imrational The plot sounds interesting, like a Twilight Zone episode. However, the acting and script fail to deliver. The special effects (aside from 3d) leave a lot to be desired. For example, in one scene, they use floating rubber masks... like cheap rubber masks you can buy at any Halloween store in October in the United States.So, do not rent this movie for the plot. Where this movie shines is in 3d. This is the type of movie where the plot and acting were incidental. It's entire theme is to show off 3d. You'll be treated to things like a guy raking thin air, with the garden rake filmed to be coming out at you. You have two scenes of a bucket of dirt being lifted towards you, solely included because it looks somewhat cool in 3d. The 3d effects are much better than most 3d movies of today. Things have depth and actually seem to come out of the screen.However, let me reiterate once again, that is the only thing going for this movie.

jack_north I was a teen in the 60's and a big horror movie fan who saw and read anything I could get my hands on regarding horror films, and especially 3D horror films of the 50's. I distinctly remember reading the press releases in the Detroit newspapers that Arch Oboler, one of the technical pioneers of 3D films in the 50's, was in town to supervise the installation of special silver screens for his new 3D process.It was not new because it used polarized lenses...those had been used in the majority of the 3D films in the 50's. The new process related to the projection of the film. (I don't recall the articles going into much more detail about that process, but now I know it was apparently the first to combine both images on a single filmstrip.) I was so excited that Oboler himself was in my hometown to supervise the showing I made sure to go see it. I believe it was at the Adams in downtown Detroit.The 3D was mind-blowing! The beer tray floating out over the audience has still (this is mid 2013) not been topped for jaw-dropping 3D. I have thought of it many times since, and I think the reason it worked so well, and so much better than explosions or other fast-moving moves out of frame, is that the tray moved slow enough to follow and keep in focus by our eyes. (This is similar to holding one finger in front of your face and slowly moving it toward your nose. Your eyes cross slowly as your finger gets nearer.) I remember little else of the film, but I know that I walked out feeling I got my money's worth, just for the 3D alone.

mhlong I watched this movie in first run in the Chicago area in 1966-67. I even remember the girl I was dating. And looking around at the audience all wearing the special 3D glasses.Anway, here's the spoiler. The plot, such as it was, could be compared to a bunch of kids collecting ants, grasshoppers, etc. and putting them into a glass jar, and tossing in what ever they think would make the insects seem at home, grass, twigs, leaves.So, if some alien kid did the same to humans, what would it toss in? Part of the Lincoln Memorial, bits and pieces of things from around the world. And if a specimen died, what would a kid do? Remove it quickly not knowing if its death would affect the others still in the jar.And might bugs do if trapped in a jar? Possibly try to do the things by rote they did before. And if a new bug accidentally flew into the jar unawares, it would probably spend some time trying to figure out how to get out before falling into a repetitive life.Here's the plot in brief. Husband and wife out flying with a pilot get caught in a storm (imagine the storm from War of the Worlds), and are forced to land inside the jar/bubble. Most of the other inhabitants are living their lives as if they're robots, going through the motions of their occupations. Our heroes try to get out, the pilot dies in an attempt.I believe at the end, the bubble is lifted, but I don't remember if there is any kind of conclusion.The 3D effects were silly, like firemen carrying a ladder into the audience. Most of them had little to do with furthering the plot. I believe Johnny Desmond (the pilot) got to sing a song. He was a 2nd rate Al Martino about 10 years earlier (if you get the joke).Not much of a movie, and probably helped stifle 3D for awhile...until (ta da) late 2009.

Bruce Cook [Also release as: "Fantastic Invasion of Planet Earth"]Director Arch Oboler ("The Twonky") pioneered a new 3-D process called "Spacevision" which used polarized glasses to separate the right-and-left images for the audience. The 3-D effect works remarkable well, especially in a scene involving a serving tray which floats out of the screen and (apparently) right up to the viewer's face.Oboler obviously made "The Bubble" just to show off "Spacevision"; the plot is practically nonexistent, and the film is littered with scenes that poke objects out of the screen at the audience. In Deborah Walley's first scene, she holds her arms out to the audience and exclaims "Darling!" to husband Michael Cole.The token plot is about a small town which alien invaders have isolated inside a spherical force field (the bubble of the title). A small plane piloted by Johnny Desmond and carrying newlyweds Michael and Deborah is forced to land during a storm, and the trio end up trapped in the town. The town's citizens act like broken robots, repeating routine tasks over and over, oblivious to everything around them. Olan Soule has a small role as one of the automaton Earthlings. The alleged alien invaders are never shown.Music by Paul Sawtell and Bert Schefter (the team which provided mucic for "It! The Terror from Beyond Space" and many other 1950s classics). Arch Oboler served as producer, screenwriter, and director -- so he has nobody to blame but himself.