Skip to main content

The crags on your face. Do they hurt?

Logan’s Run
(1976)

(SPOILERS) There’s a lot of nostalgia out there for Logan’s Run. Unfortunately, most of it that isn’t focussing on the pulchritudinous presence of Jenny Agutter is unjustified. Logan’s Run’s problems are two-fold. It isn’t escapist enough to be a true crowd pleaser, and it isn’t brainy enough to rank in the top end of more respected SF fare of that immediate period (Planet of the Apes, Silent Running). Plus, it’s directed by Michael Anderson. Nevertheless, Logan’s Run occupies an interesting place for science-fiction movies, as the last of an era grappling with dystopian themes before Star Wars spawned a new visual language and mythic envelope that made such pontificating seem old-hat and antiquated overnight.

What Logan's Run does have going for it, however, besides Jenny Agutter’s extraordinary costuming or lack thereof, is set up, courtesy of William F Nolan and George Clayton’s 1967 novel of the same name. There, the closed-system, post-apocalyptic remnants of humanity exist under rigidly regulated lifestyles in terms of belief and free thought but entirely liberal ones in terms of sexual freedom. Up until the age of twenty-one, that is, when they must die; this was extended to thirty for the movie, in order to accommodate an established lead actor. One wonders on the changes Bryan Singer’s thankfully aborted remake would have adopted. Perhaps he would have insisted on optimal ages reduced to fourteen.

Much of this scenario offers familiar elements in the form of second-hand Huxley-isms that complement the dystopian angle. The city is AI-controlled and the population are chipped (or its equivalent, via a life clock/palm flower crystal that signifies their age and thus remaining lifespan). There is no such thing as the family unit; the young are farmed in incubators. But the movie bears the scars of attempting a mix and match of ideas. The introductory text informs us that, by the twenty-third century, survivors of “war, overpopulation and pollution” (in that order?) are now living in a domed city, cut off from the outer world. Such vagueness is representative. In turn, the novel presents its own conceptual issues, positing youth run rampant, to the extent that by the 1990s, 82.4 percent are under twenty-one and by 2000, critical mass has been reached.

Where the picture capitalises on its inherent sketchiness is the idea of the reset of humanity. It’s something that has gained a degree of cachet of late with such theories as a “mudflood” occurring in the not so distant past (as in, hundreds of years, rather than millennia), or the adding of hundreds of years to the scoresheet such that, for example, the Dark Ages never existed. And under some accounts, neither did much of the medieval period (Pompeii’s destruction comes in around 1631). Such theories drill to a root paranoia that much of our learnt knowledge and unquestionable, established fact may simply be a script the powers that be – the victors, let us say – dictate to us, to be consumed by rote. Until the next reset (you know, the one that occurs through an unfortunate and unforeseen mass culling; just make sure the preponderance of survivors are the very young, ripe for indoctrination with a new legend).

But the problems with Logan’s Run begin with its failure to come up with a very good lie to sell its young, evidenced by the numbers of Runners and Sandmen needed to keep the place running. Clearly, the stupor-inducing drugs and wanton orgies aren’t enough to prevent a significant level of disenchantment. Perhaps it would have been better for the system to dispense with the obvious deaths of the Carrousel and its option for “renewal”, a hasty and somewhat messy alteration from the novel. There, those on their last day must visit a Sleepshop. Indeed, the moniker Sandman has much less resonance without the accompanying Sleepshop concept. The ceremony of the Carrousel brings with it the regalia of occult ritual, so might it have been more effective to promise a seamless transition to a higher plane, sending willing sheep into a booth or equivalent lightshow, such that anything messy occurring is out of sight, out of mind? As it is, the Carrousel visuals, cocaine disco by way of PT Barnum, with a sprinkling of Jason Voorhes, do little to convince that the fantasy of the renewal pill would really be that sweet.

The realisation of Logan’s world has that makeshift quality of much pre-Lucas SF of the period, a cheap-expensive lustre whereby, no matter how impressively vast the models are, they only ever look like models (partly down to the lighting, partly down to the flatness Anderson tended to inflict on his pictures). This was a relatively expensive movie, coming in only two or three million under Star Wars, but you’d be forgiven for assuming, with its reliance on shopping malls, sewers and other real locations, that it comes from the same opportunistic production ethos that gave us the barrel-scraping budgets of Dawn of the Dead or Blake’s 7. The knock-on of this patchwork effect is that it’s impossible to fully buy into the conceit, which means it’s no wonder that the first thing most fans go to is Agutter’s skimpies (even, in an example worthy of “100 Girls I’d like to Pork” from Danny De Vito’s Throw Momma from the Train, devoting a whole blog piece to its formative effect).

This is the kind of movie where the hero (Michael York’s Logan), despite being established as a “villain” while simultaneously as anodyne as Luke Skywalker, is asking questions from the start (“You know, Logan, you wonder a lot. Too much for a Sandman”). Meanwhile, the actual villain (Richard Jordan, enthusiastically sadistic as Logan’s best pal Francis), as headstrong and into self-gratification as he is, is surely more likely to object to having his life, and freedom, snatched away from him (the novel’s twist of Francis being a good guy and older than he seems is more inventive than anything done with the characters here).

