![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Silent Running
Mon, Apr. 23rd, 2012 09:50 pmI went to see Silent Running tonight at the Cinerama, my first film in the theater's First Annual Science Fiction Film Festival. And I sat there, at the end of this film, with all its flaws, with tears streaming down my face. I'm such a geek.
This movie came out when I was 10 and my brother was 8. I know the movie left an enormous impression on him; it's still one of his favorites to this day. I love it, too--weak script and all--for its pioneering special effects and its soundtrack (composed by Peter Schickele--I had no idea until tonight!), for the brilliant conception and creation of the drones, and for Bruce Dern's slightly wild-eyed and yet completely convincing performance. The fact of the matter is that any tendencies or interest I have in conservation can be directly traced to this film's influence.
It was interesting to be sitting in the theater, watching the film with everything that's going on environmentally right now, interesting to hear the Lowell character talk about how it's 75 degrees everywhere on Earth. What kind of conditions would be required to create such a situation? Of course, it's scientifically whooey, as is the idea that the planet could survive without its forests, but it's an interesting thought experiment anyway. As an audience member behind me observed, the forest is kind of random. The last surviving forest is supposed to be Bahia Honda Subtropical according to the Wikipedia article, but the plantings seem . . . random is the only word I can think of, and the animal life seems to have been chosen for what would evoke viewer sympathy rather than for what would be appropriate for such terrain and climate. And watching climate change threaten polar bears and other megafauna, change migration patterns, and influence seasonal weather patterns, I find myself thinking about what may or may not come next. I also wonder what a remake of the film today would be like. It would certainly be based in more science than this one, and might make a more convincing argument.
Anyway, I digress. My point is, as I said above, for all its weaknesses and heavy-handedness (see the scene where Lowell studies the Conversationist's Pledge and the camera lingers on the language), it's still an effective movie, and I'm still enormously fond of it. So glad I chose to see it. I'm scheduled to see more films on the festival program next weekend. Should be fun!
This movie came out when I was 10 and my brother was 8. I know the movie left an enormous impression on him; it's still one of his favorites to this day. I love it, too--weak script and all--for its pioneering special effects and its soundtrack (composed by Peter Schickele--I had no idea until tonight!), for the brilliant conception and creation of the drones, and for Bruce Dern's slightly wild-eyed and yet completely convincing performance. The fact of the matter is that any tendencies or interest I have in conservation can be directly traced to this film's influence.
It was interesting to be sitting in the theater, watching the film with everything that's going on environmentally right now, interesting to hear the Lowell character talk about how it's 75 degrees everywhere on Earth. What kind of conditions would be required to create such a situation? Of course, it's scientifically whooey, as is the idea that the planet could survive without its forests, but it's an interesting thought experiment anyway. As an audience member behind me observed, the forest is kind of random. The last surviving forest is supposed to be Bahia Honda Subtropical according to the Wikipedia article, but the plantings seem . . . random is the only word I can think of, and the animal life seems to have been chosen for what would evoke viewer sympathy rather than for what would be appropriate for such terrain and climate. And watching climate change threaten polar bears and other megafauna, change migration patterns, and influence seasonal weather patterns, I find myself thinking about what may or may not come next. I also wonder what a remake of the film today would be like. It would certainly be based in more science than this one, and might make a more convincing argument.
Anyway, I digress. My point is, as I said above, for all its weaknesses and heavy-handedness (see the scene where Lowell studies the Conversationist's Pledge and the camera lingers on the language), it's still an effective movie, and I'm still enormously fond of it. So glad I chose to see it. I'm scheduled to see more films on the festival program next weekend. Should be fun!