Shales (without, unfortunately, his permission): Everybody just went crazy. They went insane. They were going madddd. You'd have thought it was the end of the world. It was the end of the world, but for gosh sakes, it wasn't the end of the world! And yet as "The Day After" approached, more and more spokesthings for more and more special interest groups of all kinds got into the fray of either endorsing or condemning ABC's films about World War III. It appeared that some groups were afraid they'd look complacent, that they'd be left off a roaring and smoking bandwagon, if they didn't say something pro or con, and pronto. "See here, Smathers, why haven't we made some sort of statement on TDA?" "Oh, sorry, J.B., we'll knock something out right away and feed it to the media." It was what might be called a nuclear reaction. Some people are referring now to the "ABC hype" of the film. In fact there was little ABC hype--a teencey-weencey peep of hype compared to that lavished by the network on "The Winds of War" or "The Thorn Birds". No, TDA generated something that networks do not like: hype beyond network control. ABC was not stirring up controversy before the film, and now that it's been shown, ABC motion pictures' Brandon Stoddard, whose baby it was, says he just doesn't want to talk about it at all. Before the film, much of the public commentary was along the lines of, "This is going to be horrible, this is going to be monstrous, this is going to make everybody sick." On "The McLaughlin Group," WRC-TV's [local NBC's] insufferable weekly jam session for right-wing crackpots, token liberal Morton Kondracke, on temporary leave of his senses, denounced the film in advance for bringing "X-rated violence" to the home screen and foresaw a wave of gory TV movies to follow. He did allow as he hadn't yet seen the film. On the following week's show, all members of the group congratulated themselves on having been correct about the broadcast. Not one of them was. For all the shudders generated by premature gab about how gruesome the movie was going to be, a few commentators condemned it after the showing be- cause it wasn't ghastly enough; it hadn't lived up to their own dire pre- dictions. In fact, the film never was a thoroughly realistic portrayal of the aftermath of a nuclear blast as experts have described it. It was always only marginally realistic. ABC even trimmed back the destruction scenes during the final edit of the film late last summer. Originally there were more shots of people being vaporized during the initial blast, including a mother and her baby standing by a window in the child's room. Perhaps all the non ABC hype was making ABC a little shaky. Network executives were petrified in the final days before broadcast. Before the film aired, the Rev. Billy Graham called for "equal time" to answer the movie's message of hopelessness. Afterward, he seemed to rescind that demand when he said of the film, "No one can deny that a full-scale nuclear war would bring chaos and indescribable horror to the human race. For the first time in history, man holds in his hand the awesome power to destroy the entire planet in a matter of minutes." The Rev. Jerry Falwell, a more political evangelist, and one who should probably be taken less seriously than Graham, ranted before the film that he would organize a boycott against companies who bought advertising on it--about as constructive a suggestion as calling for a barrage of sticks and stones, and all too typically Falwellian. After the broadcast, Falwell withdrew the plan. He still maintained that the program posed "a threat to national security," an utterly and witlessly specious charge. ----------------------------- The article goes on lambasting the sponsors of opinions (and the opinions themselves) who through misinformation or no information pompously paraded their various absurd claims of doom and gloom regarding TDA. Having shared the experience of almost half of America by spending an evening glued to the tube watching that fantastic bone of contention, I offer my own view which is remarkably akin to Mr. Shales. It was an above average t.v. movie (which, in itself, is no recommendation at all) which attempted to deal with a volatile issue that is inherently frightening to anyone living in today's world. ABC should be commended for its effort, however lackluster the quality of the film. It presented to us some insights into other areas of modern life, specifically the politics of paranoia, which are well worth taking notice of. -- Jay Elvove ..!seismo!umcp-cs!jay