A Thief in the Night (1972) watch online HD

Perhaps because I was so young, innocent and BRAINWASHED when I saw it, this movie was the cause of many sleepless nights for me. I haven't seen it since I was in seventh grade at a Presbyterian school, so I am not sure what effect it would have on me now. However, I will say that it left an impression on me... and most of my friends. It did serve its purpose, at least until we were old enough and knowledgeable enough to analyze and create our own opinions. I was particularly terrified of what the newly-converted post-rapture Christians had to endure when not receiving the mark of the beast. I don't want to spoil the movie for those who haven't seen it so I will not mention details of the scenes, but I can still picture them in my head... and it's been 19 years.

I saw this film so long ago I can't recall how old I was--had to have been less than 8 years old but older than 4. After watching it with my parents, it haunted me for the longest time, particularly when connected with the song "Wish We'd All Been Ready". Made in 1972 and having a low-budget feel to it, the acting was terrible and effects were poor, but the message was strong and persuading. The intent was obviously to scare the viewer into salvation. However, depending on your mindset while watching A Thief in the Night, you may or may not take any of it seriously. That is why as a child, lacking the experience, understanding, and ability to compartmentalize it was the most disturbing...for me anyway.

I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was saved before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was forced to watch it in a youth group at my church. This movie was highly disturbing. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me.

I saw this movie twice through a pentecostal church my family attended in Nanaimo BC in the 1970's. I was of the tender age of 6, my brother 4, then again when I was 8 my brother 6. This movie terrified my brother and I and shaped how we viewed the world with distrust. It wasn't just the movie, but it was also the philosophy that engulfs so many "christians" about the "mark of the beast"and the rapture. This movie, the church, and a volatile neglectful upbringing, lead to severe paranoia towards the future. For years, I lived under the delusional affects of the church and fear of being forgotten by Christ. I am now 40 years old. Went through years of counseling. I once explained to a psychiatrist this movie and the belief system of the church and family. I was pegged with a delusional disorder. I actually began to believe this, it was my brother who reminded me, that this cultic philosophy actually happened. I no longer fear the future, I have come to terms with the fear injected into it's members by the church. I have taken this experience to fulfill a purpose, I am nearing my licensure as a Psychologist specializing in childhood trauma.

Long before Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins would shake the world of the Christian subculture (and make millions in the process) with the LEFT BEHIND books, MARK IV Pictures, the Christian film distribution company of the Billy Graham evangelistic association, gave us this masterwork. What I love most about this genre is its incredible attention to detail, sitting in a living room. Instead of taking us to the dramatic scenes of this "post-rapture" tribulation, we sit in the living room, hearing about it on the news because the filmmakers can't afford to show it. The film's premise is grounded in Pre-Millenial, pre-Tribulation eschatalogy, believing that Christ comes once for the secret taking of the true church, and then comes again at the end of the seven years of hell on earth. What used to terrify me in junior high now makes me laugh. The intriguing adventures of Patty and her journey throughout the tribulation (and two of the film's three sequels) tells her remarkable story of unbelief and ultimately damnation. I hate to admit it, but I still thoroughly enjoy watching this. It even has the SAME EXACT score of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I think I'm the only person in history to make that observation.

