On the Beach (1959) User Reviews (208)

a great human drama

[rupie · 8/10 · 20 May 1999]

The Cold War aspects of this movie may be a bit dated, but for those of us of a certain age it is a reminder of the fears we lived under at that time. In retrospect, it may be that Julian was wrong: it may have indeed been the very presence of these terrible weapons that prevented a third world war.

In any case, that aspect of the story never overshadows the movie's underlying theme, which is, rather, how each of us views the sum of our lives as our mortal end approaches. Are we alone? Have we connected with anyone? Have we failed? Have we loved? Have we been loved?

Color would have been all wrong for this essentially b&w story. Superb performances from Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner, Fred Astaire and the pre-Norman Bates Anthony Perkins. A fine bit as well by John Tate as the old admiral("to a blind, blind world").

A mere cold-war nuclear destruction movie would leave one merely frightened at the end. The fact that this movie leaves you with an almost unbearable feeling of terrible sadness is a testament to the human power of Nevil Shute's book, as well as to the fine script and Kramer's superb direction.

One of the most depressing movies ever made, but a truly great one.

The last shore

[dbdumonteil · 8/10 · 13 June 2001]

The French title is "le dernier rivage"(the last shore)The intellectuals dismiss this movie in France and I've always thought they were wrong.Ava Gardner had never been better with the eventual exception of Huston's "night of the iguana".My favorite part is the central one:one of the soldiers tries to find the cause for the strange Morse signals.He crosses bleak dead San Francisco harbor (the camera takes prodigious high angle shots of him,making us share his loneliness and his hope against hope)Hope that was to be short-lived!What a symbol,this equivalent of a bottle thrown into the sea!So few special effects,ans so much emotion.Stanley Kramer's peak.

Patience...

[fodderstompf-70522 · 8/10 · 30 December 2022]

In 1974, my 6th grade teacher would go on and on about this movie. It only took 48 years to see it-- but I bet I've thought about his description at least once a month over the decades. Coincidentally, it was about the same time that I gained an interest in Australia, which has stuck with me to this day. Was not much of a movie buff until the pandemic hit almost 3 years ago, which has since gave me time to appreciate classic vintage film (thank you TCM). Stanley Kramer, Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner... all these names mean something to me now, and I have perspective. The timing couldn't have been better to see the film December 2022, and I can fully appreciate it for everything that it's about. Great story, and the patience has paid off.

We are all on that beach, on the thin line between life and death.

[lucanujs · 28 July 2003]

And the essence of our lives is expressed in the way we treat each other under the implacable threat of imminent mortality. As Ava Gardner's character says, at the penultimate moment of love's farewell, "It's been nice, Dwight Lionel. It's been everything." And what she says on her beach is true for every last one of us, on ours.

The primary power of this great movie to me is how well it conveys the idea that for us, on this beach, love and tender kindness are all that matter in the end, and the end is always near. The sheer kindness that Ava and Gregory's characters express for each other is surely the key element of their triumphant relationship.

The moment in which their relationship most completely triumphs, of course, occurs at the Narbethong Hotel. "On The Beach" achieves a cinematic moment of genius when the chorus singing "Waltzing Matilda" changes from a rowdy crowd of drunks to a magnificently harmonious group of fine male voices. As the sheer beauty of the music overwhelms us, it also overwhelms our characters, and we all unite together in a sublime moment of awareness that true love and kindness give us our only victory over imminent death. "You'll never take me alive," says the ghost.

The way Gregory Peck's character shifts from fumbling with the fire to turning toward Ava as the music inspires transcendence, and the way Ava smiles at him, make this scene unforgettably great.

Nearly as wonderful is the scene in which Ava's character learns that the Sawfish will be leaving, with her captain at the helm. She will have to face her death alone. She doesn't waste a moment in argument or recrimination, but expresses the fullness of her love for him and her great courage when she accepts his decision and thanks him: "..it's been everything." And then: "oh, I'm so frightened." This moment is one that I take to heart. It shows the love and courage I wish to have "when the time comes."

There is still time, brothers and sisters. But we are all on the beach.

Solid post-apocalyptic old school drama

[ildimo-35223 · 7/10 · 13 December 2017]

Still this one remains perhaps the most effective "end of the world as we know it" american films, cool-headed in frozen cold war times, with an unusually light touch by the Oliver Stone (but a tad more significant in my books) of those days. Not in the least pedantic, never dull (though a bit stretching at 134 minutes), at times almost elegiac and decidedly pessimistic, Kramer's On the Beach boasts a typically strong cast, crowned by a fantastic playing off each other of Peck and Gardner, with the latter being nothing sort of magnificent in her vulnerable first hour in the film. Premiered, among others, in Moscow 58 years ago this month. Peck, a life long supporter of nuclear disarmament, attended.

