Skip to main content

Dark, dark, dark amid the blaze of noon.


Seven Days to Noon
(1950)

The dangers inherent in the atomic age have not diminished over time (ask anyone attempting to clean up Fukushima). We’ve just become more passive about their imminence, particularly when our demise is far less likely to be the detonation of warheads released by opposing power blocs than unquenchable streams radioactive waste leaching into our oceans. Best not to think about it then, eh? Back when the Seven Days to Noon was made, a mere half-decade had passed since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But it was more than enough time to have formulated the narrative’s debate over whether all this destructive capability is really such a good idea.


Barry Jones' disillusioned scientist, Professor Willingdon, goes AWOL from his Wallingford research base with an atomic bomb in his brief case (a UR-12, we are told, and clearly quite a dinky new model). He has sent a letter to the Prime Minister, informing him the device will be triggered in London a week hence unless the government publicly announces the abandonment of the manufacture of all such weapons.


The best Bernard Quatermass, André Morell, leads the manhunt as one of Scotland Yard’s finest. But it's Jones' story that is most involving; the Boultons keep him off screen for the first fifteen minutes, leading us to speculate what sort of person could plan something so monsrous. And then we meet him and he’s a complete surprise; distracted and tortured, but perfectly affable. Jones is outstanding in the role; he bears a passing resemblance to a follically challenged Kenneth Connor, but the deep disturbance in his mind is etched on his face and in his eyes.


Terrorist plots to lay waste major cities are ten-a-penny today but, despite the familiarity, this is a highly distinctive Boulting Brothers picture (best known for their comedies, this was their directorial follow up to Brighton Rock). In part this is down to the post-war milieu, with ration books still in use (as effective as an ID card in preventing a wanted figure from keeping a low profile) and ever present bombed-out surroundings. But it's also because of the sympathy reserved for Jones; his methods may be unthinkable, but his stricken conscience is entirely relatable (Thomas Harris attempted something of this ilk with Black Sunday, but his lead floundered as a nutter with a just a dash of cod-psychology underpinning him).


Indeed, you can’t imagine something like this being produced in the US at that time. Although, the picture did win the Oscar for Best Story; it went to Paul Dehn, the scribe responsible for the Planet of the Apes sequels, and regular Hammer composer James Bernard. It was also BAFTA nominated for Best Picture, losing to Dixon of Dock Green precursor The Blue Lamp. It’s perhaps surprising that the picture goes as far as it does, since there was government assistance in its production (the extensive London filming, the military presence). Maybe the foreknowledge of a non-controversial ending convinced the powers-that-be it was a worthwhile project (“Don’t you worry, the atom bomb is perfectly safe in Blighty”). After all, it promoted the idea of government openness to telling it like it is to the proles and suggested that a major evacuation could run like clockwork. There’s really nothing to worry about, you see.


They should have realised that just letting the mind loose on such matters is fuel to the debate; it doesn’t really matter if the bomb goes off or not. Fear is triggered, and not irrational fear. The movie concerns itself with the essentially immorality of the creation, rather than dwelling on its physical effects. No one describes the horrors of what happened in Japan, but it’s not as if the public had no idea, even then. And even Kubrick, over a decade later, didn’t spend his time telling us just how we were all going to die; the joke was that it would happen for absurd reasons. I have to admit my preference would have been to depict something as uncomforting as The Day the Earth Caught Fire a decade later, but in its own subdued way Seven Days to Noon retains its own sense of apocalyptic dread. The power comes from the unreality of the threat to such a familiar environment.


It may now seem that the Willingdon’s burden manifests as a slightly deranged religious fervour. Yet the idea of being confronted by overwhelming contradictions between one’s core beliefs and one’s work doesn’t need to be such an enormous leap. Not all scientists then were required to be Dawkins-esque atheistic zealots. His crisis is expressed in Christian terms; he scrawls repeated phrases from the Bible and Milton on pages found in his study, and finishes up kneeling in a church. His devotion to science derived from a desire to serve God and his fellow men, but he realised he was pursuing a goal of destruction. The Boultings make no attempt to suggest that Willingdon’s scruples are wrong, or that the church would take a different stance to him (well, leaving aside the nuking of half a city, obviously).

Fundamentally, his yardstick is moral rather than religious; ethically he discovers he has backed into a blind alley. Under such circumstances it is not such a great surprise that he should turn to the church as compass (since science has offered no such sustenance). As he tells a pub carouser who wishes Britain would load all its bombs into planes and blast the cities of its enemies to hell, he’s missing the point; such an action would mean the total destruction of mankind. The reality of Armageddon looms large in his mind, and we cannot blame him. The Boultings are clearly telegraphing this point in the scene where the professor is standing in the Natural History Museum, a dinosaur skeleton displayed in the foreground; soon we will all be just as extinct.