SPOILERS AHEAD! I saw this film at the urging of the girl who works at the videostore, who described it as "Total MST3K." And how right she is. Granted, the film has a regional interest for me, as it was filmed in my hometown of Des Moines, Iowa. Basically, this is Left Behind from the early '70s, and it goes to show that the evangelicals have been pumping out religious propoganda aimed at scaring non-believers through the art of film for over thirty years now. The music is also right on, from the hit "You've Been Left Behind" (later covered in a decent version--something i can say even though i'm not a fan of Christian rock) to the thematic drum 'n' trumpet music reminiscent of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Also, the clothes and hairstyles are the best; Linklater surely stole the look of the character Jerry in this film for Dazed and Confused. As for story, well, the rapture comes and millions of Christians simply disappear--non-believers are left behind and life goes on as usual (except for the bit about the UN making a single global government called Unite, which uses the mark of the beast--your choice of back of the hand or on the forehead--for commerce and labeling of citizenship). Honestly, everything seems fine, except for the easily swayed citizens of the world who willingly accept one government, oh, and the underground new Christians, who are freaking out nonstop. Stuff gets crazier and crazier and the heroine--who I've failed to mention--thinks her old friends are trying to kill her. And then, yup, turns out it was all a dream. Granted, after she wakes up, we have a deja vu moment where her husband's electric shaver is in the sink--just like the beginning of the dream! But who's to say he didn't step out for a smoke? Eh... Whattaya expect from Russell Doughten (who appears as the grandfatherly preacher who misled his flock), the man who produced 1958's smash hit horror film starring Steve McQueen: The Blob! And thankfully for us, this wonderful golden nugget of gold was followed by A Distant Thunder, where we discover her husband really did disappear in the rapture... (by the way, the whole series of 4 films has been released on DVD with loads of cool extras!)

As some other comments show, this movie might scare you, when you're a little child. (And that is probably all that it is good for.)

However, if you're older, this movie only does one thing: suck majorly -and thereby I don't mean the acting, its soundtrack, cutting or s.th. like that. I'm simply talking about the "plot" (if you can call it that).

SPOILERS ahead ------------------------

I don't want to give any more spoilers than necessary (if after reading this, you really still want to watch this movie) but if you graduated from any school, this is just a big insult of your intelligence. When watching this, I was stunned most of the time, because what was happening was just THAT stupid.

This includes:

-the forming of UNITE (an evil UN-association)

--> we are just supposed to believe it's evil. is it even evil at all? if so: why is it evil?

-the mark of evil in the form of a tattoo

--> there is no necessity to impose this on the people, so why the hell (no pun intended) are they doing it?

-inviting Christ to your heart merely as lip service

-->because there's nothing anybody, who in this movie is considered "a real Christian", ever does, besides saying that stupid prayer. so...just say that prayer before the rapture and you're saved - no matter what?!

Thus, rating 1/10

I'm truly embarrassed to admit that I suffered through this film four or five times, while growing up in a Baptist church and attending a WASPish Protestant elementary school. One of the most abhorrent motion pictures ever made (second only to Lamont Johnson's reprehensible "Lipstick" back in 1976), "A Thief in the Night" has -- sadly -- become a Bible belt staple -- one of the only "Evangelical Christian cult films." How wildly popular is it among conservative Christians? Let's put it this way: one could walk into any "film night" at a midwestern Baptist church during the eighties and nineties and catch this motion picture, nine times out of ten (until John Schmidt took over by making a series of contemporary Christian films that actually remain watchable to this day -- "The Wait of the World" (1989), etc.)

I fail to understand how anyone could even -sit through- "A Thief in the Night" (let alone heap unqualified praise onto the film). Not only are the production values, the direction, the 'performances,' the script, the music, and the editing ludicrous, but one can imagine the film feeling dated even back in 1972. (The characters seem to be walking around on another planet).

As other IMDB users imply in their critiques, it might be possible for a film of this nature to evolve into a secular cult item -- a joke, to be screened as a secular midnight movie and at 70's cinematic shlock fests, ala "Toomorrow," the mysterious and elusive "Darktown Strutters," and "BJ Lang Presents." Ahh, such is not the case. The "filmmakers" rendered this impossible by dampering "A Thief in the Night" with some of the sourest, most depressing dramatic overtones in movie history and ensuring that it can never (NEVER) be *enjoyed* as entertaining camp. From first frame to last, it remains repulsively gloomy, angry, and depressing. This, from a film about Christ's second coming -- a subject which should impart a message of hope, not of fear.

