Target Earth

I've long treasured post-catastrophe films. From such low budget entries such as Obler's bleak Five (1951), Harry Belafonte's The World, The Flesh And The Devil (1959), on to Panic In Year Zero!, The Last Man On Earth (both 1964, now usefully coupled in a MGM 'midnite movies' collection; the latter's remake as The Omega Man (1971) the recent 28 Days Later, and so on, as a group they frequently offer a peculiar, ludicrous charm of their own. Target Earth is ultimately one of the minor entries of the genre, but one that starts off so well that one wants to report that it continues at the same high level of intrigue. Unfortunately it's a rule of thumb of this sort of film that, the more survivors are discovered to populate a stricken world, the greater the drop off in suspense that results. Rose's film is no exception, as the audience's response to the arrival of a succession of new humans ranges from mild interest at the arrival of Frank as the potential love interest for Nora, through to bewilderment at the silly tipsy couple then contempt for the panicky Otis, (who we know deserves to die for being so stupid), until just plain annoyance remains at the extended homicidal ambitions of Davis the killer (Robert Roark). To put it bluntly, his character is a final distraction from what any sensible viewer wants to see - that'll be the huge invader robots rampaging through the streets, wielding unimaginable alien powers. Rather like those annoying romantic-singing subplots, the diversions from the real gold in most Marx brothers' films, Davis gets in the way of the real reason why are paying our money and, notwithstanding the artificial drama his threats engender, the audience soon wishes him gone.

Sadly, the budget restrictions of Target Earth mean that Davis has almost as much screen time as the mammoth automatons, which in turn are eventually restricted to the appearance of just a clunky one (for the real thing one has to turn to such films as Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow). Davis is annoying too in that most films set in a deserted, ravaged earth represent a chance to start again, hopefully with a new morality and order of things. Continually, however there are flies like him in the ointment: obstinate, obvious elements that stand in the way of social progress. In some films, like The Last Man On Earth and its remake, it's a population of nocturnal mutants. In The World, The Flesh, And The Devil, the old sin of jealousy. In Five and the present film, it's just an individual who rocks the boat, although in Target Earth the appearance of such an element is intrusive and less of a piece.

Another distraction is the group of scientists who, working around the clock, try and find a means to destroy the invaders by technical means. The robots' main weapon is based around their cathode ray beams - made before the mechanics of television were wider known, this - and this is the thing the specialists set out to overcome. Practically a story separate in itself, and almost completely detached from the human-interest taking place elsewhere in the fractured city, sadly it's just one more strand keeping the viewer's eyes off the expected giant robots for a few extra scenes. As in most 1950s' invasion movies, these white-coat, top brass discussions are the most static and un-involving. (In fact it took films like Colossus - The Forbin Project or The Andromeda Strain of a generation later, to inject some real drama into on-screen scientific analysis.) And when the enemy does strike, crashing in and pursuing members of the small group up to the roof, the boxy, not-at-all gigantic robot is a disappointment to the modern viewer, if it ever did prove convincing. However it's a scene the audience has been praying for by this point, and the hulk's attack remains strangely memorable. There are other pleasures along the way of course, notably some of the dialogue, such as when Frank explains his theory why the invaders have come from Venus (because it allegedly has similar atmospheric conditions to Earth).

Nora is impressed: "Say, where did you learn all this?" Frank: "In college. My best friend lent me his science fiction books." It's a casually gormless exchange, the like of which has been parodied recently in the affectionate homage Lost Skeleton Of Cadavra.

The various elements on offer here are part of the fun, and none of this is to say that Target Earth is anything less than entertaining even if it lacks a good deal of the action it suggests. Incidentally the DVD release is considerably enhanced by the extras, notably a commentary by, and a tribute to, the producer Herbert Cohen, taken off a laser disc release a few years back, whose first film as an independent this was. Arguably he has claim to be the auteur in this instance, rather than director Rose - who only ever made a couple of other budget war movies, being also responsible for such additional Z-grade classics as I Was A Teenage Werewolf and I Was A Teenage Frankenstein (both 1957, and featuring Target Earth's co-star Whit Bissell), as well as the cult British title Horrors Of The Black Museum (1959). The heartfelt, and somewhat moving, tribute to Cohen is by Didier Chatelain, a long time Cohen friend and associate, uses copious stills and lasts 20 minutes. In all, it is a generous package marking the work of the man who once helped bring the world Bela Lugosi Meets A Brooklyn Gorilla (1952). Of course, War Of The Worlds this isn't, but for some ripe bargain basement nostalgia, or for a glimpse of what science fiction terrors gripped late 1950s' screen viewers, I still recommend it.

