ArthouseSchmarthouse’s review published on Letterboxd:
9
Blu Ray (BFI)
Astonishing, harrowing, impassioned, uncompromising cinema. In just 46 minutes, Peter Watkins (Punishment Park) eviserates the case in favour of nuclear warfare by zeroing in on the most basic (and obvious) human consequence: the appalling loss of civilian life that would occur in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear strike, followed by the inevitable total societal breakdown afterwards. Watkins presents his case in the form of a hypothetical docudrama, merging inverted Public Service Announcement-style narration with talking head interviews with experts and staged "on the ground" documentary footage. Chillingly, all of the scenarios presented during the course of the film- the forced, unprepared evacuations of civilians, the post-attack triaging of casualties into "save" and "do not save", the terrifying effects of firestorms caused by the bombing, the killing of civilians by police in the name of keeping order, the mental impact on those who survive, especially children- are based on what really happened in Hiroshima, Dresden and other places which were subject to bombing (nuclear or otherwise) during the Second World War.
The anger throughout is palpable. Using quotations from actual real-world sources, Watkins reserves particular contempt for religious figures and nuclear scientists for encouraging nuclear war whilst simultaneously downplaying its potential effects. He also takes aim at the media and politicians for failing (perhaps refusing) to properly educate their citizens as to the realities of an attack or how to properly protect themselves from it. This is teased out via mock-interviews with almost comically misinformed "regular people", most of whom haven't the faintest clue of the realities of the situation, exposed presumably to comforting propoganda and misinformation.
Another key theme is the lack of humanity and common decency shown towards other people. For example, when the interviewees are asked whether in the event of Britain being attacked by nuclear weapons they would expect their government to respond in kind, the answer is always given in the affirmative, despite the fact that doing so would inevitably lead to countless more people in another country being condemned to death. I suspect that if you asked the average person on the street the same question today their answers would be depressingly similar. Nonetheless, there is something so relentless and admirable in the way that Watkins aims to grab the complacent people of the West and shake them into understanding how their comfortable, well-fed lives could be turned upside-down in a second, highlighting the knife-edge that our prosperity (that we absolutely take for granted) truly balances on.
A lot of Watkins' work was ahead of its time and so it proved here too. Rather underlining his argument that the media doesn't wish to tell the public hard truths or engage with them in any sort of nuanced debate, the BBC (who produced this film) refused to screen it on television until July 1985, because at the time of its production they felt it was "too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting". Thankfully the Oscar voters were somewhat braver (a rare thing to say), awarding The War Game the 1967 Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.
In any case, The War Game is a searingly powerful, angry and brave film which presents as strong an anti-war message as I have ever seen on screen. A must watch.