A great Tour de Force by a fine cast, interpreting a great story

[hfelknor · 10/10 · 13 April 2006]

I watched this movie in a USAF chow hall on the island of Makung in the China Strait with about 20 other airman. The year was 1960. We were stationed there on a missile site. Our targets were 7 Chinese missile sites. Their target was us.

I was 22 years old and immortal.

Until I watched this movie.

When the movie ended, I will never forget the fact that no one moved for perhaps 10 minutes. There was just the bright, blank screen and the sound of the end of the film going around and around. Thiketa-thicketa-thicketa................... No one ever said a word about what we had just seen.

We, or at least I, never forgot this movie. As said earlier, it was more than scary. It was sad.

It seems strange now, 40 some years later, to be telling people that you really should watch this film and watch the masters at work, with a script that is chilling. And you know what? We still haven't outlived the possibility...........

Powerful Anti-War Film in the Cold War Period

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 5 December 2011]

In 1964, the nuclear submarine USS Sawfish arrives in Australia after the worldwide nuclear holocaust. Commander Dwight Lionel Towers (Gregory Peck) confirms that the world has been destroyed and the nuclear dust is coming to Australia. The widower Cmdr. Towers, who grieves the death of his wife and children, is befriended by Royal Australian Navy Lieutenant Peter Holmes (Anthony Perkins), who is a family man with wife and the newborn baby Jennifer. He has a lover affair with the local Moira Davidson (Ava Gardner), a still beautiful alcoholic woman with a past, and she falls in love with him.

Cmdr. Towers and his crew invite the drunkard scientist Julian Osborne (Fred Astaire) to join them in their reconnaissance voyage to the further North and to the United States, and they return hopeless and aware that Australia and the rest of the mankind has very few days until the doomsday.

"On the Beach" is a powerful anti-war film released in the Cold War period. It is dated in the present days but I believe how scary this realistic film might have been in the climax of the Cold War in the 60's. The idea of people taking "sleeping pills" supplied by the government is one of the scariest things I have ever seen in a movie. When Lt. Peter Holmes explains to his housewife and mother, a typical woman of the 50's and 60's, what she should do with the baby and herself, her reaction probably reflects a great part of the female universe in this period. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "A Hora Final" ("The Final Hour")

Gives new meaning to the word 'shudder'

[lottatitles · 9/10 · 26 September 2002]

I made the mistake of watching this film at 11 pm, in a theater with only 4 other people. We were scattered about...and alone. I have seldom wanted to be in a group as much as I did that night. I almost got up and went to sit in a row with one of the 4. Directing? Brilliant. Cinematography? Brilliant. The cast? Exceptional. Ava Gardner (still beautiful), Gregory Peck, Fred Astair and Anthony Perkins are inspired. I have always wanted to go to Australia. Many years later I got the chance. As the coast of Sydney came into view I started to cry...and didn't know why? Then I realized, I was 'hearing' Waltzing Matilda and remembering.

Good End of the World Movie

[gallenm1 · 7/10 · 6 June 2003]

This 1959 nuclear war film has a lot going for it. It does not rely on nuclear devastation such as burned out buildings and charred corpses for effect. Instead, it focuses on the struggles of the people who were outside the zone of immediate destruction, those who have to wait for the arrival of the fallout cloud. The performances in this film are excellent. Fred Astaire is good as a scientist who predicts the impending calamity and is haunted by his guilt as a scientist for the creation of nuclear weaponry. Anthony Perkins is convincing as a naval officer in one of his final roles before his performance in Psycho caused him to be type cast. Finally, Donna Anderson is good as Perkins's nervous wife who is in denial about the tragedy. It is a pity that she did not appear in more movies. The film has some flaws. Towards the end, there is a scene where it resorts to implausible tearjerking, and the tone tends to be overly propagandistic. Furthermore, the time table for the coming of the fallout cloud is scientifically implausible. Nevertheless, this is a classic film that should be on everyone's to watch list.

Perfectly paced and well acted, it keeps melodrama minimised

[Kafca · 10/10 · 4 May 2000]

In an era (1959) and on a topic (nuclear war) that usually demands melodrama, "On the Beach" resists. In fact, the all-star principal cast and director Stanley Kramer seem to treat the topic as a stage play, focussing on the individual. And that is how such a story should be treated. Life on the northern hemisphere has been destroyed a defence mistake by one of the (then) two superpowers. Gregory Peck's nuclear-powered submarine was submerged at the time (they stayed under water for a hell of a long time in those days). The sub heads for Melbourne, Australia, which is one of the only places in the world not yet affected by radiation. But the radiation will come, and this is where the truth of the piece comes out.

