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

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

Isn’t it true, it’s easier to be a holy man on the top of a mountain?

The Razor’s Edge (1984) (SPOILERS) I’d hadn’t so much a hankering as an idle interest in finally getting round to seeing Bill Murray’s passion project. Partly because it seemed like such an odd fit. And partly because passion isn’t something you tend to associate with any Murray movie project, involving as it usually does laidback deadpan. Murray, at nigh-on peak fame – only cemented by the movie he agreed to make to make this movie – embarks on a serious-acting-chops dramatic project, an adaptation of W Somerset Maugham’s story of one man’s journey of spiritual self-discovery. It should at least be interesting, shouldn’t it? A real curio? Alas, not. The Razor’s Edge is desperately turgid.

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

Schnell, you stinkers! Come on, raus!

Private’s Progress (1956) (SPOILERS) Truth be told, there’s good reason sequel I’m Alright Jack reaps the raves – it is, after all, razor sharp and entirely focussed in its satire – but Private’s Progress is no slouch either. In some respects, it makes for an easy bedfellow with such wartime larks as Norman Wisdom’s The Square Peg (one of the slapstick funny man’s better vehicles). But it’s also, typically of the Boulting Brothers’ unsentimental disposition, utterly remorseless in rebuffing any notions of romantic wartime heroism, nobility and fighting the good fight. Everyone in the British Army is entirely cynical, or terrified, or an idiot.

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

It’s not as if she were a… maniac, a raving thing.

Psycho (1960) (SPOILERS) One of cinema’s most feted and most studied texts, and for good reason. Even if the worthier and more literate psycho movie of that year is Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom . One effectively ended a prolific director’s career and the other made its maker more in demand than ever, even if he too would discover he had peaked with his populist fear flick. Pretty much all the criticism and praise of Psycho is entirely valid. It remains a marvellously effective low-budget shocker, one peppered with superb performances and masterful staging. It’s also fairly rudimentary in tone, character and psychology. But those negative elements remain irrelevant to its overall power.

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

You know what I sometimes wish? I sometimes wish I were ordinary like you. Ordinary and dead like all the others.

Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) (SPOILERS) Bryan Forbes’ adaptation of Mark McShane’s 1961’s novel has been much acclaimed. It boasts a distinctive storyline and effective performances from its leads, accompanied by effective black-and-white cinematography from Gerry Turpin and a suitably atmospheric score from John Barry. I’m not sure Forbes makes the most of the material, however, as he underlines Séance on a Wet Afternoon ’s inherently theatrical qualities at the expense of its filmic potential.