It’s only Willingdon’s drastic action that identifies him as out of his mind. Not that such extreme methods haven’t been adopted by those in positions of power to justify terrible actions; his behaviour is predicated on a kind of warped utilitarian thinking. We also see him adopt strategies that will become common parlance; like modern terrorists, Willingdon refuses to negotiate. And, like modern leaders confronted by terrorists, the PM refuses to capitulate. Ronald Adam’s premier doesn’t make much impression, although he delivers a speech in which he explains that Britain’s nuclear policy is in place because making weakness provides irresistible temptation to the tyrant, the dictator. Post-WWII it’s an cunningly manipulative argument, and accordingly the notional imminent threat remains an ever-popular propaganda tool of the leader demanding everything from increased defence spending to infringement of civil liberties.


There’s a tinge of a The Man in the White Suit vibe to the broader conversation; it’s the boffins and politicians who make great claims for progress, but what of the (literal) fall out for the common man? Alec Guinness’ ever-clean suit raised some pertinent concerns about the reflex on the manufacturing industry (i.e. a capitalist society could not countenance such a development). Here, Goldie (Olive Sloane) passes judgement on Willingdon with a rebuke that could have come straight from the Ealing comedy; “You and your sort, inventing things” (of course, all she wants is a good man; when Willingdon stays the night at her flat, she suggestively tells him of the couch, “It’s quite comfortable – if that’s what you want”).

The professor is dismissive of such a Luddite mentality, but in his (relative) rural paradise he doesn’t encounter the daily reminders of what “progress” brings (the post-blitz London). With both Willingdon and Guinness’ Sidney Stratton there is a head-in-the-clouds aspect to scientific progress-for-the-sake-of-progress that requires a rude awakening.  It’s hard to gauge how progressive the Boultings thought process is here. It may just be a case of picking their issues. The following year they produced High Treason, in which a plot to attack Britain by some damn Commies needed foiling. J Edgar was surely proud in that instance.


If the Willingdon invites sympathy up to a point, he resists our affection. The Boultings reserve this for their salty Londoners. It’s this aspect that betrays the identity of the duo that would go on to make Private’s Progress, I’m All Right Jack, Brothers in Law and Heavens Above! Joan Hickson’s cat-laden, chain-smoking landlady, the first port of call for Willingdon, has her suspicion piqued not by his true identity but a newspaper report warning, “Landlady Killer at Large”. Could this man, pacing his room at all hours, be intending to murder her? The Boultings jet black sense of humour also serves as a reminder that aberrant behaviour is no modern phenomenon (the rose-tinted spectacles brigade would tell us so, but this was the period when Christie was still up to his grizzly crimes). 


A lad in a pub is revealed to be playing a pinball machine called “Atomic Racer”.
A doom mongering placard wearer who will not leave his signage behind is repeatedly turned away from evacuation points; eventually we see his abandoned board (“The wages of sin is death”). When Willingdon’s colleague Stephen (Hugh Cross) races to a payphone, to warn the police of the sighting of the professor, the barged occupant exclaims, “What’s, the world coming to an end or something?” 

The soldiers we encounter are generally a derelict bunch, missing no opportunity for laziness, thievery (stealing a pair of knickers from a house being searched) or boozing. Indeed, the amount of work required of them causes one pair to opine that it would have been better to join the navy. And it’s one particularly trigger-happy squaddie (a metaphor for the military-industrial complex as a whole?), played by Victor Maddern, who nervously brings the proceedings to a decisive close.


Crucially, it’s the heart-on-her-sleeve comedy involving Olive, the fading could-have-been starlet, which ring out the picture. Her refrain of “What about my car to Aldershot?” rings throughout the third act as she attempts to flee the doomed capital, and she gets the final moments (with her King Charles spaniel Trixie). It’s a slightly clumsy lurch back into levity, but it somehow seems consistent with the indomitable British spirit the Boultings are gently taking the rise out of.

Some of the plot developments feel like a bit of a stretch. It’s immensely fortunate that, no sooner have Stephen and Willingdon’s rather wet daughter Ann (Sheila Manahan) arrived in the Capital, they see her dad entering a Tube station. And I can't see a government announcing a threat like this to the Nation, even back in the purportedly more open 1950s. (I thought the newspaper shown at one point gave the year as 1952, but I may have been mistaken; it’s certainly not a sweltering August whatever year it is, since Willingdon is most express in buying a replacement overcoat.)  


