imbluzclooby In the not so distant future Planet Earth has been virtually denuded due to industrialization, technology and over-population. A task force of several Astronauts and three robots are sent out into space to man several giant cargo ships containing Greenhouses stored in biospheres. Lowell Freeman (Bruce Dern), is among the four crewman, and apparently, the oddball who wants to preserve these habitats in the hopes of returning them to Earth to restore the now deforested and sterile planet. I recall seeing this film many years ago as a child. Of course the message was over my head, but the humanity and touching moments of the waddling robots. Interestingly, the movie serves much better as an allegory on the human condition rather than a campaign for Environmentalist concerns. Silent Running fails mainly from its primary theme in that there are questions that aren't reasonably addressed: why was it necessary to launch these nature pods into space anyway? why couldn't the US government form a biosphere on Earth? wouldn't it be more convenient and cost-efficient? Was this a precarious excuse to provide a premise for a Science Fiction film? Unfortunately, Silent Running falls flat on these crucial questions.Instead, the plot becomes a tour de force where our supposed hero goes berserk after receiving the disappointing news of getting orders to destroy the pods. Sure, we understand this guy is an Eco-fascist who has a soft spot for nature, but the guy goes homicidal. Thus, ruining any empathy. His actions are problematic and so his his rationale for carrying them out. This is the only Sci-Fi movie I know of where the protagonist is a raving lunatic and the villains are regular guys who just want to finish their job and return home. But we must consider this movie as a relic of its time. The Hippie era in the early 70's had reached its status quo and concerns such as these were in their seminal stages. Forty Five years later, with all of the lobbying for Natural wildlife preserves and Eco-Friendly progress, this movie seems pretty inconsequential for its own good. Scientists have learned that natural fauna and flora are essential to man's existence and our global concerns are much different now.I thought the acting of Bruce Dern was over the top. He is too weird and frantic even in casual conversations among his few interactions with the fellow crew members. The implausible drama is what turned me off the most with Silent Running. The special effects are pretty good for 1971 although the outer view of the ships look very fake by today's cinema technology.But the overall message of humanity is what strikes a chord with me the most. The Environmental message is merely incidental. The main character's pathos from Nature loving zealot to maniacal killer to remorseful loner is what's most tragic. When we are driven by our ideals to the point of alienation, isolation and estrangement, we realize that it's human contact that mattered most to us. Lowell's personal journey was a lesson in and of itself. The final scene where the only remaining survivor (Dewey) the drone) tending his forest is both beautiful and touching.

chris-3415 this review contains spoilers! its 1972 and the summer of love has been followed by the winter of the machine. what can a poor boy do? realising he is powerless in the face of the new world order, he drops out (hard 1970s style, not soft 1960s style) kills the local supporters of the status quo, retreats to his bedroom in the shadow of saturn (astrological reference), neglects the washing up and lets the pot plants wither away. he's been on the job looking after the terrarium for 8 years but he still hasn't learned that plants need sunlight to photosynthesise, duh. he talks to machines that can't talk back and imagines a response. he goes crazy. in the end he lets his dreams go, and commits suicide, in the process taking out the people who have tried to rescue him. his problem is that he's locked into a machine system which has no avenue of escape. he tries to save the plants with artificial life, ends up using the on-board Abomb to do himself in. his whole existence is predicated on the machines and he just can't deal with it. he's a hippy ideologue. read in this way its an OK story, but really, considering kubrick's 2001 was made some years before it, silent running is pretty lame. it has much more in common with the moralistic scifi movies of the 1950s and 60s, despite its groovy environmental themes (also pretty old hat by this time; rachel Carson's silent spring was published in 1962). and joan baez's sentimental quavering on the soundtrack is frankly unbearable.

tcbdeo Silent Running is based on the very real possibility that there will be no more 'right' to life in the United States because its citizens would not be allowed to grow food. Forty years after the film's release, the the current advance of 'right to farm' laws champions corporate domination over all food sources.Little did the creators of Silent Running know that the majority of Americans forty years later would, indeed, reject real food, favoring processed food instead, just as in their film.Silent Running even covers why Americans would find the situation perfectly acceptable: because a thoroughly 'democratized' nation would ideally be able to provide labor opportunities to the entirety of its marginalized proletariat.The film's intelligence is subtle and carried through by an effort of pure-heartedness, hindered only by very poor pacing. If one's patience can last until the development of the lovable Drone's personalities, finishing the film won't be any problem.

michaelt-culligan Was it the early Seventies when the world was first made aware of the potentially devastating environmental disaster that civilisation was spiralling towards? Certainly, when you place this 1972 movie alongside the lyrics of Joni Mitchell's 'Big Yellow Taxi,' there is a case to be made for it being the time when "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot." The movie has a lot going for it. To begin with, there's a performance from Bruce Dern that is worthy of comparison with Gene Hackman's Oscar-winning performance that year in a way the other nominees simply were not. He provides a passionate and intelligent performance in which he is hardly ever off-screen and makes the viewer share his anger at the treatment of his mission. Then, too, there is the rarity of a science-fiction film which does not attempt to overwhelm the viewer with unnecessary special effects – one in which the drama is driven by the character and the scarily believable story. If you are looking for a film about environmental concern that works on every level, then forget about Al Gore's worthy but dull contribution and watch this beautifully-realised film. Then watch it again... and again. It really is that good!