Logan’s Run is also the kind of movie where the very careless AI drops clangers that feed the hero’s doubts (“You mean, nobody’s ever reached renewal?”). And to top it all, is defeated with a “Does not compute!” self-destructive climax, the last resort of an inspiration-free screenplay. Sure, you can argue entropy has entered the system, all systems, as evidenced by Box’s twisted angle on food storage (“It’s my job to freeze you”), but the last twenty minutes of the picture are pretty much a redundant slog. Logan returns to the city without any kind of plan and so gets very lucky when the computer doesn’t like what he has to tell. The interrogation is quite striking visually, with a then cutting-edge hologram effect, but that’s about the extent of it.

Indeed, the picture really begins to crumble after the encounter with Box and the exit of Logan and Jennifer into the outside world (whereby we see that the subtext of many a dystopian SF picture remains intact: humanity is a pox on the planet, and it would be a blessing in disguise to wipe out vast swathes in order to rehabilitate it).

Box (Roscoe Lee Browne) is the kind of half-baked concept design that appeared quite frequently before Lucas ushered in fully-devised and interconnected universes, and is thus the more interesting for its oddity. But the decision to dispense with an actual Sanctuary means the picture has no real lift in its last half; I’m not suggesting a Mars colony (per the book) would have been an answer, but Peter Ustinov in old age makeup doesn’t really cut it, not with his improv Southern accent and TS Eliot whimsy. I love Ustinov, but his performance here is the wrong side of indulgent. It adds nothing to picture’s mythic sense at the point where, for example, Planet of the Apes is unearthing human toys; he has no importance other than being old. And the guy from Topkapi.

I suppose one might argue that Ustinov’s presence allows the final scene to celebrate the elderly (rather than leaving them to rot in care homes), but any potential is squandered; the treatment tends to the mawkishly indulgent. Combined with the rather trite rediscovery of the concepts of husband and wife by Logan and Jessica, the movie rather collapses in upon itself. Of course, it doesn’t help that Anderson fails to inject much in the way of urgency and nothing in the way of style to the proceedings, either of which would have helped mask the screenplay’s inadequacies.

The various incarnations of the eternally in development hell remake promised to go back to the source material for inspiration, but the world of Logan’s Run really needs firm foundations from the first to give it legs. The themes of fabricated religion, indoctrination and pacification are the most interesting ones serviced by the picture – ones one might argue reflect current society in various respects, certainly as far as the putting down of “heretical” voices is concerned – but not enough time is spent establishing and realising them.

Doctor Who borrowed liberally from the concept in the first segment of 1986’s The Trial of a Time Lord, in which a hermetically sealed, post-apocalyptic underground society serviced by an AI/robot institutes regular culls to keep the young population stable. No orgies there, however. Indeed, like many 70s pictures, it’s a wonder Logan’s Run managed to merit a PG rating (even the 12 raises eyebrows, not so much for what is shown as implied). Ultimately, the movie never feels sufficiently thought out to reach past the derivative and become comfortably its own thing. Probably its most serviceable aspect is its name. Yes, that must be why they want to remake it.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Damn prairie dog burrow!

Tremors (1990) (SPOILERS) I suspect the reason the horror comedy – or the sci-fi comedy, come to that – doesn’t tend to be the slam-dunk goldmine many assume it must be, is because it takes a certain sensibility to do it right. Everyone isn’t a Joe Dante or Sam Raimi, or a John Landis, John Carpenter, Edgar Wright, Christopher Landon or even a Peter Jackson or Tim Burton, and the genre is littered with financial failures, some of them very good failures (and a good number of them from the names mentioned). Tremors was one, only proving a hit on video (hence six sequels at last count). It also failed to make Ron Underwood a directing legend.

Here’s Bloody Justice for you.

Laughter in Paradise (1951) (SPOILERS) The beginning of a comedic run for director-producer Mario Zampa that spanned much of the 1950s, invariably aided by writers Michael Pertwee and Jack Davies (the latter went on to pen a spate of Norman Wisdom pictures including The Early Bird , and also comedy rally classic Monte Carlo or Bust! ) As usual with these Pertwee jaunts, Laughter in Paradise boasts a sparky premise – renowned practical joker bequeaths a fortune to four relatives, on condition they complete selected tasks that tickle him – and more than enough resultant situational humour.

I'm offering you a half-share in the universe.

Doctor Who Season 8 – Worst to Best I’m not sure I’d watched Season Eight chronologically before. While I have no hesitation in placing it as the second-best Pertwee season, based on its stories, I’m not sure it pays the same dividends watched as a unit. Simply, there’s too much Master, even as Roger Delgado never gets boring to watch and the stories themselves offer sufficient variety. His presence, turning up like clockwork, is inevitably repetitive. There were no particular revelatory reassessments resulting from this visit, then, except that, taken together – and as The Directing Route extra on the Blu-ray set highlights – it’s often much more visually inventive than what would follow. And that Michael Ferguson should probably have been on permanent attachment throughout this era.