But this development does mean that we're treated to the eeriest scenes of a deserted London this side of The Avengers/Doctor Who/28 Days Later. And certainly the most evocatively filmed ones. The long shot where Willingdon runs down a deserted street away from an encroaching searchlight could be lifted from an HG Wells adaptation. There's a documentary feel to the evacuation scenes (it even answers questions such as “What will happen to all the animals?), which may be consciously echoing those wartime public information films where everyone maintains a cheery grit (on the other hand, the army shoots looters so neither are they pulling their punches). It’s possibly a fair criticism that the movie has nowhere much to go once it sets up its store in the Capital; indeed, it relies almost wholly on Willingdon’s lack of pre-planning (fair enough, he’s not in the best of mental health) to sustain tension. But this lends the proceedings an air of spontaneity; the professor’s encounters develop naturally for the most part (the odd chase aside). That slight sense of verité is maintained by some of the devices employed; the use of titles to introduce us to each new dawn in the countdown not only ups the ante but also invites association with the form of a documentary retelling actual events.


I wonder if it’s coincidental that two decades later Dehn would go to the place that Seven Days dared not with Beneath the Planet of the Apes. It may have been at Chuck Heston’s instigation, but this time he set off that damn dirty nuke. Seven Days didn’t need to go that far, though. It still impresses just for bring up the conversation. And, while I suspect that the profile of the movie would be significantly higher if it had scorched London back then, there’s still a tension at the climax; you’re not completely sure which way they’re going to play it. It’s a testament to what a versatile pair the Boulting Brothers were.

****

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Prepare the Heathen’s Stand! By order of purification!

Apostle (2018)
(SPOILERS) Another week, another undercooked Netflix flick from an undeniably talented director. What’s up with their quality control? Do they have any? Are they so set on attracting an embarrassment of creatives, they give them carte blanche, to hell with whether the results are any good or not? Apostle's an ungainly folk-horror mashup of The Wicker Man (most obviously, but without the remotest trace of that screenplay's finesse) and any cult-centric Brit horror movie you’d care to think of (including Ben Wheatley's, himself an exponent of similar influences-on-sleeve filmmaking with Kill List), taking in tropes from Hammer, torture porn, and pagan lore but revealing nothing much that's different or original beyond them.

You can’t just outsource your entire life.

Tully (2018)
(SPOILERS) A major twist is revealed in the last fifteen minutes of Tully, one I'll happily admit not to have seen coming, but it says something about the movie that it failed to affect my misgivings over the picture up to that point either way. About the worst thing you can say about a twist is that it leaves you shrugging.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

No one understands the lonely perfection of my dreams.

Ridley Scott Ridders Ranked
During the '80s, I anticipated few filmmakers' movies more than Ridley Scott's; those of his fellow xenomorph wrangler James Cameron, perhaps. In both cases, that eagerness for something equalling their early efforts receded as they studiously managed to avoid the heights they had once reached. Cameron's output dropped off a cliff after he won an Oscar. Contrastingly, Scott's surged like never before when his film took home gold. Which at least meant he occasionally delivered something interesting, but sadly, it was mostly quantity over quality. Here are the movies Scott has directed in his career thus far - and with his rate of  productivity, another 25 by the time he's 100 may well be feasible – ranked from worst to best.

Well, you did take advantage of a drunken sailor.

Tomb Raider (2018)
(SPOILERS) There's evidently an appetite out there for a decent Tomb Raider movie, given that the lousy 2001 incarnation was successful enough to spawn a (lousy) sequel, and that this lousier reboot, scarcely conceivably, may have attracted enough bums on seats to do likewise. If we're going to distinguish between order of demerits, we could characterise the Angelina Jolie movies as both pretty bad; Tomb Raider, in contrast, is unforgivably tedious.

If you want to have a staring contest with me, you will lose.

Phantom Thread (2017)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps surprisingly not the lowest grossing of last year's Best Picture Oscar nominees (that was Call Me by Your Name) but certainly the one with the least buzz as a genuine contender, subjected as Phantom Thread was to a range of views from masterpiece (the critics) to drudge (a fair selection of general viewers). The mixed reaction wasn’t so very far from Paul Thomas Anderson's earlier The Master, and one suspects the nomination was more to do with the golden glow of Daniel Day-Lewis in his first role in half a decade (and last ever, if he's to be believed) than mass Academy rapture with the picture. Which is ironic, as the relatively unknown Vicky Krieps steals the film from under him.

This is it. This is the moment of my death.

Fearless (1993)
Hollywood tends to make a hash of any exploration of existential or spiritual themes. The urge towards the simplistic, the treacly or the mawkishly uplifting, without appropriate filtering or insight, usually overpowers even the best intentions. Rarely, a movie comes along that makes good on its potential and then, more than likely, it gets completely ignored. Such a fate befell Fearless, Peter Weir’s plane crash survivor-angst film, despite roundly positive critical notices. For some reason audiences were willing to see a rubgy team turn cannibal in Alive, but this was a turn-off? Yet invariably anyone who has seen Fearless speaks of it in glowing terms, and rightly so.

Weir’s pictures are often thematically rich, more anchored by narrative than those of, say, Terrence Malick but similarly preoccupied with big ideas and their expression. He has a rare grasp of poetry, symbolism and the mythic. Weir also displays an acute grasp of the subjective mind-set, and possesses …

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.