The inhabitants of 'the end of the world' go through what you would expect: denial, anger, clinging to the thinnest hope, and finally, resignation. As I said at the start, this is clearly a story about the individual. Kramer knows this, and the cast of Ava Gardner, Tony Perkins, John Meillon and Fred Astaire play it with a reality that is all too rare. Even recent films like Final Impact fail to deliver on this count. The real joy of the film is the pacing, which gives the cast the chance to play it like it should be played. Astaire proves he is an actor, and only once slips into his raised eyebrow 'top hat and tails' mode. It is a well thought out movie without the Hollywood ending, but such is the art of Kramer that the ending is a good resolution, not just a funeral. The camera work is exceptional throughout, starting with the continuous shots in Peck's submarine. I don't know about the Waltzing Matilda music at the start, however. But it does work later in the piece, and makes it worthy of the Academy Award nomination it received.

It's the end of the world as we know it

[ExpendableMan · 7/10 · 16 May 2007]

Nuclear war has devastated the planet. All life in the Northern hemisphere has been extinguished and the last remaining pockets of humanity gather in an idyllic community on the Australian coast to await the radioactive wind sweeping down to wring the last fragile gasps of breath from the world. Humanity is doomed. Finished. The nuclear arms race has reached a final, terrifying climax and do you know what the most startling thing about it is? Just how good an actor Fred Astaire really was...

In this adaptation of Nevil Shute's novel, Astaire throws off the dancing shoes, says "so long" to Ginger Rogers and plays a bewildered, aging scientist using the last days of mankind to live out his boyhood fantasies of life as a race car driver, while ruminating on the self-destructive tendency of our species that has finally driven us to extinction. Disillusioned, sad and yet maybe even revelling in the carefree abandon that imminent death offers, Astaire is undoubtedly the best thing about this movie, which is high praise considering some of the competition. Gregory Peck especially shines as Captain Dwight Towers, leader of an American submarine crew who find their way down under. Towers, forced to leave his wife and child behind in the USA has to face the growing realisation that they are dead and there is nothing he can do to save them. He is ably supported by Ava Gardner as a lonely alcoholic desperate to find love in what time she has left and Anthony Perkins as a committed family man, who must face up to the possibility that he will have to poison his own wife and baby in order to be a 'good father.'

As you can probably guess then, On the Beach is not a cheerful film. In fact, it's harder to imagine a grimmer opus of despair and you definitely have to be in a certain frame of mind in order to watch it. Bar one barnstorming stock car race which sees automobiles careening off the track recklessly, spinning around and exploding, it's a very slow paced movie, so it's a tremendous credit to the writers involved that two hours of people pondering the fragility of life and everything they did not accomplish doesn't get boring. It is still very much a product of the time though and more cynical audiences might find it difficult to believe that society will keep performing everyday functions right up until the end and not degenerate into a chaotic, panicking mess.

That said, On The Beach is still an immensely powerful film. The message resonates even today and in terms of capturing the paranoia and pessimism of the 1950s, it does so with far greater effect than any of the so-called metaphorical science fiction films filled with giant, radioactive ants and rampaging aliens that appeared in cinemas at the same time. The script is terrific and while the pacing may be a bit slow, the cast are all running on full steam throughout. The scene where Perkins explains the effects of radiation poisoning in particular is arguably the most harrowing anti-nuclear message that film has ever provided. And if it makes you shudder watching it in this day and age, imagine what it must have felt like back in 1959, when the shadow of the bomb loomed large overheard.

A Great Movie

[angelsunchained · 10/10 · 9 April 2005]

On The Beach was made in 1959 and it's still a fantastic movie some 46 years later. As great as all the performances are, the photography and the script are as out-standing.

The only drawback to this black & white classic is the hauntingly depressing nature of the film. Death is never easy to explore and it's done here tastefully, gritty, and realistically. Gregory Peck shines in this controversial role. Ava Gardner gives her finest performance. Fred Astaire is incredible in this serious role. However, the film was stolen by the pre-Psycho Anthoney Perkins and newcomer Donna Anderson as a doomed young couple with a new baby. The ending of On The Beach is one of the most depressing in screen history, still this is a must see for any fan of any of the actors or the legendary Stanly Kramer.