In short: nothing fun about this one, folks. It's a *miserable* experience, and it may even fall into the same category as "The Incredible Torture Show," about which, Danny Peary once wrote, "If any film deserves to be banned, this deserves strong consideration."

The worst sidelight of the film: the terrible light it continues to shed on conservative Christians, and on the Revelation of St. John per se. "Left Behind" (1999), starring Kirk Cameron and based on the bestselling book series (a film I have not seen), covers the same ground and is evidently far more watchable.

This film follows the belief of certain fundamentalist Christians that an event known as the "rapture" will take place soon which will cause all true believers to disappear from the earth all at once. In that regard, "Patty Myers" (Patty Dunning) is one of the many who is not taken up into heaven because she is not a Christian. However, her husband, "Jim Wright" (Mike Niday) was recently converted and he has disappeared. So has her friend, "Jenny" (Colleen Niday). On the other hand, her other two friends, "Diane Bradford" (Maryann Rachford) and her new husband "Jerry Bradford" (Thom Rachford) were also left behind and like Patty, they are now forced to deal with another fundamentalist event known as the "tribulation" which is essentially a hell on earth. Now, as I stated earlier, this film follows a controversial belief of a certain segment of the Christian faith. As such, there may be many people who may not understand or appreciate this type of film. Likewise, it is a low-budget production geared more for an evangelical outreach than for general entertainment purposes. Because of that, the acting is very basic and the dialogue will probably strike many as being a bit corny. Additionally, as the hairstyles and clothes clearly indicate, it is definitely dated to a time-period (late 60's & early 70's) which may not appeal to a more modern audience. Even so, this film created a stir within its targeted audience and resulted in 3 sequels: "A Distant Thunder", "Image of the Beast" and "The Prodigal Planet". In short, if a person can get beyond some of the peculiarities I mentioned earlier, they might find this film interesting in its own way. And while I am able to keep an open mind about the overall subject of the film, from a critical and objective perspective I have to rate it as slightly below average.

All these reviews I've read so far are from kids that got scarred for life or from anti-Christian views. Now first of I was one of those kids "forced" to watch this movie, though I never felt forced. I attended a Christian school and the whole school watched it together. Did this movie scare me? Hell yes I was about 6 or 7 when I watched this.. This movie is based on the book Revelations from the bible. It's basis starts that a pre-tribulation rapture occurs (if you are unfamiliar with that it basically means that the Christian people of the world will be taken from the earth before the start of the 7 years of tribulation). I would never recommend that you sit a child down to watch this movie, I don't really know what it is about it the visuals or the haunting feel, but it will scare just about any kid, especially if they come from a background of knowledge of the "End Times". The movie itself is done in a 70's theme, bell-bottoms and the whole bit. The acting is pretty bad. Though if you want to learn a little about what Christians think will happen in the not so distant future watch it. For those people saying this is a scare tactic movie for the Christian movement, I would say yes and no. In the movie if you accept Christ as your savior before the rapture, you are spared living through the 7 years of tribulation, but on the other hand; if you accept Christ after the tribulation you will be hunted down and killed. It was meant as a Christian movie. I believe those that don't have some knowledge of the Christian faith or have it themselves will just dog this movie because it is from that view. Though I'm not saying this is a great movie by any means, but it definitely was an interesting view especially when I watched it again as an adult.

I discovered this "End Times" movie on Google Video when I typed in "1972". It's basically the story of Patty and how she gets left behind with other non-believers after the believers (which included her snake-bitten husband) were perished. I liked the opening song in the beginning credits and some of the chase scenes. I'm just not sure the movie was a good lesson on the benefits of devotion to the teachings of the Bible since it gives us the fear but not the joy of the exercise. And then there's that cheesy montage of domestic life of Patty and her husband that screams '70s. This film is very much of its time. However, it is pretty effective as a story and it does make you think about the filmmaker's intentions. So see A Thief in the Night with an open mind and don't think too much about the uneven acting or writing but about how effective the movie's message is.