I hate natural causes!

Body Bags (1993) (SPOILERS) I’m not surprised Showtime didn’t pick this up for an anthology series. Perhaps, if John Carpenter had made Coming Home in a Body Bag (the popular Nam movie series referenced in the same year’s True Romance ), we’d have something to talk about. Tho’ probably not, if Carpenter had retained his by this point firmly glued to his side DP Gary Kibbe, ensuring the proceedings are as flat, lifeless and unatmospheric as possible. Carpenter directed two of the segments here, Tobe Hooper the other one. It may sound absurd, given the quality of Hooper’s career, but by this point, even he was calling the shots better than Carpenter.

As in the hokey kids’ show guy?

A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t think Mr Rogers could have been any creepier had Kevin Spacey played him. It isn’t just the baggage Tom Hanks brings, and whether or not he’s the adrenochrome lord to the stars and/or in Guantanamo and/or dead and/or going to make a perfectly dreadful Colonel Tom Parker and an equally awful Geppetto; it’s that his performance is so constipated and mannered an imitation of Mr Rogers’ genuineness that this “biopic” takes on a fundamentally sinister turn. His every scene with a youngster isn’t so much exuding benevolent empathy as suggestive of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ’s Child Catcher let loose in a TV studio (and again, this bodes well for Geppetto). Extend that to A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood ’s conceit, that Mr Rogers’ life is one of a sociopathic shrink milking angst from his victims/patients in order to get some kind of satiating high – a bit like a rejuvenating drug, on that score – and you have a deeply unsettli

What's a movie star need a rocket for anyway?

The Rocketeer (1991) (SPOILERS) The Rocketeer has a fantastic poster. One of the best of the last thirty years (and while that may seem like faint praise, what with poster design being a dying art – I’m looking at you Marvel, or Amazon and the recent The Tomorrow War – it isn’t meant to be). The movie itself, however, tends towards stodge. Unremarkable pictures with a wide/cult fanbase, conditioned by childhood nostalgia, are ten-a-penny – Willow for example – and in this case, there was also a reasonably warm critical reception. But such an embrace can’t alter that Joe Johnston makes an inveterately bland, tepid movie director. His “feel” for period here got him The First Avenger: Captain America gig, a bland, tepid movie tending towards stodge. So at least he’s consistent.

Hey, my friend smells amazing!

Luca (2021) (SPOILERS) Pixar’s first gay movie ? Not according to director Enrico Cassarosa (“ This was really never in our plans. This was really about their friendship in that kind of pre-puberty world ”). Perhaps it should have been, as that might have been an excuse – any excuse is worth a shot at this point – for Luca being so insipid and bereft of spark. You know, the way Soul could at least claim it was about something deep and meaningful as a defence for being entirely lacking as a distinctive and creatively engaging story in its own right.

I’m just glad Will Smith isn’t alive to see this.

The Tomorrow War (2021) (SPOILERS). Not so much tomorrow as yesterday. There’s a strong sense of déjà vu watching The Tomorrow War , so doggedly derivative is it of every time-travel/alien war/apocalyptic sci-fi movie of the past forty years. Not helping it stand out from the pack are doughy lead Chris Pratt, damned to look forever on the beefy side no matter how ripped he is and lacking the chops or gravitas for straight roles, and debut live-action director Chris McKay, who manages to deliver the goods in a serviceably anonymous fashion.

You nicknamed my daughter after the Loch Ness Monster?

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2 (2012) The final finale of the Twilight saga, in which pig-boy Jacob tells Bella that, “No, it's not like that at all!” after she accuses him of being a paedo. But then she comes around to his viewpoint, doubtless displaying the kind of denial many parents did who let their kids spend time with Jimmy Savile or Gary Glitter during the ‘70s. It's lucky little Renesmee will be an adult by the age of seven, right? Right... Jacob even jokes that he should start calling Edward, “Dad”. And all the while they smile and smile.

I want the secret of the cards. That’s all.

The Queen of Spades (1949) (SPOILERS) Marty Scorsese’s a big fan (“ a masterpiece ”), as is John Boorman, but it was Edgar Wright on the Empire podcast with Quentin “One more movie and I’m out, honest” Tarantino who drew my attention to this Thorold Dickinson picture. The Queen of Spades has, however, undergone a renaissance over the last decade or so, hailed as a hitherto unjustly neglected classic of British cinema, one that ploughed a stylistic furrow at odds with the era’s predominant neo-realism. Ian Christie notes its relationship to the ilk of German expressionist work The Cabinet of Dr of Caligari , and it’s very true that the picture exerts a degree of mesmeric immersion rarely found in homegrown fare.