Sure its powerful and a story that should be told, but do we have to watch it?

[dbborroughs · 7/10 · 4 November 2006]

Bleak, black and thoroughly depressing this film has to go on the list of all time downers. This is the story of the end of the world via radiation as survivors try to find a safe place and other people still alive, but instead find only the abyss.

Stanley Kramer's powerful look at what nuclear war may bring is a masterpiece of film-making. It moves you to ponder not only your own mortality but also that of the world. Made at the height of the nuclear arms race this story was once a day or two off from actually happening, today its still possible, but I think we'd have a little better chance of averting it (or at least I hope). Its a wonderful heart felt movie on all levels both in front of the camera and behind it.

The problem with a film like this is, why would anyone want to watch it. Yes, its a well made and well told drama, but its so depressing and the ending is such a foregone conclusion that watching it becomes an exercise in self abuse. What can we get out of story that is now so clichéd that as we watch it we fill in the blanks of whats going to happen next. I'm guessing even when it was made everyone pretty much knew what the outcome was to be. To be honest other than a chance to see great film-making I don't know why anyone would want to make oneself feel so depressed on purpose.

This film is a vital warning about "tomorrow". It just may leave you feeling too hopeless to do anything to stop it.

No good

[tom_amity · 1/10 · 20 October 2007]

May I enter a minority report? I hate this film as much as Nevil Shute (author of the novel On the Beach) did.

Shute's biggest complaint was the film's distortion of the character of Commander Dwight Towers. In the novel, Towers' "coping mechanism" is an alternative reality: the conviction that "when all this blows over" he was going to return to his wife and family in Connecticut; he even buys them presents to take home. "You may think I'm nuts," he tells Moira, "but that's how I see it." Moira's greatest achievement is to enter into his alternative reality and to promise to visit him in Connecticut. Indeed, to Moira's sorrow, the two do not consummate their relationship; Towers will not, cannot, cheat on his wife. The mercenary Stanley Kramer would have none of this: the film, he decided, needed sex. Gregory Peck, to his credit, tried to argue Kramer out of this distortion, but Kramer wouldn't budge.

Like all Shute's novels, On the Beach is about ordinary people triumphing over an impossible situation. The characters in Shute's story talk of simple pleasures and go on with their lives, planting flowers and beautifying their homes, talking of "the situation" and "when it comes" in careful euphemisms, not in denial but quietly aware that soon and very soon they must make their plans about how they are going to spend the end. My favorite scene is in the furniture store, when Peter Holmes says "Can I pay with a checque?" The clerk answers in the affirmative, and they exchange their documents with dignity, like gentlemen, without bitter recriminations or snide end-of-the-world jokes and with no pathetic attempts to utter profundities. The movie, I fear, betrays the mood of the novel: in the movie, the characters do nothing from start to finish other than moping, moping and moping. This makes the film sentimental, corny and downright mushy. The novel has none of those qualities.

Kramer made the mistake of imagining this story to be about nuclear war, or the aftermath thereof. He's utterly wrong. The story is about the triumph of the human spirit over impossible odds.

Powerful Without Being Pretentious

[Eric-62-2 · 14 August 1999]

"On The Beach", despite it's heavy subject of a nuclear holocaust wiping out all human life, succeeds because Stanley Kramer is mercifully more restrained and less pretentious than he would later be in "Inherit The Wind" and "Judgment At Nuremberg", which are memorable more for their polemics than their characters, in my opinion. Except for one minor speech by Fred Astaire at one point (which as the previous reviewer noted is somewhat ironic in light of the fact that the very thing Astaire rails against, the idea that large nuclear stockpiles could keep the peace, turned out to be absolutely true) the film is for the most part about people and how they react to the knowledge that their world and their lives will soon come to an end. This is what makes the film so compelling as far as I'm concerned. The cast is excellent, with fine performances by Astaire (his first non-musical part), Anthony Perkins and Gregory Peck. But the real strength of the movie is Ava Gardner's touching performance as the lonely, alcoholic Moira Davidson who manages for one brief moment before the end to find true love with Peck. Having read much about her life, there is something almost hauntingly autobiographic in Gardner's portrayal, and that only adds to the movie's overall poignance.