This is a great movie for all Generation X'ers. What a different world the America of 1972 was compared to our psychotic 21st Century. You can get a sense of what an 1972 America gone by was like by watching this movie. I found that the clothing and the car styles brought back to me fond memories of a much better country than we have now. Just think...back then there were only 4 or 5 TV stations to choose from. There was no AIDS, Muslim terrorists, Road Rage, 911, Bird Flu, Freeway Snipers, etc, etc. The Vietnam war was just over. There will still be 7 years before Star Wars comes out. The personal computer and internet would still be 29 years away.

When this movie first came out the producers had to market the film themselves as no other film company wanted it. So it began touring small Protestant churches around the country being shown on movie projectors(This was the days before VCRS of course). The pastor of a church who would would be interested in showing A Thief in the NIght to his congregation would obtain a copy of the film. Then he would set up a evening to show it in the church meeting area or lunch room. Members of the congregation would invite "unsaved" friends and family members and it would be a social event of the week.

If you can get past the limited production values of the film and just watch it for its nostalgic value, then I think you will enjoy the film more. Of course I am speaking as a gen xer.

If I had a time machine I would go back to 1972 and say goodbye to the 21st century cesspool we have now.

A THIEF IN THE NIGHT is an excellent fictional account of the weeks leading up to the RAPTURE and the weeks following that pivotal event.

I thoroughly enjoyed both the production values and the content values of this independent Christian movie.

THE PRODUCTION VALUES. Hey, it's an independent movie, with a shoe-string budget, so, ya, it's going to look a bit cheesy (if your standard is A-list Hollywood fare). But, properly compared with other independent movies, this film is perfectly acceptable. More important than acting style, costumes, and music is the narrative itself. Is the story compelling? Do the dramatic moments work? Does the story trajectory build to a satisfying climax? The answer to all these questions is an unqualified "yes." As a side-note, the truly important technical stuff--continuity, sound, lighting--are fine. The viewer is able to watch the show without being distracted by sloppy craftsmanship.

CONTENT VALUE. The message of the movie is superb. When you consider how many ideas the movie-maker developed within the brief span of 69 minutes, you begin to appreciate his artistry. He presents the message of salvation, the consequence of unbelief, the danger of backsliding, the truth of the rapture, and the threat of a world-dominating satanic government with flare, imagination, and--most importantly for an evangelical movie--with biblical accuracy.

The movie-maker is a good storyteller. For example, he develops the message of salvation in two important ways: (1) he shows us through action the reality of Jesus Christ's sacrifice for our sake. This is achieved in a subplot where the zoo-keeper is bit by a poisonous snake and nearly dies. The only cure is blood from someone who is immune to the snake-poison. The poison is like sin; the cure is like Christ's blood, shed on the cross. (2) The filmmaker also develops the message of salvation through dialog. He has various characters explain the truth about human sin and the need for salvation through faith in Christ. So, the movie-maker uses both action and dialog to tell his story.

As a side-note, the fact that a movie produced by evangelical Christians actually contains dialog and scenes that convey a clearly delineated message of salvation, couched in explicitly evangelical Christian language, imagery, and theology is also perfectly acceptable. To criticize this film for being explicitly Christian is absurd; it's akin to criticizing a Nike commercial for promoting sport-wear. What else would evangelical Christian movie makers make, if not a film that states their case? Also, the fact that the movie-maker employs the idea that the unbelieving will be left behind in a godless world is, again, perfectly acceptable. The movie-maker uses the dramatic potential of that idea admirably. How do I know? I heard about A THIEF IN THE NIGHT from a woman who saw the show way back in 1974; it still lived in her memory thirty years later. How many movies can you say that about? All around, a very enjoyable, thought-provoking show. I plan on showing it to my teen group at church.

