Overrated

Boring

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Watching it is like watching the spectacle of a class clown at their best: you laugh at their jokes, instigate their defiance, and "ooooh" when they get in trouble.

This is for sure one of the most realistic movies i have ever seen ! Great stuff from the 70s , VERY GOOD acting , and simply its almost as if watching a documentary rather then a Hollywood movie.

According to Wikipedia as I compose this review, the Three Mile Island accident happened 12 days after the release of this picture. I remember seeing it the Friday night it opened, and it blew me away. Over time, I think Apocalypse Now has become the better picture of 1979, but at that time, I thought it was the best film of 1979.The problem with this movie was that it became more of a political movie after TMI, rather than the thriller with which it was originally intended. It's of course impossible to view this movie without factoring in what occurred at TMI. You can't "un-ring the bell," as they say. I was lucky to watch it without the taint of TMI, but of course, not too many people can say that. Jack Lemmon has the performance of the movie. I'm a fan of Jane Fonda, but I didn't think she was plausible in the role of a TV reporter.

Because of this film, the crisis in Pennsylvania really came home. We have now had major incidents in Chernobyl and in Japan. Now we have a President elect that is about to play around with nuclear weapons and is in bed with the Russians. I know that is really political, but we have had elements of restraint and caution and have managed to survive for decades. I know nuclear weapons aren't power plants, but the result of mishandling either would silently kill tens of thousands of people. In this film we are presented with a very possible scenario. Because of negligence or general lack of concern, a potential meltdown is a possibility. This is about human error and we have no shortage of humans who are perfectly happy to allow others to face the consequences of their actions, especially when money is involved. Jack Lemmon is excellent. There is amazing tension all the way through. God help us if such a scenario ever plays out.

No need to recap the plot, nor echo consensus points on the excellence of the production. Instead, I want to single out three topical threads that drive much of the drama and remain relevant in our own day.One thread is the shaping of public consciousness by mainstream media. The conflict here is between a breaking crisis at a nuclear power plant and how that gets reported, if at all. Understandably, Godell (Lemmon) and allies feel that ordinary cautions about law-suits and bureaucratic procedures must be overridden in order to prevent the plant from starting up again and risking apocalypse. On other hand, Well's (Fonda) TV station must concern itself with risking major liability if Godell turns out to be a crank, which the power company is insisting upon. So where does the station's responsibility lie. In the movie there's little time to sort out these concerns, so the station's honchos must make snap decisions.Another thread is the conflict between personal conscience and practical concerns. Godell is a central figure here, along with reporter Wells. Godell loves the plant and the services it provides. On other hand, he must wrestle with growing realization that the plant's safety features are fatally flawed. Thus he moves through stages of personal involvement until finally engaging whole-heartedly in exposing the dangers to a TV audience. Similarly, Wells moves through stages from cushy denial to putting her job and life on the line in support of Godell going on TV. But can Godell be so certain of his conclusion. There's no time to verify since the power company insists on starting up again.And lastly is the question of power itself, both literally and figuratively. Power, considered literally amounts to electricity to run our many modern conveniences (the movie's microwave oven), generated here by the nuclear power plant. Shutting it down would also mean shutting down an entire community including the TV station. Figuratively, the leverage amounts to who ultimately wields power within the society itself. We see elements of this crucial question revealed by the basic conflict over whether the plant is shut down or not. To me, the contest here is between an element of the 70's counter-culture, the bearded Richard (Douglas), along with in-betweeners like Wells and Spindler (Brimley), and the suits concerned foremost with company investments, especially the planned new plant up the coast. Note how the imperious board-chairman (Herd) peers down from above into the control room where the action is. Note too how he commands an armed security attack force, a lethal arm of corporate power where the power really is. Thus, I can't help but see elements of 60's counter-culture helping to shape this 1978 production. However, these echoes shouldn't be allowed to consign the perennial threads to a bygone time. Fashions may have changed, along with a new digital age that's loosened MSM's grip on public information. Still, these underlying threads, so powerfully dramatized in the film, remain among the underlying conflicts of our own age. For example, apocalyptic climate change is controversial, emerging as both an individual and collective issue. All in all, the movie amounts to a harrowing interweaving of such basic themes, thanks to a stellar cast, screenplay, and production crew. So don't miss it.