Lost potential

[prateekcertain · 7/10 · 19 May 2018]

'On the Beach' has a great premise to work with - a town ignoring the impending radioactive doom creeping and strolling slowly with the winds of the ocean towards it, and a navy team with a submarine that does not want to suspend the cloak of importance of their duties. The scenes of tranquil and playfulness are especially well-made and has the bittersweet comfort of ignorance in helplessness. The exploration of the vacant landscapes of American shores and harbours is unnerving. I did enjoy the reactions of most of the people to their eventual demise. What really disturbs the story is the ill-paced romance aspects. If they had spent more time with people coping (or not coping) in these strange circumstances instead of the romance plots, this could have been a classic. It was evident that the movie was not about the nuclear catastrophe itself, but how the Australian town reacts to it. But it takes a while to pick up. The party scene at the beginning of the film, for example, is extremely boring and not essential.

What's the fallout like today?

[tomsview · 9/10 · 2 May 2018]

"On the Beach" is beautifully restrained. The way the last survivors of Earth await the arrival of the radioactive fallout is nothing less than stoic. They are like those gentlemen on the Titanic who knew there wasn't room in the boats and continued with their card games or smoked a last cigar as the ship went down.

I first saw this film in 1960, but it has held up well. Stanley Kramer ditched novelist Nevil Shute's scenario about how the war started involving Albania and Egypt etc. In the movie, no one really knows; someone, somewhere made a mistake - it's still relevant.

The film avoids the obvious. Some filmmakers would have shown atomic explosions under the opening titles to bring the audience up to speed, but there is none of that. The film focuses on a small number of people and their reactions to their impending doom.

Apart from anything else, it was fascinating to see Australia on the screen in a big Hollywood movie even if we all die at the end. American stars played the main characters although only Gregory Peck played an American. Ava Gardner, Fred Astaire and Anthony Perkins played Australians with varying degrees of success with the accent.

Ava's character is an Australian version of her Lady Brett Ashley from "The Sun Also Rises", but pre-"Psycho" Tony Perkins along with Donna Anderson as a young married couple bring the tragedy home. Donna Anderson is so convincing that for a long time I thought she was Australian, but she is indeed American and features in "Fallout" a brilliant 2013 documentary about the making of the film.

At the time, Waltzing Matilda was almost the unofficial anthem of Australia. Composer Ernest Gold latched onto it for his score for the film and virtually created a "Symphony on the Theme of Waltzing Matilda". He gave the tune shadings that go from light and jaunty to triumphant and finally mournful. The song may have been overdone in a scene with drunken fishermen, but Gold's score remains as emotive as ever.

Every time I see the film, that ending as Fred steps on the gas in his garage and Ava watches Greg sail away followed by shots of deserted Melbourne streets never fails to put a lump in my throat.

On the Beach review

[renegadeviking-271-528568 · 7/10 · 18 February 2021]

On The Beach is an adaptation of the 1957 novel of the same name, which was written by Nevil Shute. At the time of the films release there was great public fear of Atomic and Nuclear weapons. I'm sure this film chilled many viewers to the bone at the time, particularly due to its unflinching look at the aftermath of one of these weapons being used. The film is scary and thought provoking. Almost sixty years later and this film still remains a frightening and powerful film experience. Sadly the film still remains relevant as mankind is still intent on having these weapons around.

I like how the film captures how many different reactions various people have to the news of the end of mankind. Some can't handle it and escape into a bottle of booze, some go to extremes to feel and experience life while it still exists, and some simply refuse to accept that there is no hope of survival whatsoever. It always makes me think how I would react in such a situation.

On The Beach poster

The film is set in Australia. The entire population(apart from people in Australia)have died due to radiation sickness following a Nuclear war. The radiation is being spread on the winds, and it is estimated to arrive in Australia in around five months time. The citizens there are trying to come to terms with the war, and with the fact of their own impending fate. An American submarine, the U.S.S. Sawfish, surfaces off the coast of Australia. It was submerged when the war began, and therefore the crew were not exposed to the radiation spreading across the surface of the planet.

The submarine has been travelling around the globe and briefly surfacing at various countries, only to find no sign of life. Captain Dwight Towers (Gregory Peck)and his crew dock in Australia and come ashore. Despite Dwight's wife and children having been killed in the war, he just cannot accept that painful fact and still acts as though they are living. While the crew are ashore, Dwight befriends the guilt ridden scientist Julian Osborn (Fred Astaire) and the outgoing and boozy Moira (Ava Gardner). Dwight and Moira slowly fall in love with one another. Dwight however cannot permit himself to act on his feelings though because he still considers himself married.

Dwight and his crew are joined by Julian and Lt. Peter Holmes (Anthony Perkins)after a Morse signal is picked up coming from America. The crew must travel there and try and find out if anyone has somehow managed to survive. While all this is going on, the countdown to human extinction has begun and the clock is ticking fast. Photo0830

Peter and Mary have a difficult discussion about the suicide pills. Screenshot by me.