This is a great movie. Some will disagree with me but , if you know anything about the bible you know it is. I think everyone should see it!! I agree a new updated version like be nice but the message is still right on. If you can see this movie. Is not a "scare the hell of you movie",it is truthful with the Bible. I think the U. N. will play a major role in the world government to come. The last days are lining up with the Bible. Look at what has happened with the chip for dogs and cats that now has come to light to protect on children from being kidnapped. It's the size of a grain of rice. This I feel is the fore runner of the mark of the beast spoken of in the Bible. Without the mark you can't sell or buy, with this chip that small in the future there is no telling how much info can be put on it.

This movie is used to by religious organization to provoke fear in little kids so they will believe in Christianity. In some ways, this movie is a tool to brainwash mentally vulnerable children. Many religious schools show this to little kids, because it is easier to brainwash kids at ages between 5-10.

My mother used to make us watch this movie and movies from this series every New Year's Eve when we were small kids (maybe 5). To say that this movie traumatized me as a 5 year old is an understatement. I couldn't stop thinking about it and talked about it so much that even my friends who had not seen it were terrified. I had nightmares for at least 15 years and I think that making children see these movies is child abuse. I still dread New Years Day because of this and although I know this was just a movie, I still have a sense of dread for the future that I've never been able to shake. If I were not brought up to think that this was true and had this shoved down my throat, I wouldn't found the bad acting and ridiculous plot entertaining, but being told at 5 that this is what is going to happen to you can cause lifelong trauma.

I was forced to watch this whole series of films as a young child and I was told they were REAL! Talk about child abuse. I would have been less frightened of Dracula or Frankenstein. This series is only good for people who believe in this ridiculousness and who want to indoctrinate their children into believing the same. Besides the obvious issues associated with brainwashing and indoctrination, there's also the bad acting, bad writing, and BAD "special effects". They are just all around terrible, terrible movies. Yes, believable (and horrifying) to a kid, but I can't imagine a grown-up buying into this shlock. Although, I must say, that I would be interested in seeing them today, as an adult. They might have a certain midnight/cult movie feel to them.

Obviously, there wasn't a huge budget for this film which definitely hindered the production. But the story and ending were so brutal that they made up for a lot. I mean brutal on the level of Ju Dou and other (great) Chinese films. I first saw this when I was 14 years old, I ran home and begged God to forgive me for everything...

Written and acted by sincere amateurs, produced by some exploitation monger, this is dull and hard to watch.

Not the worst movie ever, but at least schlock like _Plan 9 From Outer Space_ usually had a real actor or two. I'd recommend _A Thief In The Night_ only to hardcore ironists and hardcore Dispensationalists. I'm neither.

Don't believe me? Watch it for free (albeit sourced from poor VHS) here: http://www.archive.org/details/Thief-In-The-Night

Relevant links added mostly to reach IMDb's 10-line minimum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3199/thief-in-the-night-se-a/

Since I am a Christian believer and that includes believing in the Divinity of Jesus Christ and that He is my Personal Savior and Lord due to His Sacrifice at the Cross and coming back to Eternal Life after being raised from the dead as well as believing that the Bible is the inspired Word of God - what can I really say about this particular film?

I think the film has a powerful message, even though I have mixed feelings about its delivery. I think people should be converted through the knowledge of the free gift of Salvation provided by the Sacrifice at the Cross and Christ's subsequent resurrection. I have mixed feelings about the concept of "being scared into Heaven". But perhaps some people need to be. The idea that evil [Antichrist] can just take over the entire world after the Christian believers have been removed from the earth is scary indeed. In the past, evil has taken over entire nations such as in the Roman Empire, Napoleon's France, Hitler's Germany, and Soviet Russia. Evil continues to inflict nations in different parts of the world. Thinking about this on a worldwide scale is disturbing.

