Director: HARRY HORNER. Screenwriter: Anthony Veiller, John L. Balderston, based on the play Red Planet by John L. Balderston, John E. Hoare. Film editor: Francis D. Lyon. Cinematographer: Joseph Biroc. Music composed by Mahlon Merrick, David Chudnow. Production designer: Charles D. Hall. Set decorator: Murray Waite. Assistant director: Emmett Emerson. Production manager: Joseph Paul. Producer: Anthony Veiller. Executive producer: Donald Hyde.Copyright 15 May 1952 by Melaby Pictures Corp. Released through United Artists Pictures. New York opening at the Criterion: 14 June 1952. U.S. release: 15 May 1952. U.K. release on the lower half of a double bill: floating from January 1953. Australian release: 23 October 1952. 7,762 feet. 86 minutes. Cut by United Artists to 74 minutes in Australia.Alternative title: MIRACLE FROM MARS.NOTES: The stage play, "Red Planet" opened on Broadway at the Cort on 17 December 1932, running a dismal total of seven performances under the direction of Burk Symon and Chester Erskine. The leading players were Bramwell Fletcher, Valerie Taylor, Eugene Powers, Richard Whorf, Wilfrid Seagram, Louis Hector and Henry Herbert. The elaborate production was designed by Lee Simonson and produced by Rowland Stebbins.COMMENT: Despite its preposterous naivety, this morality play is still somewhat moving — a tribute to the sincerity of its makers. The film is a genuine curio, of interest only to the connoisseur. Action and science fiction fans are warned to give it a wide berth. The version at present circulating has been improved by excising the scenes of the Russian revolution, criticized by overseas critics for the poverty of their budget.The script is adapted from a stage play by John L. Balderston and John Hoare and, as might be expected, it's a rather talky affair. Director Horner keeps it moving however, and the acting is surprisingly straight-faced.OTHER VIEWS: Incredibly, fascinatingly bad in its messagey (in more ways than one) and up-lifting way. Raises hysterically irresponsible plotting to the level of art (or something). — Donald C. Willis.

I'm a fan of cheesy old 50's scifi and this was what I was expecting from this film. Sadly its not scifi at all. It's really more pro Christian and anti-communist propaganda and not much else.It's a film that is hard to just watch without either laughing or simply questioning the competence of the director and production team.However I do suggest people watch it interested in how movies have evolved. It's whole premise is quite strange and could never be made in recent times its just too ridiculous.It probably ranks up there with 'Glen or Glenda' in suspect movies that don't actually work and just come across as a bit embarrassing and amateur.There is some very competent actors delivering some amazingly un- inspired lines that often extremely cringe worthy.The film is available on youtube for free to watch and even at that price I feel slightly scammed.It feels like a film that should be watched by a film history class at college and then discussed at length because it throws up so many questions especially who signed the cheque and why.

Peter Graves, looking like a poster boy for the Gestapo, is about as dull as a fifty cent knife. He's married to a tiresome, whiny woman who complains constantly. I won't go into the science (which is so vacuous and imprecise as to be laughable) because this is a rallying point for the McCarthyites of the early fifties. Science is actually the enemy here. The message is to go back to the caves and wear sandals. Did you see any black people in the movie. Did you see any Hindus or Native Americans. Apparently the Martians had a copy of the King James Version of the Bible. They suddenly began to speak in Thees and Thous in their messages. The concept of this film rolls along nicely. Peter and his wife are blamed for the destruction of the Western economy. This in itself is ridiculous. Since the Martians never do any more than talk. In the end we know why. Did the people who made this film think the world stupid? I guess when you see the workings of Tailgunner Joe at the hearings, we kind of know an answer to this question.

Planet Earth has been receiving radio messages from its nearest neighbour Mars . Messages telling of a new type of technology means that fossil fuels will become redundant meaning that millions of jobs will be lost in the Western world . Are these messages genuine or is there another more Earthly power behind it ? After seeing INVASION USA I found myself watching yet another American propaganda film from the same year . I was attracted to the title thinking it might be an obvious film where the red planet decides to enslave the countries of Western democracy because that's what reds do . This isn't how things developed but any sort of rugs being pulled out from under you or irony of the red planet not being communist at all is hardly a recommendation . I can understand the thinking behind INVASION USA and the points its making within its own twisted reality but this isn't the case with RED PLANET MARS I don't know if I'm stupid or simply because I wasn't concentrating hard enough but I had difficulty paying attention to the plotting . It's not really a film that grabs your attention and is very static . I wasn't surprised in the slightest that this film was adapted from a stage play . One would have thought in that case it would be easy to follow since it's dialogue based but this isn't the case at all . Scientist Chris Cronyn receives messages from Mars and before he - and the audience - knows it religion is sweeping the world including the Soviet Union . The writers some entirely ignorant of religion and Marxism . Suppose we take on board the idea that our view of religion comes from a race from a higher civilisation . Ask yourself how does this explain life after death ? If a Martian lives 300 years then surely it'll die the same a human dies after 70 years . There will be no life after this one no matter what planet you're from . This is one of a number massive plot holes , and these plot holes even have the totally illogical nature of drawing attention to themselves such as the Soviet politburo asking themselves where are the Soviet population getting all their radios from ? Yeah I'd like to know too . I suppose this falls under the heading of plot connivance ? Perhaps the most irritating thing is the ending and the way it's developed . For large sections of the film you're being led along that the Soviets are behind these messages and it's all a communist plot , so much so that the counter revolution in the Eastern bloc is just a staged event and the British ambassador is being used as a stooge the same way plenty of useful idiots were taken on tours to the USSR in the 1920s and 30s . The communist double dealing is reinforced at the end when a former Nazi now working for the communists turns up at the Cronyn's lab at the end . This villain despite being a former Nazi and communist reveals himself to be a Satan worshipper . Let me get this right ? He's not a Neo-pagan like the Nazis and he's not a Marxist atheist like all communists but he worships Satan ! . Like I said the writers haven't thought any of this through especially where religion or Marxism is concerned . One massive plot hole that jumps out and grabs you is that the Cronyns' and the villain are killed in a lab explosion with no witnesses but the final scene sees the American referring to their sacrifice to the United Nations . Either this unnamed president has second sight or this film has a really poor screenplay . Guess what one I'm putting my money on ? If you thought NOAH was a genuinely bad film you obviously haven't seen this one