This is an extremely bleak film and I don't find it to be an easy watch at all. The performances of the cast make it a must see though. I find it to be extremely moving and I think that it captures so well the horror and tragedy such an event would bring about in reality. I find the human stories to be the main reason to return to this one again and again. It's both fascinating and moving watching the different characters and how they react to their approaching deaths. Photo0827

Gregory Peck as Dwight. Screenshot by me.

Gregory Peck is completely heartbreaking as a man trying to appear to be in control of his emotions. Inside though Dwight is anything but in control of his emotions. Dwight is consumed with a grief that he cannot display publically. Gregory shows us his tough façade cracking a few times though.

Thanks to Gregory's superb performance we see Dwight really struggling to stay in control and we also see him wrestling with his conscience in regards to his developing and undeniable feelings for Moira.

Fred Astaire is best remembered today for his incredible dancing skills, but he was also a very fine dramatic actor. His performance here as Julian Osborn is one of the best he ever gave in my opinion. Julian was a Nuclear scientist and he feels tremendous guilt that something he helped to build is now ending up destroying humanity.

Fred steals every scene he is in with just a look. In many scenes he is in the background but you keep your focus on him to see how he is reacting at certain moments. I also like the look on his face in scenes where Julian watches Dwight and Moira, he seems to know before they do that they are falling in love. I think Julian knows that their time together will be very bittersweet and he pities them because of that. I think that Fred is especially excellent in the scene where the Sawfish crew ask Julian to try and explain how the war started in the first place. Photo0832

Ava Gardner as Moira. Screenshot by me.

Ava Gardner touches my heart as Moira. She conveys the sadness and fear that Moira is struggling with perfectly. Moira is such a tragic figure because she has so much love to give, and she wants to spend her final days being happy with Dwight.

Ava perfectly conveys this woman's inner turmoil, as she struggles to blot out the pain of the present by consuming booze and how at the same time she finds in Dwight a reason to stay alive and sober to savour every moment they have left. I think Ava delivers one of her most underrated performances in this film. She makes you want to hug Moira because she is so vulnerable and loveable. Photo0821

Anthony Perkins as Peter. Screenshot by me.

Anthony Perkins is excellent as the young Lt. Peter Holmes. I've never been much of a fan of Perkins, but I really do like him in this film. Peter and his wife have recently had a baby, and his wife is really struggling to accept the truth of what is about to happen to everyone. Anthony perfectly captures the emotional and moral distress Peter is in.

When Peter has to decide if he and his young family will take the government issued suicide pills or not, Anthony really lets you see how much of a difficult decision that is for Peter. It is the kind of decision that nobody should ever have to make, but the film forces you to think what you would do in his place. Would you accept the slow, painful and deeply unpleasant death caused by radiation? Or would you have one last beautiful day surrounded by those you love, still being healthy and in control of your life, and then take the pill and peacefully slip away? Photo0842

Donna Anderson as Mary. Screenshot by me.

Donna Anderson breaks my heart every time I watch this. Donna plays Peter's wife, Mary. This woman is terrified of the truth about the end of the world but she won't accept it or even talk about it. She too must decide how to meet her end.

I think many people would react like Mary, still holding out for hope even when faced with the opposite reality. Donna portrays Mary's hysteria and terror very well indeed.

John Tate is Admiral Bridie. John only appears in a few scenes but he is excellent when he does show up. I really like how he subtly conveys his love for his much younger secretary, Lt. Hosgood (Lola Brooks). Those feelings are there in the way he looks at her. The way Hosgood looks back at the Admiral also gives me the impression that they both felt the same way. Watch them carefully in their scenes together. Photo0846

Bridie and Hosgood share a drink. Screenshot by me.

I especially love their final scene together where they share a drink. That scene moves me each time I watch it. The scene is beautifully played by both actors. I also love the weight of what is inferred between them but how it is never said, it makes for a very powerful and touching moment.

If you are among the few people on the planet who actually believe we should have Nuclear weapons, then I would seriously hope that this film (particularly the final ten minutes, and the famous final shot)would make you change your opinion. I would also recommend you watch the film Fail-Safe and the TV miniseries Threads and The Day After. Just having one of these terrible weapons in the world is one too many. These films and series show what will happen to us if we ever use them. It annoys me so much that some members of our species are intent on creating ways of bringing about our destruction. We should learn to love each other, because at the end of the day we are all the same, we are all human and will all die one day. Why can't our time on earth be filled with happiness instead of war and hate?

