Dallas (1978) Novelization

Based on the original television mini-series written by David Jacobs, Arthur Bernard Lewis, Camille Marchetta and Virginia Aldridge. It starred Larry Hagman, Ken Kercheval, Patrick Duffy, Linda Gray, Barbara Bel Geddes, Howard Keel, Victoria Principal, Charlene Tilton and Jim Davis.

***

Dallas was an American television series that debuted in 1978 as a five-episode mini-series. It detailed the lives and loves of the Ewing family, and did so well that it was continued as a series. It ultimately ran for fourteen seasons, ending in 1990. Dallas was the prototypical Prime-Time soap opera, and it opened the door to a variety of similar shows in the 1980s such as Dynasty, Knots Landing, and Falcon Crest. Dallas was arguably the best of these and was enormously popular in the early 1980's. If you are of a certain age, the question "Who Shot J.R.?" should resonate. Along the way, it even courted controversy by bringing back a character who had been killed off by declaring that the season that occurred while they were off the show was a dream by one of the characters. I watched the show in the 1979-1983 time-frame and remember it fondly.

What is it one wants from a novelization? They were never meant to be anything other than advertising for whatever movie or TV Show they were based on. In all honesty, most are not good reads. So why do people read them? For me, it was always looking for the experience of the film, but with more. More story, more characterization, more dialog--something that gives more insight into the source material. Some novelizations have scenes that were ultimately omitted from the released version; some are based on earlier versions of the screenplay, so they can differ, sometimes substantially. And some are expanded by the author into something altogether different. This last category is pretty rare. You need a few things to line up for something like that to work: the author has to have the leeway to add new material, they have to be invested enough to add new material, and they have to have the talent to add it.

The novelization for Dallas falls into the last category. The author has systematically revised the world depicted in the screenplays into something earthier, perverse, and twisted.  This is not a world where good and bad are clearly defined—everyone exhibits dark tendencies. It's a world where everyone walks around looking to get it on, and where murder is mentioned casually.  I think it is the author's experience writing erotica that powers this transformation, although this is not to say that the novelization is just about sex.  There are other factors at work as well that complete the reimagining.

Lee Raintree is a pseudonym for Con Sellers, an author who published more than 230 books using more than 60 pseudonyms1. He specialized in adventure, historical romances, and erotica. He was hired by Dell Books to write a novelization of the original five-part mini-series, which he wrote in six weeks. The book was successful, ultimately selling over 300,000 copies by 1979.  He passed away in 19922.

This is very much a product of the 1970s. The men are REAL men, the women are all big-breasted, the language is rough. And my word, there is a lot of sex. Throw in some of the casual staples of the decade as well--misogyny and racism--and you have a rollicking potboiler.

It technically tells the same story as the mini-series, but the author has expanded the parameters dramatically. The book covers all five parts of the mini-series, so you would expect it to be a little longer than typical, but the first 100 pages take place before the mini-series even starts. These first 100 pages are the complete history of the Ewing family--how Jock and Miss Ellie got together and how the family rose to power. This backstory helps set up some plot points covered in the mini-series, but also establishes the world we are going to read about, which is ultimately quite different from the television version. 

You will recognize most of the characters, but there are some divergences as well, and it is in these divergences that the book is most surprising. There are numerous plot points in the book that simply do not exist in the television counterpart. Some of these plot points are character expansions, but some change the overall story being told. I am reluctant to detail them as I don't want to spoil it for anyone who wants to read this, but the world of Dallas depicted in this book is darker, more savage, and ultimately realistic than what could acceptably be shown on television in the late 1970s in America. Murder, rape, extensive profanity, and pretty explicit love scenes abound.

True, the men are misogynistic, but the author is not. He knew who his target audience was--women--and the most dramatic changes made to the story involve the women. They are, with one exception, described as intelligent, strong-willed, and most importantly as women who enjoy sex and are not afraid to admit it. Miss Ellie is shown as a primary partner to Jock in the early years, helping shape how the business grew while she bore him three children. When criminals break into the Ewing house near the end of the story, the television version has the women cowering until the menfolk arrive just in time. The book version has Miss Ellie getting her daddy's Colt .45s and taking care of the criminals herself. Which is entirely fitting given the backstory established in the book, and which is completely absent in the television version.

I am not saying this is high art but it is consistently readable, entertaining and tells the source story much better than the TV show itself.  You can't can't ask for more than that. 

