Monday, March 30, 2009

1960: THE SILENT STAR

What’s it about?

A newly discovered alien artifact linked to the Tunguska meteorite explosion of 1908 appears to be a recording in an unknown language from an exploded spaceship. Although enough of the recording is deciphered to determine that the spaceship originated in Venus, most of the message remains a mystery -- and Venus itself stays strangely silent despite repeated attempts at contacting the inhabitants by radio. A multinational expedition is quickly mounted, incorporating crew members from all the great countries of the Earth: the Soviet Union, East Germany, the United States, Japan, China, India, Poland, and of course the nation of Africa.

While en route to Venus, the scientists continue trying to decipher the remainder of the alien message while dodging the usual perils of space travel (i.e., incredibly boring meteor storms). It’s only once the rocket has moved beyond radio range with Earth that they realize the message was not intended for humans at all -- instead, it’s a report on the feasibility of an invasion of Earth. Several decades have passed since the recording was made, so the crew decides to press on with their mission and make peace with Venus if a threat still exists. Attempts to contact the planet still yield no results and even in orbit the thick cloud cover makes it impossible to see the surface, so the crew decides to land and contact the inhabitants of Venus in person.




Is it any good?

THE SILENT STAR is very much like a socialist version of DESTINATION MOON (1950) or FLIGHT TO MARS (1951) -- much of the movie is taken up by the mounting of the interplanetary expedition and the resulting trip through space. The intervening ten years have made a bit of a difference, however. Although the rocket is still an impractically cavernous movie rocket, the details of the space voyage ring a little truer. The astronauts wear uniforms and spacesuits not too different from those that real cosmonauts wore, they eat liquified food, they rely largely on computers for navigation and control, and so on. On the other hand, those extra ten years also serve to emphasize just how creaky some of the plot contrivances of the space flight are. There is the usual meteor storm and the usual space walk to repair the damage, but THE SILENT STAR really seems to just be going through the paces as none of it is especially exciting or suspenseful or even important to the plot.

The sets, costumes, props, and sci-fi designs are all very nifty. Venus especially has a compellingly weird look, like a landscape illustration out of a Dr Seuss book. And the interior of the rocket itself probably has more in common with later spaceships like STAR TREK’s Enterprise than with the clunky submarine-inspired rockets of earlier sci-fi flicks. The music used over the opening credits was also very promising and raised my hopes for some weird sound design. It reminded me a little bit of the otherworldly score for PLANET OF THE APES, but unfortunately I can’t really say I noticed any music at all after the movie started. The action sequences also leave a lot to be desired. As soon as something ostensibly exciting starts happening, the special effects sputter out -- this is most obvious during the meteor storm when the cosmonauts are thrown about in high speed, so the sequence feels just a few bars of “Yakety Sax” away from a Benny Hill chase scene.




Another downfall of THE SILENT STAR is the dialogue. The movie starts with a long section of expository narration -- and, in fact, the exposition and explanation continues via news reports and character monologues for almost the first half hour. The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima by the U.S. is also referenced repeatedly and figures in the back stories of two characters. (One is an American scientist who regrets he helped build the bomb. The other is a Japanese woman whose mother was killed in the attack on Hiroshima.) It does seem a little unsporting for the movie to pay lip service to multinational cooperation, but then also to continuously remind viewers that the U.S. is full of decadent war mongers. But then it’s a Soviet bloc production, so I’d probably be more disappointed if it didn’t have at least some party-approved propaganda. As far as the whole movie goes, I guess my final judgment is that there are a lot of “things to look at” in THE SILENT STAR (e.g., a super-computer, a chess-playing robot, some neat Venutian technology, a cool rocket), but not a whole lot else that is too interesting. The characters, the themes, the dialogue, and the action are all pretty simplistic. I’m not sorry I saw it, but it’s really more historically and culturally curious than enjoyable.

There is also an English-dubbed version of this movie which was released internationally in the sixties that goes by the name THE FIRST SPACESHIP ON VENUS. I watched about half an hour of that version as well, and though it’s essentially the same story, a lot of footage was cut from the beginning of the film. (Some characters also got new western-friendly nationalities -- for instance, the Polish robotics expert is French instead.) This not only removes most of the criticism of America, but also tightens up the pacing in that section. In the German-language version, much of the first half hour is facile politicking, and it’s really no loss to see it excised. But the English-language version also cuts much of the cosmonaut back stories as well. While most of that is no great loss either, there are some neat scenes that get lost (like one where two of the crew members take time to sit down in a field and appreciate the solidity of the Earth before blast off), as well as some really great mountain scenery that any cough drop commercial would kill for.




What else happened this year?

-- Roger Corman produced and directed the comedy/horror/sci-fi movie THE LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS (emphasis on comedy) about a man-eating, talking potted plant named Audrey Jr. Though filmed in only two days on a minuscule budget, it eventually inspired a stage musical which had its own movie adaptation starring Rick Moranis and Steve Martin in 1986.
-- Taking place in an alternate timeline where Britain somehow leads the space race, THE MAN IN THE MOON follows the adventures of a normal guy who becomes the number one candidate for a trip to the moon thanks to his amazing ability to shrug off stress. Hijinks ensue, many of them involving astronaut training equipment of dubious utility.
-- The French sort-of-horror, sort-of-sci-fi flick EYES WITHOUT A FACE follows a monomaniacal doctor as he attempts to graft a new face on his disfigured daughter’s skull with the usual disastrous consequences.
-- Apparently alien telepathic children coexist uneasily with the rest of the inhabitants of a small English town in VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED. The movie is adapted from a John Wyndham novel called THE MIDWICH CUCKOOS.
-- Fritz Lang returned to one of his most diabolical characters in THE 1,000 EYES OF DR MABUSE. The ensuing Mabuse revival ran through the early sixties and made the telepathic hypnotist a villain on par with classic monsters like Dracula and Frankenstein. (But only in parts of Europe.)

If you only watch one sci-fi movie from 1960...

This is a tough one. I’d say that every movie in the list above (including THE SILENT STAR) is pretty good in its own way, but I don’t think that any of them are necessarily great. My advice would be to watch whichever one sounds most interesting to you, but if you just want an enjoyable sci-fi movie then I’d say go with either VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED or THE LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS.

1 comment:

  1. When I got this movie from Netflix, it came with a note attached to the sleeve from a previous viewer which read: "What a disappointment! I don't speak Polish, so I couldn't follow the movie. Don't you have an English version?"

    I thought this was hilarious for several reasons (for instance, the movie is actually in German) so I left the note attached for the next person to enjoy. But then a few days later, I got an email from Netflix telling me they got my note and that I should direct my comments to customer service rather than processing facility.

    ReplyDelete