As bleak as this film is, it also does have some happy moments and it also focuses on the many good points about humanity. We see characters give and receive love. We see compassion, friendship and kindness. It makes you think that you should really value your life because you could lose it at any time. I also like that the film ends on a plea that could be seen as being directed straight at us in the audience. That plea is "There is still time... Brother". Nuclear destruction is not Science Fiction, it is a terrifying real life possibility, but we do have it within our power to stop it from becoming an horrific reality. Photo0844

The plea aimed directly at us. Don't let our world end like this. Screenshot by me.

I'm sure that audiences back in 1959 cannot have found the final shot of the plea to make for comfortable viewing. After all this final shot would have reminded them that the horror they've just seen wasn't fiction. At the height of the cold war this film cannot have been an easy one to watch. Given the state of our world right now, I'm afraid that this film sadly remains very relevant and chilling for us to watch today. Will we ever come to our senses and get rid of these weapons and our hate? I hope we will get rid of them.

My favourite scenes are the following. Julian and Peter's conversation on the submarine. Dwight trying to explain to Moira at the train station how he feels about his dead family. The young sailor leaving the submarine and going ashore in San Francisco, he chooses to die there (his home city)but he will do so alone. Julian trying to explain how the Nuclea

Must see movie

[rlipsitz · 9/10 · 13 August 2001]

One of the most potent movies I've ever seen. Chilling! Although appearance of movie is dated...it should be...filmed in 1956. The characters, situation, emotion are timeless. The date of the movie in no way weakens the strength of the story. Only slight weakness is the relationship between Peck and Gardner. Too much time spend on these two at times distracts from story. Still it does set up a moving ending in which devotion to duty, comrades, (in a situation where such devotion is meaningless) deepens our awareness of humanity. Not for the weak of heart. No happy endings here!! All the more powerful for its non hollywood approach, we need more of these movies. Instead of finishing the moving feeling good, we finish THINKING GOOD. Much more important goal of a movie if you ask me.

Here comes the apocalypse, so go about your business

[wavecat13 · 7/10 · 23 January 2019]

This has it is good points, but it has a dessicated feel and it could have been much better. Based on a novel I have heard of many times but never read, I am glad I finally got around to checking it out. This is an early entry in the post-apocalypse genre that treats the subject in a serious, dramatic fashion, with an emphasis on character. So there are no explosions, no mass deaths, no computer generated pyrotechnics. Instead we have a group of people somewhere in Australia (althou only a couple seem to be Aussies) confronted by impending doom in the form of a giant wave of radiation, the result of a nuclear war, heading steadily toward them. People go about their business as if everything is normal, and we never even find out what started the war or who the combatants were. Gregory Peck is the main character, the captain of a submarine, who gets into an affair with the Ava Gardner character. He also leads his ship on an eerie exploration of the California coast, the result of some signals that are being sent from a location there. Fred Astaire is a real surprise as a cool, cynical scientist - no song and dance numbers in this. I never realized what a fine actor he could be. A typical movie would be about overcoming what seems to be inevitable destruction, but this is more about accepting it while finding solace in romantic love.

Chillingly understated

[aromatic-2 · 10/10 · 30 November 1999]

Is "under-wrought" a word? If so, this movie defines it. A great cast never seems like its acting in an all-too-realistic portrayal of the fifth Kubler-Ross phase of humanity. Past denial and anger, there is finally grim acceptance, replete with just the perfect sprinkling of gallows humour. The ultimate philosophical question is raised by author Nevil Chute,"What is truly important in life, if in the end, we're all dead?"

Heavy Moral Quandaries from the Heart of the Nuclear Standoff

[drqshadow-reviews · 7/10 · 21 November 2014]

A coastal Australian population (and the US submarine coincidentally docked nearby) awaits the inevitable, weeks after the rest of the world was wiped out by a wave of nuclear-powered, mutually-assured destruction. There's an eerie sense of normalcy to the landscape, by far the film's greatest, most thought-provoking strength. The worker bees all go through their usual motions, as if a great big wall of radioactivity weren't looming off the coast, slowly creeping in to poison them all. It's enough to pull us out of the moment and consider how we might react in such a situation ourselves: when there's nothing to be done, isn't it better to ignore the inevitable, living out the rest of our days in a willfully-ignorant sense of unsteady bliss? Of course, there eventually comes a moment when such questions can't be dodged any longer, and the cast makes some bold, powerful decisions in the face of a long, grueling death by airborne toxin. Those uncomfortable choices, and the ethical quandaries that precede them, form a stiff backbone for the film. The slow, dry pacing of its superficial plot can be difficult to work through, though, and ultimately that's what keeps it from reaching its loftiest ambitions. As with many sci-fi commentaries of the era, you'll have to do a lot of reading between the lines to make the most of this one. It's smarter, but also far less accessible, than most of its modern counterparts.

