Skip to main content

On Earth, everywhere you go, the temperature is 75 degrees. Everything is the same; all the people are exactly the same. Now what kind of life is that?


Silent Running
(1972)

Douglas Trumbull’s directorial debut (the ill-fated Brainstorm remains his only other feature) is sometimes cited as showing the humanity that the epic he established himself with (in the capacity of photographic effects supervisor), 2001: A Space Odyssey, lacks. In some respects, Silent Running goes to the opposite extreme of 2001’s sterile environment of emotionally remote astronauts, cloaking itself with overt ecological themes and topical-at-the-time back-to-nature thinking. It is also possessed of a profound melancholy, emphasized by Peter Schickele’s score. The film ends with a small victory, or at least a glimmer of hope, but it’s protagonist is denied any sense of triumph due to the lengths he is willing to go to in order to protect his ideals.


Even the film’s production is a result of an end-of-an-era sensibility. Easy Rider had been a massive, unexpected, success for Columbia and Universal had the bright idea of trying to catch that kind of lightning in a bottle for themselves. They let five young filmmakers go to work on (relatively) low budget films; Silent Running, The Hired Hand, The Last Movie, Taking Off and American Graffiti. The entries from Easy Rider alumni crashed and burned, but Graffiti’s enormous box office makes the one-for-five result seem shrewd.

The earnestness of its message – and some of the narrative devices used to relay it – set against the realism of its characterisation, performances and cinematography represents a strange dichotomy within Silent Running, perhaps a consequence of Trumbull’s relative youth (he was only 30 when it came out). 


The titles play over a view of the space greenhouses, which Bruce Dern’s Freeman (yes, Free-man… ) Lowell tends, to the sound of Joan Baez (could you get more ‘60s?). It’s all-but screaming “hippy movie”. The scenario is one of capitalism run riot over any concerns of preservation of the natural world, familiar now but unfamiliar then.  Freeman is Adam in his Eden. He is introduced naked, like the first man, and descends from there. We see him go bare-footed in a monastic habit and preache to his colleagues with messianic fervour (later, he will more resemble Cain). But, despite the identification with archetypes, the characters themselves (although we are mostly in the company of Dern) are presented with an eye towards realism of motivation and behaviour that was becoming the norm in this period. Well in advance of Alien, or even Dark Star, the crew are weary and cynical. They want to go home, even one without any greenery left, and look for distractions from the mundanity of their work. Such that they accept instructions to detonate the greenhouses (the motivation for the order being, surprise, profit) without batting an eyelid and become excited about the operation (it is something different, and it means they will return to Earth).


Freeman is the exception, because he has found his salvation in returning to, and attuning with, nature. His impassioned speeches regarding the fate of the Earth and the blindness that has allowed the loss of this world, might come across as overly preachy and trite if not for the impassioned performance of Bruce Dern. He carries much of the film solo, and if he was commonly a bit part villain prior to Silent Running, he was frequently – as here – expected to be on-the-edge in subsequent roles.

In an interview, Dern commented that fans of the film who came up to him were always unable to say when they saw it, except to say they saw it when they were young. I certainly wasn’t that old when I first encountered Silent Running. Relevant to this is that, like 2001, it has a decidedly adult tone despite being considered acceptable for general viewing (both films are U certificate). There’s some bright red ‘70s blood when Dern’s leg gets messed up, but it’s more surprising to see a film that is emotionally so raw, where attitudes and behaviour and mental breakdown are not softened or made palatable, get off so lightly (I’d argue it’s a PG film – but it’s got cute robots!)


Dern kills the first of his crewmates in an altercation as he attempts to prevent the detonation of his geodesic dome. If that wasn’t premeditated, the fashion in which he dispatches the other two definitely is. As he later says, “I don’t think I’ll ever be able to excuse what I did, but I had to do it”. He’s not a character who provides easy audience identification. Freeman is unstable throughout, first because of the threat to his beloved forest, then due to the guilt his actions have caused (there’s even a touch of satire, as his he is told by Earth, “God bless you, Freeman. You’re a hell of an American”).


Freeman’s extreme state of agitation is not what children viewing will remember most (consciously at least), as there are three robot pals who are fun to be with! Who mirror the three crewmen he killed (Freeman shows affection and concern for the drones, something we never see when he addresses his sub-human forest-slaying colleagues).  If we don’t get on board with Bruce getting brutal with his fellows, neither do we ever identify with them. Trumbull pulls a Kubrick trick in creating the strongest audience bond with the non-human characters. Indeed, it’s Dern’s empathy for their wellbeing that allows us to relate to him, even as he takes extreme measures. The loss of Louie (and finding of his foot by his friends later) and then the injury of Huey are the most affecting scenes in the film.


It seems harsh of Freeman not to let Huey hobble around with Duey on the drifting greenhouse, requiring the drone to meet his fate, but it is consistent with his viewpoint. Only purity and innocence are allowed to exist in this Eden; Freeman is corrupted in mind and Huey in body. Duey, who is not self-aware (has not eaten of the Tree of Knowledge) may remain, in harmony with the environment.

Trumbull devised the story and his original concept had Lowell encountering aliens, with a less foregrounded environmental message. Three different writers ultimately took passes at it; Steven Bocho, Michael Cimino and Deric Washburn. None of them were able to disguise the rather baffling lack of deductive skills shown by Freeman when the plants start dying. He’d been tending the forests on the Valley Forge for eight years but he doesn’t realise that it’s a lack of sunlight would affect their health? It’s a blundering plot development of the kind that puts one in mind of (more simplistic) kids’ movies, and consequently sticks out like a sore thumb. Yet it serves to support the overarching message of preservation.


The effects work is tremendous, and largely holds up with the passing years. The model shots are as beautiful as you’d expect from the 2001 man, while the shooting of the film in the actual Valley Forge aircraft carrier lends a no-frills austerity to the interiors. Trumbull doesn’t feel the need make everything science-proof (and he doesn’t have the budget), so there’s no explanation for the artificial gravity as there is with Kubrick’s film. And he’s not about to let it get in the way of telling the story (Freeman can communicate with Earth from Saturn in real time). The pre-R2D2/Black Hole/Wall-E robots were performed by amputees and like so much of the design adds verisimilitude.


Silent Running undoubtedly has flaws in terms of plotting, but it’s a film designed to provoke an emotional response rather than an analytical one (there goes this review, then). As such my reaction is much the same now as when I first saw it; a sad and beautiful piece of work that resonates long after it has ended. Even Joan Baez mournful tones contribute to that end, distracting as they are and off-putting to many, ‘60s backwash providing an unlikely complement to the used-future on display.

*****



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.