[net.movies] Silent running - good and bad

gordonl@microsoft.UUCP (Gordon Letwin) (04/16/85)

I read with interest the folks who said how much they liked the
film "Silent Running", and Mark Leeper's comments on how poorly
done and inconsistent it was.  I've always agreed with both
viewpoints.

Silent Running is a terrible "ecology" film, since as Mark points
out they simply state, in a short scene, that the purpose of
the flora and fauna is simply aesthetic and that Earth is getting
along just fine without them.  This is, of course, a key fallacy
held by a lot of folks, a fallacy which will probably be fatal
to nearly all of us.  A favorite quote (I forget the author),
"The last animal on earth to become extinct will not be man."

Further inconsistencys... if these are "greenhouse" domes what are
they doing out by Saturn where the solar flux is so low?  If the
domes can be made self sufficient (as they were - it seemed trivial)
then why bother to tie up the freighters?  Why not just let the
domes orbit freely?  No need to blow them up, they could remain.
I think the analogy here was to an ocean vessel - you must be tied
to the freighter to survive.  Regardless of the support needs of the
domes, they don't need the engines and instrumentation of a space
vessel attached to them all the time.

In spite of the film being (in some ways) stupid, inconsistent, and
propagating the mistake that supports most of the ecological damage
done on earth, I still found it to be an excellent movie.  I guess
that there's no accounting for some people's tastes...

I especially liked the scene early on where the camera pans pack
from Dern (while he's at the window) to show the ships suspended
in space...

	gordon letwin
	microsoft

luner@uwai.UUCP (04/19/85)

> I read with interest the folks who said how much they liked the
> film "Silent Running", and Mark Leeper's comments on how poorly
> 
> 	--  gordon letwin

I liked the music. I believe it was sung by Joan Baez, but it the
title song available on any album?

					/DLL

jackh@zehntel.UUCP (jack hagerty) (04/19/85)

> 
> Silent Running is a terrible "ecology" film, since as Mark points
> out they simply state, in a short scene, that the purpose of
> the flora and fauna is simply aesthetic and that Earth is getting
> along just fine without them.  
> 
> Further inconsistencys... if these are "greenhouse" domes what are
> they doing out by Saturn where the solar flux is so low?  If the
> domes can be made self sufficient (as they were - it seemed trivial)
> then why bother to tie up the freighters?  Why not just let the
> domes orbit freely?  No need to blow them up, they could remain.
> 
> 	gordon letwin


I agree with these points, but still Silent Running is one of my favorite
SF movies. I think it is a classic example of a movie rising above its
plot through the use of high production values. Premise aside, the writing,
direction, acting, special effects, art direction and music are all first 
rate. (Speaking of that last point, the music is by Peter Shickelee (sp?)
better known as the creator of P.D.Q. Bach)

I personally think the reason the movie was set in Saturn orbit is that
Doug Trumbull wanted to strech himself. In the book "The Making of 2001"
(for which Doug lead the effects team) it was stated that the reason the
destination of the Discovery was changed from Saturn (as in the book) to
Jupiter was that to make a convincing Saturn you had to first make a
convincing Jupiter and then figure out a way to put rings around it. For
Silent Running (which he directed as well as supervising the special effects)
I think Doug wanted to show that he had found a way.

As I said, I agree with you that the premise is silly. If they really wanted
to save the foliage somewhere out of the way, all they had to do is place
the domes in the Earth's orbit. I don't mean in orbit around the Earth,
I mean in orbit around the Sun at the Earth's distance, just offset some.
After all, you have 600M miles to play with.

-- 
                    Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Systems
                          ...!ihnp4!zehntel!jackh

root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (04/22/85)

> I liked the music. I believe it was sung by Joan Baez, but it the
> title song available on any album?

Yes on Varase Sarabande records.  Look in issues of Starlog or better
yet your local record store (if you have a good one nearby) in the
films scores section.  The pressing is not the greatest in the world,
but it does have just about everything presented in the film.
-- 


UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root	- Lord Frith
ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO

Or as Jabba the Hut would say, "Brrrruuuuuurrrrrrrpppppp!"

jpexg@mit-hermes.ARPA (John Purbrick) (04/22/85)

> I read with interest the folks who said how much they liked the
> film "Silent Running", and Mark Leeper's comments on how poorly
> done and inconsistent it was.  I've always agreed with both
> viewpoints. 	gordon letwin

I talked this film up to my SO on the basis of having seen it long ago when
I was a student and ecology was in fashion. So then we rented it on tape from
the video store--and she couldn't stand it. It did indeed have various
inconsistencies, plus it's maudlin and depressing. But I still found some
parts to like. Freeeman Lowell has exactly the right half-mad style, his
late companions are very realistic, and the Drones are the best movie
robots ever, especially compared with that junk from LucasFilm.

	John Purbrick ...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!mit-hermes!jpexg