Our Destiny Is In Our Own Hands

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 25 June 2007]

Released in 1959, the apocalypse of On the Beach allegedly took place in 1964. We missed it, but it sure doesn't mean it still can't happen. Maybe now more than ever. But probably not in the way it happens here.

That's one of the awful things about On the Beach, they don't know what happened. Scientists among the survivors in Australia speculate, but they don't really know. Interesting however that their speculations led to the future film scenarios in Failsafe and Doctor Strangelove. But as Ava Gardner said, she didn't do anything so why is she and all the rest still left south of the equator doomed.

Nuclear war has occurred and the result was total annihilation of life in the Northern Hemisphere. The nuclear powered submarine U.S.S. Sawfish was submerged and sailed south until land with people was found in Australia. Still people like Gregory Peck can't get it into their heads that everything they knew and loved is gone.

Still though he finds time for a romantic interlude with Ava Gardner as the Australians and those who made it to their shore size up the situation and it ain't good and no options for hope.

Nevil Shute's apocalyptic novel was filmed in Australia and it leaves a good ring of authenticity. Anthony Perkins gives an earnest portrayal of the young officer in the Royal Australian Navy though he does slip in and out of the Aussie accent.

Besides the message of On the Beach the main publicity about the film concerned Fred Astaire in his first straight dramatic part. He got rave reviews from astonished critics and deservedly so, playing a nuclear scientist who know amuses himself by indulging in a secret fantasy to become an auto racer.

This film was hated, still hated by right wing critics everywhere because of its total pessimism. The religious right particularly doesn't like this film because the apocalypse arrives and there's no divine intervention, even just to save God's Elect whomever they might be. It's just the end of life and the promise that future visitors to the planet might piece together the story of what happened as does the crew of the Starship Enterprise finding a devastated world or two on their mission to seek out life. Yes, it could happen to us.

I think that what Stanley Kramer was trying to tell us is that whatever created this universe left it in the hands of those who inhabit it to do what they could with it or any corner thereof. It's our responsibility to find a way to live together and respect each other and our differences or annihilate ourselves. It's not easy, but it's that simple.

Maybe we'll learn that lesson and On the Beach is a good teacher.

Great movie, great message, pity about the music

[p-newton-568-666466 · 7/10 · 29 October 2009]

Just loved this movie. Quite faithful to the book and captures Shute's sense of stoic resignation (oh well, chin up old chap)and of course the almost manic obsession for one last hurrah....cue port drinking, fishing, Australian Grand Prix.... Would have liked to have seen more of the dissolving of order that Shute depicted towards the end and of course Kramer copped out a bit with the last scene of Moira on the headland as the sub sailed off (perhaps Ava taking suicide pills would not have been a good look in those days).

My only real disappointment was the score. How many variations on waltzing matilda can you fit into two hours...the ghostly rendition of the final verse as Dwight and Moira kissed in the fishing lodge was bold and the beautiful type stuff. As an Aussie I found it cringe-worthy (even allowing for the era) and Kramer I think showed a bit of naivety in his understanding of the country by pushing the tune ad-infinitum.

Also thought him heavy handed with the music in his treatment of the San Francisco, San Diego scenes and the final banner scene. Silence would have been far more effective.

Still, a tremendously powerful, though-provoking and non-sensational treatment of a topic which occupied the minds of many at the time. Really did illustrate the world ending with a whimper and not a bang.

Dull, lifeless and boring, VERY boring.

[dukeb0y · 2/10 · 21 March 2008]

Again, the 'End of the World ' as we know it, has arrived. Where to start? Where to start? Nowhere, because that's where this movie is going.

So one man in a protective suit goes ashore. Now I can understand, due to a radiation cloud, everybody is dead. But NO bodies? Not even from pets?It would stink to high heaven. And then the machinery (from a power-plant?) is running at full blast. SOMETHING would overload by then, and fires would break out. So the man throws 2, and only 2 switches and turns off the power to the whole city.

This is a S L O W soap opera.

Want to see a better movie? 'Panic in Year Zero!' was a much better picture.

And I have to mention, at that time, 1959, there WOULD be bomb shelters, and some survivors.

I'll give it 2 stars for Fred Astaire's fine acting. (And the vintage race car event. As a matter of fact, that was the best part!)