Which is the superior nuclearkino?

which is the superior nuclearkino?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=knSSUEdLcvg
endingthefed.com/breaking-president-putin-warns-america-if-its-hillary-clinton-its-war.html
nytimes.com/2016/05/13/world/europe/russia-nato-us-romania-missile-defense.html?_r=1
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Threads. Though the silo stuff was pretty great.

>hears the sirens

what would you do Sup Forums?

...

Threads by a mile. Those birthing scenes...

based Anne Sellors
underrated performance

The Day After was underwhelming.

I haven't seen Threads. I watched The Day After and thought it was okay, but only okay. Should I watch Threads?

The road starring guy pearce and my close friend bobby duvalle.

Yes

Without a doubt Threads.

The Day After was very enjoyable too, though. I particularly liked the launch sequences, etc, taken from "First Strike"

I recomend you watch "Countdown to Looking Glass", it's styled after a news show which is reporting on events as the world moves to a war footing and even has Newt Gingrich! youtube.com/watch?v=knSSUEdLcvg

>When the television service undertook the making of a film on this subject, it recognised the risk that the film might turn out to be unsuitable for general showing. In the event, the effect of the film has been judged by the BBC to be too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting, it will, however, be shown to invited audiences, including those people who helped to make it.”
>too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting

It's fairly dark

Testament is actually the superior nukekino for American movies
Day After does have that fantastic launch/strike sequence though

Just saw this a couple of nights ago. Solid all around.

>tfw you realize the danger of Threads and The Day After never left

I honestly believe that I will see/die in a nuclear war during my lifetime. To me it's an inevitability at this point.

The danger remains, but the scale of danger has decreased significantly. At the height of the Cold War the U.S. and the Soviet Union had tens of thousands of warheads each. Now there are less than 10k worldwide.

nuclear kino

Of course, but that's still more than enough to kill 90% of civilization, especially me since Britain's small enough to get completely glassed.

It's why I don't want Trump to win. I agree with a lot of what he says but he's too volatile to be trusted with the big red button, Hillary's a cunt but at least she's not likely to provoke Russia because they made fun of her.

A nuclear war is next to certain but not Threads or The Day After style.

You won't see a Western democracy hit by a nuclear weapon in the next hundred years. Places like India/Pakistan or possibly North Korea (who'd nuke SK, not the US.) are more risky.

Threads left me in a depression for like 2 weeks

Sup Forums would have you think the HAPPENING could HAPPEN any time now.

This is the BBC we are talking about here.

"Too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting" could mean anything from someone getting a paper-cut to a white woman getting together with a white man at the end.

This.

If we see an actual nuclear altercation in our lifetime, it will be small-scale, brief and one-sided.

My money is on Iran or some other country getting ballsy and pulling something stupid, like a coordinated attack on Israel.
Israel's trigger-finger will get itchy and they'll launch 3 to 5 nukes, and that will be the end of whoever attacked the,

>It's why I don't want Trump to win. I agree with a lot of what he says but he's too volatile to be trusted with the big red button, Hillary's a cunt but at least she's not likely to provoke Russia because they made fun of her.

You have it completely fucking backwards.
Trump is trying to broker peace with Russia while Hill-Shill is gunning for war.

Well, the BBC later made threads which was far worse.

It was most likely governmental pressure because 'The war game' cast doubt on Britain's nuclear deterrence.

Threads.

It's decent movie, it was remade in 2000 as live TV drama with better than average TV-cast.

>broker peace with Russia

Really? And where is this evidence that Hillary will start WW3?

>BREAKING: President Putin Warns America: “If It’s Hillary Clinton, It’s War”

endingthefed.com/breaking-president-putin-warns-america-if-its-hillary-clinton-its-war.html

Use a real source next time

>endingthefed

For fucks sake user. You'd think there would be on viable source reporting this news if it wasn't bullshit.

>Russia Calls New U.S. Missile Defense System a ‘Direct Threat’

nytimes.com/2016/05/13/world/europe/russia-nato-us-romania-missile-defense.html?_r=1

Unless there's clear evidence that Trump would remove those (which there isn't) I don't see how that makes Hillary "gunning for war"

Trinity & Beyond, William Shatner narrating what more do you want?

When the wind blows

did you read the article? or do you just base all your arguments on headlines

The Sacrifice