The First Coming of Christ is prophesied in several Old Testament Books. In the Book of Micah, it says that the Messiah [Jesus] will be born in Bethlehem. In another example, the Book of Daniel talks about "49 years plus 434 years" which are 483 years from the time of the Persian Empire in which the Jewish exiles were allowed back to rebuild the City of Jerusalem. Theoretically, this time reckoning brings us up to the week in which the Messiah Jesus was crucified (around 32 or 33 AD). And this is based on writings made centuries before the fact !!

The Second Coming of Christ is also described in both the New and Old Testaments such as in the Book of Revelation and in the Book of Daniel. In the last part of the Book of Daniel, to paraphrase scripture, it describes a great time interval passing until "knowledge [education] and travel have increased", perhaps describing the centuries between the times described in the Book of Daniel up though our 21st century, and perhaps beyond. After this has transpired, to paraphrase again, "the Angel Michael stands up to fight against satanic forces and the dead are risen, some to everlasting life and others to everlasting contempt". There appear to be double references in the Book of Daniel describing events about Antiochus (the Greek "Antichrist" who desecrated the Hebrew Temple) during the second century B.C. , once again, centuries before the fact, and a catastrophe [world war?] yet future to our times (the Antichrist mentioned in the film). Yet, the Bible refers to the details of these events to be sealed knowledge until the time of the end. This great time interval mentioned above could possibly correspond in part to Church History as we have known it as well as to the rise of the modern nations as we know them today. Now, Church History is approximately 2,000 years old. The question that we have is how much longer this time period will continue prior to the Second Coming of Christ. As mentioned above, the answer to this question according to the Bible remains sealed.

Once again, the writer suggests, much of this knowledge is sealed up until the time of the end "when education and travel have increased". However, historically, more knowledge has become available over the past century and a half than all of the past nineteen centuries put together. This is particularly true of scientific knowledge. Other signs that theologians talk about is the resurrection of the state of Israel and the geopolitical situation in the Middle East which appears to resemble some of the situations described in the Old Testament such as in the Book of Daniel. Whether or not we have reached the real time of the end (such as within our lifetimes) remains unknown. Why ? The Bible says this knowledge is sealed until the time of the end. There are some details that remain hidden from us about the Second Coming of Christ. Even Jesus said that He did not know, to paraphrase, " nor the Angels in Heaven, but the Father only ".

What this means is that we should continue to anticipate the Return of Christ while doing the Christian walk in our daily lives.

Speculation about the Second Coming of Christ goes back centuries.

Much of this speculation has caused a great deal of tragedy and misunderstanding, especially in the dangerous practice of date-setting. Again, one must emphasize that even Jesus did not know when He is coming back, but only the Father knows. In addition, one must be especially careful about the danger of "adding or subtracting" from the Bible. The Book of Revelation in the last chapter gives a very stern warning about tampering with God's Word.

However, just like one can tell by changes in the weather that spring is coming, one can tell from world events that human history seems to be coming to some sort of climax. Precise knowledge of whether this is really so or not remains sealed, though, as the Bible says. This is where Faith comes in.

The term "Rapture" does not appear in the Bible, but its concept is hinted at in the First Book of Corinthians in which, to paraphrase St. Paul,"he tells us a secret - we will all not die, but in the twinkling of an eye, we will all be changed into new bodies". Furthermore, in the first Book of Thessalonians, the Lord will come "like a thief in the night (sound familiar?) in which believers who have died will be raised and those believers that are still living will all meet the Lord in the air". There are different interpretations of these passages, especially in terms of sequence of events, but this is where the concept of the Rapture comes from in the movie.

Films such as this raise a certain amount of controversy about interpreting the Bible, but that is the point. It is supposed to make a person think.

If the Old Testament turned out to be accurate about the predictions about the First Coming of Christ, it stands to reason that the New Testament (as well as the Old) is accurate as well about His Life on earth as well as His eventual future return.

