One of the things that makes "Testament" so interesting is simply the fact that one expects a movie about the aftermath of a nuclear holocaust to be exciting. But "Testament" isn't exciting. Instead it starts out routinely ordinary. We simply meet the Wetherly family. Mom, dad and 3 kids. They have all the love and all the problems of any family. There's nothing extraordinary about them. And they live in the extremely un-extraordinary small town of Hamlin, California. Everything is un-extraordinary until one day the TV goes out. When it finally comes back on, it's carrying news of a massive nuclear attack on large portions of the United States. Aside from a very bright light coming through the front window of their home, nothing much happens in Hamlin - except for the aftermath.There's no one to turn to for help, there's hardly anyone left to be in contact with. The bright light, of course, told us that while Hamlin wasn't destroyed, there must be radiation. Can anything be safely eaten? Can the water be safe to drink? Have the people been hopelessly exposed? We watch, as things slowly begin to fall apart in Hamlin.A lot of this revolves around the children. So many children. Children who had a whole lifetime ahead of them and were busy practicing a school play, when the unimaginable happened. The school play goes ahead, to try to maintain some sense of normalcy, but nothing is normal anymore. People get sick, people begin to die, and there's just no hope. None at all.It's the sense of absolute and utter hopelessness that permeates this movie and that finally makes it both so sombre and so powerful. It's not at all "exciting" in the normal sense of the word, but it's gripping. You can't let it go once it starts. I actually watched this back in 1983 when it was released. Today, it's a bit of a curiosity. But in 1983 the Cold War was still going on, the Soviet Union still existed, and Gorbachev hadn't come to power to bring a sense that, to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, "we can work with him." In the pre-Gorbachev era, the Soviet Union was mighty threatening, and this movie would have at least been unsettling in its believability. Even today, with the Soviet Union long dead, "Testament" has power. (8/10)

Well, I just finished re-watching it after 30 years, and I'd have to say it was about as emotionally powerful as it was in the 80's as it is now. However, emotion is a very broad spectrum pool of feelings, and in contrast with the actual realities of nuclear war, this one is easily the less believable of the major 3 (Threads, Day After, Testament). Why? Because after a nuclear exchange in the northern hemisphere, the slow, horribly grinding days of boredom, hunger and eventual radiation sickness, slowly waiting to die, would be something we in the southern hemisphere would probably experience more at this extremely slow, and less...let's say: radical rate. Watch 'On the Beach' for an inkling into what I am getting at here. In the northern hemisphere: Billions in major cities would die in the first round of nukes, immediately vaporized, and then billions more would go a little slower (but not much) on the outskirts, yet much quicker than in this farce. Even those in the country would be dying in unimaginable physical horror for weeks on end - much more quickly gone the way of extreme violence, with extremely heavy, messy biological contamination, medical problems and radiation sickness than here 'foretold'. It's 'leisurely' pace is it's complete downfall IMO because of where it is set, it makes little to know sense, and believability is very important in these types of movies. 'Threads' by comparison, was a far more accurate portrayal of proposed sad events.

This film is one of three made in fairly close succession about the possible consequences of worldwide nuclear war, and certainly the most well-realized of them. The other two range from cheesy America TV movie hype in "The Day After" to extremely dark British horror with "Threads". The latter of the two has something to offer where the first has little, but of the three it is "Testament" that tells the balanced, down-to-earth experience that the majority of us would be only too likely to experience.There's no mushroom cloud here, no special effects. Just a flash of light in the distance, and an ever-building sense of dread. The characters are written like true, believable people in other similar 1980s dramas. I cannot stress enough how real this movie feels. If you go in looking for action or thrills, this is not for you. This is a tragedy, a drama, a film of real humanity. It would survive unhindered without the horrific elements that provide the backbone of the script, because it is not interdependent on them. The characters don't exist simply to fill out the plot points. They have depth. And that's where "Testament" draws its power. This is not a disaster film, populated by varying degrees of cannon fodder. This is a true "what-if". What if my small town, the one where I've grown up and spent the bulk of my life, became the victim of nuclear fallout? I saw my childhood in this film. The young character of Scottie (played by Lukas Haas) reminds me of myself, his mother (Jane Alexander) of my own. I saw all too many hints of those I grew up with, my neighbors, my siblings in the scenes of "Testament".This film broke my heart, and if you let it, it just might do the same to you. It's the face behind killing, the human factor, the cost of collateral damage. But, most of all, it's a warm yet intensely painful story of a mother faced with the unavoidable and imminent death of her loved ones. "Testament" is a dirge, a march to the end through all the purity and life of our fading memories. It holds you close like a dying friend, hoping that an embrace will keep the soul from escaping. This is life at its most precarious.

I first saw this film back in '83 and I think for people who didn't grow up during the Cold War era this could be looked at as just another disaster film of the angry alien or global warming melting glaciers variety. The difference is, this could have really happened. People get up, leave for work on a normal day and then, in the middle of Sesame Street, the world just ends.Testament focuses on the lives of one family in a small California town surviving this fate. The tag line on the film stressed it was a 'realistic account' of how things might be after a nuclear war. No explosions or Mad Max violence, just regular people deciding 'What now?' The first half of the film deals with this pretty well and the family members are sympathetic and likable. The problem that I have, have always had with Testament, is act 2.After a few weeks of living with the shock of what has happened the family begins confronting their grief and the realization that the television isn't going to be coming back nor will the Red Cross be dropping by with coffee and blankets. They are on their own. Forever. Oh, and radioactive fallout has started making everyone sick.So what does our leading lady do? As the mother of her 3 kids plus several newly orphaned neighbour children does she load up the Volvo wagon with her family and supplies and head to Canada? No. She does not.Instead she goes to increasingly futile town meetings and talent shows. Her narrative is concerned with how people in the future will remember how they (the town) lived, not about surviving for another day. She rattles around her house as people start dying around her and the filmmaker wants us to see this as noble.The message of Testment isn't 'The human spirit overcoming terrible odds' or 'Strength of family will get you through' or even 'Modern science will doom us all.' No. The message here seems to be 'Die with dignity.' And that, it would seem, includes those dependant on you.Given the option I would rather be Mad Max.