Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
It took years
12 June 2019
Armageddon. Nuclear holocaust. Doomsday. These were the terms that were used during the Cold War. Both the United States and the USSR stood nose-to-nose ready to reduce their respective adversaries to radioactive wastelands. The U.S. public had no idea of the number of near-misses that occurred during this dangerous time. This documentary is about a single man who stood between the world and the end of humanity during one of those near-misses.

I lived through the Cold War. I served aboard a U.S. Navy nuclear submarine. This submarine was not a ballistic missile sub. It was called a "fast attack" or "hunter-killer" sub. What I found out when I served during the early 1980's was that on ballistic missile submarines (boomers) the missiles came out of the top of the sub. On a fast attack, they came out the front.

We carried nuclear weapons. I was within arms reach of a real-live nuclear weapon when I went into the sub's battery bay to do morning measurments. That experience changed me. I did not want to play chicken with things that would have destroyed life on this planet.

My inner turmoil was nothing compared to the choice that Stanislav Petrov faced on September 26, 1983 when the Soviet satellite surveillance of the U.S. strategic forces reported not one, not two, but five incoming intercontinental ballistic missiles. It was his decision to report the missile warnings as false alarms. Had he simply followed established procedures his actions could have touched off a world-destroying nuclear war. The entire world owes this man a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid.

This film documents the life of the man who saved the world. He never considered himself a hero despite the fact that his decicion allowed civilization to continue on this planet. The film shows that Stanislav wasn't a choirboy. He was a flawed human being. He also endured difficulties that defy description considering the magnitude of the act that he performed in the service of humanity.

The name Stanislav Petrov should be etched in the annals of history as an example of people who have saved far more lives than all of the world's despots have destroyed. He saved even more lives than someone like Dr. Norman Borlaug.

Look it up.
15 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Futurama: Jurassic Bark (2002)
Season 5, Episode 2
Poignant, yes, but...
30 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Having watched this heartbreaking episode, I understand and, in some ways, concur with other reviewer's assessment that this tugs at the viewer's deepest emotions, especially those whom have experienced the deep and totally honest love that comes from a companion animal. It was an episode designed to rip the emotions from all but the most callous viewer.

That said, I think that the writer's treatment of Seymour was just mean. I know that there is a certain degree of license given to cartoonists when it comes to the treatment of their characters. We have an unspoken agreement with the writers of these programs that these creatures, while vulnerable, still have the ability to forgo inexplicable torments with the understanding that they're not subject to the laws of physics, nor to the laws of ordinary human emotional response. They'll always bounce back, because that's the nature of the cartoon world.

This, however, was different. Following Fry's discovery that Seymour had lived years after he had been frozen and his subsequent refusal to reanimate Seymour, we're shown a montage of Seymour's pitiable, yet stalwart hope that his human companion will return to him as he waits faithfully at the entrance of the pizzeria where Fry worked, only to have his ultimate hope of seeing his friend dashed by the ravages of time.

To me, this is just being cruel to a faithful character. Seymour is never given the chance that his faithfulness deserved. One can frame this as a loss for Fry since his basic ineptitude is part of his character's essence. Yet, this dismisses the premise that steadfast support is worthy of reward.

Seymour deserved better and the writers of this episode should be ashamed of the way that they treated him.
5 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed