BorisP Posted June 19, 2005 Share Posted June 19, 2005 Anyone ever watch Silent Running? It is a 1970's era movie with a guy called Bruce Dern in it. It is a classic, made back when they used to put anti littering messages on the TV. The Earth has used up all it's land for buildings or something. I forget. They have put the remaining biosphere aboard spaceships in large greenhouses. Bruce Dern is perfect for the movie. He is the stereotypical 70's era hippie activist type. He is the odd man out on his spaceship. He gets along better with the plants than with the other people. There are these little robots that help with tending the planets. The robots are cute and kind of humorous. They are all R2D2 kind of robots. Just beeps and buzzes and lights. Then the spaceship gets a message. For some reason or the other, they are getting rid of the greenhouses. They can't afford to pay for them or something. They are all supposed to be destroyed and the guys return home to Earth. The other crewmembers think that is great. They rush out to the greenhouses to plant the charges and prepare the jettison mechanisms for the domes. Bruce Dern is upset though. There is something about what he goes thru that reminds me of 2001. Some huge personal change that is irreversible. I remember I cried when I watched it the first time. Bruce Dern was that good of an actor. The sense of loss he projected at the idea of all the biospheres being destroyed was gut wrenching. He is a nutty kind of guy with curly hair. Not a hero type at all. Except in the 70's, nutty with curly hair was a hero. It was the hippie, fight back against Vietnam, fight back against the man, fight back against injustice kind of regular guy hero image. Kind of ridiculous when you think about heroes today. A hero today has to be able to kill 20 people without blinking. The heroes in the 70's usually ended up going crazy with remorse if they were forced into killing bad guys. I really liked that movie. Maybe people have changed so much that the movie would not have much impact on people now. There really isn't any anti government or pro people or pro environment movement any more. All of those things exist still. They are corporatized and they seem to be more like camps people attend like going to boyscout camp. The old organizations filled with driven people who personally wanted to change things don't seem to be in fashion any longer. Sitting here thinking about it, I cannot recall even one people's movement in our current time that is large or dynamic or honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 19, 2005 Share Posted June 19, 2005 sounds like an interesting movie. so what happened in the end, was he able to do anything about stopping the destruction? As for pro people pro environment organisations, how about greenpeace? From what I hear they are still out their enforcing their points of view, harrassing whalers, chaining to bulldozers...even the french spy agency blew up one of their boats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psheldrake1 Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Excellent movie. That's what got me into botany. I'd love to be in a ship like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BorisP Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 I can't tell ya the end of the movie! Why would you watch it? I also thought living on a ship like that would be excellent. All the toys, the forest, the serenity and peace and quiet. Ya greenpeace is still active. In today's world they are considered the enemy. Green peace has been going downhill ever since the French blew up their ship. That was more than 10 years ago wasn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Man Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 In today's world they are considered the enemy. Green peace has been going downhill ever since the French blew up their ship. That was more than 10 years ago wasn't it? To whom are they considered the enemy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starcrunch Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 The thing that impressed me about this movie was the models in space, everything looked very real and fluid of motion worked, unlike some other movies from the 70's, if I'm right I think George Lucas had the guy who did this movie work on Star Wars, or something like that. I wasn't too crazy about the plot and frankly this movie bored me to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockdude Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 One of my favorites. I sat thorough it three times in a row during it’s original theatrical release. Even at ten I appreciated the realism. A bunch of the footage from it was later used in Battlestar Galactica 78 and 80. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starcrunch Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 One of my favorites. I sat thorough it three times in a row during it’s original theatrical release. I'm sorry to say it but that would be considered torture, but still not as bad as Solaris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paniq Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I remember seeing it on TV as a kid - great movie. I bought the DVD last year, not much extra on it but it at least allows me to watch whenever I want. (must be the hippy in me :D) Another classic is Dark Star with the beachball alien & talking bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dino4 Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 This would be in my top ten fav movies. Great story, "Valley forge" great name for a ship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudnik Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 There was some very interesting Hippy scifi back then, like Dark Star, which showed the first jump to lightspeed, that borrowed by George Lucas, but one movie that really sticks in my head was one called Glen and Randa, which I havent seen since 1977, but I finally found a dvd online http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0067141/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkboy Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 I remember as a kid CRYING when one of the Robots (Huey, dewey or Louie..I can't remember wich one) dies. Oh man I was sooo angry that they tried to destroy the ship too. I love this movie.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekkiedane Posted November 13, 2005 Share Posted November 13, 2005 I remember as a kid CRYING when one of the Robots (Huey' date=' dewey or Louie..I can't remember wich one) dies. Oh man I was sooo angry that they tried to destroy the ship too. I love this movie.... [/quote'] Maybe this old av of mine will help you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmoviefan Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 Hi well someone has to rain on the parade..so it might as well be me! first time i seen this was last year on dvd. I always wanted to see it,and was somewhat dissapointed . I think Bruce Dern was the wrong choice in casting and was unconvincing as a "nice guy type" maybe cause im use to his bad guy roles, he would always play a mean cowboy or other villian types in the seventies shows. just this guys unconvincing personality runied the movie for me. actors i would have cast for his role: 1.Roy Scheider 2.mark hamill 3.Clint eastwood. even though i dont care for all of eastwoods films 4.CHARLES BRONSON! LOL! charlie was sensative and could blow em to pieces at the same time! tough to cast a sensitive and tough guy role all in one.its a mixed bag and hard to play. the only actors to do this right are multiple personality head case actors. ill prove my point. Who would be more realistic to cry over his plants and be sensitive one minute then go after the bad guys with the vengance of the angel of death. Bruce Dern.......sorry nope. MARLON BRANDO and ROD STEIGER!!! heck yea! yes even if they were older. they would have gave that role realism because they were such headcases.they would fully envelop the multiple personality role to the full extent.this is what made them stars! so, let me make them my 1 and 2 choice but for the times and their ages the top list would probaly suffice more realisticly. Now ON A GOOD POINT!. this movie was WAY WAY WAY AHEAD OF ITS TIME! I had to keep checking the Internet movie database for an error in the date. I said no way this was 1970-72 this had to be 1979 80 after alien,star wars, and star trek movies era i was wrong! this was the first of its type that others followed. 2001 a space oddessy was the real pioneer for this type of film But I will say that this movie has its own original style of modernism in scifi film the photography,interplay beetween actors(script)editing ect. hard to put in words folks. remember when alien came out in 79. it had a diffrent style which i think this had a simularity to. this movie is o.k. to watch one time, but too slow for repeat viewing. kind of a chick flick . sensitive and dramatic. lets have some feedback on the actors i chose to cast. and if anybody agrees,who they would have cast.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paniq Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Not seen glen and Randa - will have to see if I can find a version. Well as I saw Bruce Dearn in this before any villian roles (never into Cowboy films as akid!!) he seemed fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drken Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 I can't imagin anyone but Bruce Dearn in this role. Evryone's entitled to there opinion but if Roy Scheider, mark hamill, Clint Eastwood would just be silly. It would have had a compleatly diffrent feeling anyway. The charicter is supposed to be a little unbalanced considering he murders 3 inocent people to save some plants. It would be like not having Mel Gibson as Mad Max if you changed the leading role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warp5 Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 did,nt one of the robots look like r2 d2! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paniq Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 It's the other way round, r2d2 looks like one of the robots! The origin of R2-D2 can be found in the "drones" Huey' date=' Dewey, and Louie from the film Silent Running (1972). Upon meeting Douglas Trumbull, director and special effects chief on Silent Running (1972), George Lucas commented on how much he liked the designs of Douglas Trumbull's two-footed robots in the film (which were operated by bilateral amputees). Four years later, a functionally similar design appeared as R2-D2 in "Star Wars". Universal Studios, the distributor of Silent Running, noted the similarity between the robots (and the similarity of "Star Wars" to the Buck Rogers (1939) serials of the '30s), and promptly sued 20th Century Fox for infringement. The lawsuit was eventually settled when Fox countersued over Battlestar Galactica (1978) (TV), which bore a striking resemblance to "Star Wars".[/quote'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekkiedane Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 ^Which reminds me; isn't there an uncanny resemblance between the Silent Running ships and a certain 'domed gardens' ship in the Battlestar Galactica miniseries? Which is which? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endo Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 always makes me cry... 'nuff said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now