The Manhattan Project

1986 "Paul Stevens' high school science project has gotten a little out of hand. He just built an atomic bomb. Now he's got 11 hours to make sure it doesn't work."
The Manhattan Project
6.1| 1h58m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 13 June 1986 Released
Producted By: 20th Century Fox
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Named after the World War II-era program, the plot revolves around a gifted high school student who decides to construct a nuclear bomb for a national science fair. The film's underlying theme involves the Cold War of the 1980s when government secrecy and mutually assured destruction were key political and military issues.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

20th Century Fox

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Chris Blount Not quite understanding the bad reviews here. Going in it's easy to see immediately that this movie was going to be flippant and a bit of a fairy tale. How can anyone take it seriously? Instead, just sit back and enjoy the ride.This movie is basically a series of unlikely events strung together. Can they happen, sure but probably in another dimension. But still, I found this film a guilty pleasure. It's best to just put your mind on hold for a bit and just have fun.On a side note, I really miss the 80's version of John Lithgow. He is such a great actor and back then he was at his prime.
gavin6942 Paul Stephens (Christopher Collet)'s high school science project has gotten a little out of hand. He just built an atomic bomb. Now he's got 11 hours to make sure it doesn't work.The plot was likely influenced by the case of John Aristotle Phillips, a Princeton University undergraduate, who came to prominence in 1977 as the "A-Bomb Kid" for designing a nuclear weapon in a term paper using publicly available books and articles.Roger Ebert gave the film four out of four stars and called it "a clever, funny and very skillful thriller ... that stays as close as possible to the everyday lives of convincing people, so that the movie's frightening aspects are convincing". He particularly took note of how "sophisticated" the film was about the relationship between Paul Stephens and John Matthewson, while praising Brickman's ability to "combines everyday personality conflicts with a funny, oddball style of seeing things, and wrap up the whole package into a tense and effective thriller. It's not often that one movie contains so many different kinds of pleasures." Although I am surprised that Ebert heaped such praise on this film, which seems to have been largely forgotten, I am glad that he did. The Cold War and nuclear war were common themes in the 1980s, whether the direct plot or only alluded to. And some films became huge (WarGames) and others have been forgotten. I suspect this one is largely forgotten because it lacks big name actors (with all due respect to John Lithgow). If it hasn't already been done, someone ought to get a special edition in the works...
disdressed12 i gotta say,i loved this movie.it's very well crafted.the atmosphere of the film is fantastic.i loved the way the film is lit.the characters are well constructed and believable,as well as being sympathetic.the acting is first rate.the music score couldn't have been better.the suspense is built to just the right point and isn't over done.the movie is almost two hours long but it moves comparatively quick for a movie of that length.i'm actually surprised there wasn't a sequel or that there hasn't been a remake.i think a remake(especially set in in present times)has the potential to be an interesting movie if done right with the right director/producer/cast.anyway,for me,The Manhattan Project is a 9/10
illegal_alien51 I don't even wanna talk about it, I just wanna cut it down and leave it for dead. Or with other words, don't watch it unless you wanna make fun of it later! It's a half lame movie for little kids who haven't had a physics class yet and who's parents are willing to explain that something like that is never possible in real life. Here are some examples why (to get you started)The material being so highly concentrated I would imagine when he opens the hatch to get the jar out he'd immediately lose consciousness and die within minutes. No yellow rubber gloves are gonna protect him from the radiation.It looks like he's going for an implosion design with his bomb (like the Nagasaki bomb). That's really "smart". Especially since the gun design (Hiroshima bomb) is far easier to build, but maybe he is aware that the implosion design will have a far greater efficiency so he can incinerate far more people with it, if that's what he wants? (That's where another thought occurs: Why is he complaining about the morality of the lab when he builds a bomb of his own?) Then there is more unprotected working with the material. Even if the material was only slightly radioactive for some reason, his nice fluffy hair would have fallen out halfway through building his device. At the least we would have seen lots of vomiting! To sum it up, tired of writing this as I am, it's just all horrible anyway! I can't understand why a movie with that name couldn't have been a bit more interesting, realistic and possibly talk about the real Manhattan Project instead!