When I first viewed this movie,I was 11 years of age. Needless to say I couldn't sleep for a couple of nights. The movie is vintage post-World War II paranoia that has reached cult classic status (see The Astounding B-Monster web site).

All right!! So it isn't hi-tech or academy award winning material, however, the premise is a good story.

So what! The robot looks like a Maytag washer-dryer combo gone mad. Give us a break!! Stop comparing yesterday's movies by today's computer F/X standards. Think (if you can) what it was like in the fifties with no internet, no laptops and no cell phones! And you couldn't trust those Russians! The fifties reached their peak with UFO's sightings and stories and that's what this movie is all about.

Enough said!. Turn the lights down low, make some popcorn and enjoy this movie with a friend, because that robot might just be looking over your shoulder.

8 out of 10.

TARGET EARTH sounds like an epic sci-fi movie on paper: see! Earth attacked by an army of killer robots with death rays! Sadly, as is usually the case with these things, the real story is far more prosaic, and a dearth of money means that this is a typically cheap and plodding sci-fi pic with more in common with ROBOT MONSTER than WAR OF THE WORLDS.

Cult producer Herman Cohen delivers us a tale of a quartet of survivors trapped in a deserted city and at the mercy of a robot seemingly made out of cardboard boxes. A few scenes of military speak are interspersed with the main narrative, no doubt to pad out the running time a little. Whit Bissell plays in support.

Nothing much happens here. There are a few cheesy death scenes and attempts at suspense that will disappoint all but the smallest child. Needless to say there are few effects. I like 1950s B-movies but this really doesn't have much going for it, although Robert Roark is fun as the human villain of the piece, Richard Denning is the likable everyman hero, and Kathleen Crowley certainly fills out a form-fitting sweater. What more could you want?

Acting: THE GOOD. Richard Reeves and Virginia Grey. Although they both started the movie completely intoxicated, they suddenly become sober at the sight of a dead body. But I found them to be the only two characters with any hint of personality in this movie. THE BAD: Everybody else. Kathleen Crowly runs through the vacant city with a smile on her face, isn't she supposed to be frightened? Richard Denning is just the opposite. His face is so straight throughout the whole movie, I was beginning to believe HE was a robot. And finally, Robert Roark...ugh!! What is that?? A Humphry Bogart impersonation?

SPECIAL EFFECTS: THE GOOD: You'll only have to look at the robots a few times,the rest is left to our imaginations. THE BAD: Is that robot bow-legged? Well, I have seen worse in other B-movies.

CLASSIC LINES: FRANK: "Take it easy, I'm not going to hurt you!" Just before slapping Nora in the face. And, FRANK: "It's(Venus)covered by a heavy layer of clouds,that means plenty of water, oxygen, and hydrogen in it's atmosphere." VICKI: "Say, where did you learn all this?" FRANK: "College." Overall, this is your average 50's sci-fi with more focus on character studies than on the cheap looking robot. Which saves it from the Ed Wood level of movie making.

This movie starts out in promising fashion. The first scene is nearly silent, with minimal use of a score, as the camera slowly pans across a woman lying in bed, a mirror, an open bottle of sleeping pills. The woman awakenings, her suicide unsuccessful. It could almost be the opening of a well-directed, stark 1950s melodrama.

Unfortunately, the best things about this movie are the first 5 minutes and the last 5 minutes (plus the fantastic poster art).

In between is a mishmash of C-grade romantic melodrama, crime melodrama, and military stock footage, blended with a few unimaginative scenes of a couple of government scientists working in a little low-budget brick room in a basement to find a way to defeat the enemy.

And of course the requisite sexism of the era. Our two main protagonists meet each other and bond over a man-on-woman slap, because, naturally, he perceives her as being hysterical. Fortunately, she apologizes, and they move on.

Regarding the latter, I don't blame this movie for being "a product of its time," but I nonetheless cannot understand why it has managed to stay in the consciousness of fans of 1950s American science fiction and Cold War pop culture. It is somewhat interesting as a post-apocalyptic Cold War melodrama, of which the movie Five is another example, and has obvious cultural relevance in that context. But there are so many other better, more interesting and entertaining examples. It might be worth one viewing for die-hard fans, but having seen it more than once now I can say it is certainly not worth repeated viewings.