Blessings in Christ to everyone,

Dan Basinger

I watched this movie when I was 9 years old. Unlike other people I seem to be the one that loved this movie when i watched it. I do not believe this is as some say a scare tactic. I believe it is a warning, a chance to make your life right, to be prepared. I have watched the entire series and still to this day continue to watch it whenever i get the chance. People who loved this movie would also love the Left Behind Series. God loves all of you and he does not want you to have to go through the horrible things that will happen after the rapture. This movie talks of salvation and it explains the consequences of deciding against God. If you where scared.... then you knew in your heart that you where not saved. This is more then just a movie, it is God calling people to him before it is to late.

After I'd heard of it many years ago, I saw this movie yesterday afternoon on DVD and it proved to be a fair Sunday afternoon movie for Christians but nothing more :-). I am a new born Christian however I believe that the rapture will take place after the great tribulation (the movie teaches that it will happen before it). I don't like the way the film tries to scare the audience, I don't think that it is an effective way of preaching the gospel. But let's see the movie itself as a movie, a story,a piece of cinematography, even if it's not so easy. Yes, it was dated at the time it was made. Yes, the happy marriage pictures are greasy. Yes the plot reminds me of some low budget B-movies from the '50-s (actually, Russell S. Doughten Jr. produced The Blob too). But it's not boring at all. My presumption was that it will be very amateurish, made with a cheap cam by somebody who knows nothing about movie-making with ridiculous acting by his brethren in the local church. But this film has well done cut and cinematography. The music of the Fishmarket Five is fine, unlike the classical "suspense" themes. The escaping scenes are exciting. This is the type of movie you could be curious about, but you know that you will not enjoy it. Just like the films of Ed Wood.

I came across this film by accident whist watching another series The Leftovers which had a song in it that is also in this film. Many have said they saw this film in Church and such, but I did not (maybe it was because I grew up in Brooklyn). As a Protestant, I was never taught about the rapture nor was it ever mentioned at my Church (in fact, I had never heard of the rapture until I was an older adult; guess it wasn't a thing for my branch of Lutheranism and it still isn't). Acting is blah, but it is a good period piece and bought back to mind the clothes, the way I used to talk, the way things were so much simpler back then. It definitely made me think of my long-lost friends and I found myself wishing to go back to those times. Give it shot - especially if you lived during the early '70s; and if you didn't, well - it's not a bad representation of many of us lived.

This movie was commonly shown in churches in the 1970's, and frightened many non-believers so badly that some of them did begin to consider their own spiritual condition and come to salvation. I was one of those people, having seen the film in a Pentecostal church with my then best friend back in high school in 1974. I was raised in a Methodist church that seldom spoke of salvation and never spoke of the rapture, so the entire concept presented in the film was new to me at the time.

Thus, I guess you could say this film did some good in the fact that some were brought to Christ either as a direct or indirect result of watching it. However, it does tend to rock already saved ones into a sense of complacency in relation to the doctrine of the rapture of all Christians prior to the great tribulation, when a careful study of the Bible shows that this is not the case. In that sense, the film does a disservice.

As other reviewers have mentioned, the acting is B-rated, but that is not really the point of the movie. It was not trying to break box office records or win awards. I haven't seen this film in 41 years, but the memory that still stands out the most to me is that of the heroine of the film going to church on Sunday, trying to find something of the spiritual experience her new husband has found, and being treated instead to a very dead dull sermon. After the rapture, she goes to the church and finds the tormented preacher who has also been left behind lamenting - "Another one!". In other words, apparently large numbers of his parishioners as well as himself have never known Christ's salvation.

From a psychological standpoint you have to ask yourself why this film is so frightening. Most people, especially Americans, have been taught their whole lives about the torments of hell that await those who die unredeemed, yet nothing seems to frighten people more than the idea of being left on earth by God to be hunted and persecuted by their fellow man. This is probably because most people have never seen an actual demon, but they have seen plenty of the evil man is capable of, and it is therefore more real to them.