1. https://lib.usm.edu/spcol/exhibitions/item_of_the_month/iotm_sep_2013
2. https://www.lmtribune.com/obituaries/author-con-sellers-dies-at-69-6383c41c

Last Tango In Paris (1972) Novelization

Last Tango in Paris (Italian: Ultimo tango a Parigi; French: Le Dernier Tango à Paris) is a 1972 erotic drama film directed by Bernardo Bertolucci. The film stars Marlon Brando, Maria Schneider and Jean-Pierre Léaud, and portrays a recently widowed American who begins an anonymous sexual relationship with a young Parisian woman.

The film premiered at the New York Film Festival on October 14, 1972, and grossed $36 million in its U.S. theatrical release, making it the seventh highest-grossing film of 1973. The film's raw portrayal of sexual violence and emotional turmoil led to international controversy and drew various levels of government censorship in different jurisdictions. Upon release in the United States, the MPAA gave the film an X rating. United Artists Classics released an R-rated cut in 1981. In 1997, after the film became part of the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer library, the film was reclassified as NC-17.

***

As a novelization it hews pretty closely to the script, and offers some backstory not found in the film.  It does not adequately convey the power of the film, but it is interesting nonetheless.

Performance (1970) Novelization

Written by William Hughes

1970 Award Books paperback edition.

Based on the 1970 film PERFORMANCE, written by Doanld Cammell and directed by Donald Cammell and Nicholas Roeg. It starred James Fox, Mick Jagger and Anita Pallenberg.

PERFORMANCE was made at a time when the rules of what you could do in a film were loosening. It was originally rated X in the US, before that rating became synonymous with pornography.  There is nothing explicit in the film and it has subsequently been re-rated as R. It tells the story of a gangster on the run and a rock star who takes him in.  The film's story is all Donald Cammell, while Nicolas Roeg handled the cinematography and editing, which like Roeg's WALKABOUT (1971) and DON'T LOOK NOW (1973) is at times non-linear and impressionistic, especially in the second half.  The film remains powerful precisely because it is ultimately ambiguous as to what really happens.

The novelization tells the story much straighter than the film does, in part because the film changed during the filming of it.  The plot is relayed in a linear fashion which robs the story of much of if not all of the mystique that the film has.  It is not uninteresting, however, especially if you are very familiar with the film.  The sex and violence is still there, which perhaps hit harder due to it not being stylized.  The book explains much of what goes on clearly, and the ending is very different in execution than the film, and perhaps in story.  But, as noted above, the plot of the second half of the film seemed to be re-shaped during the filming.

Well worth reading if you are a fan of the film.

Excerpt:

Number twenty-two Melbury Terrace was different from the other houses in the drab street, looked as if it belonged in another world. It was larger than the others and set back from the road, a small patch of waste round the front, obviously once a garden, but beyond recall. It looked as if it continued round the back of the house.

It was the colour that really set number twenty-two apart. Though the house looked in a poor state of repair, it had been painted in bright clashing colours---even some of the windows were painted over in deep rich patterns. On the, side of the cracked steps that led up to the front door stood a series of stone idols, eastern, Chas guessed, erotica from a monumental mason.

He spoke quietly. "Jesus wept. You've seen the lot now What a bloody Kazi."

He walked across the road and mounted the steps to the front door. The letter-box was open wide, crammed with mail. Automatically, Chas extracted some of it: air-mailed copies of the Village Voice, circulars, bills, mainly bills. He noticed that there were no English newspapers either in the slot or on the mat. He felt relieved, all the more chance of safe refuge until he could get hold of Farrell and get some of his "rainy day" money.

Chas tried to door, but it was locked. He stepped back down the steps and looked up to the first floor windows. Nothing. Most of the curtains were drawn, proclaiming that the house was still asleep. Chas put his ear to the letter-box, there was no sound from within.

Making sure that his shades were on straight and his camel's hair coat was fastened to avoid scrutiny, he leant on the bell, and was happy to hear it peel loud and long somewhere in the depths of the building.

It was seven thirty when Charles Devlin rang the bell of Turner's house, and life was never going to be the same again.

Night Games (1980) Novelization

Based on the 1979 film written by Anton Diether and Clarke Reynolds and directed by Roger Vadim. It starred Cindy Pickett, Barry Primus and Joanna Cassidy.

I had never heard of this film before coming across the novelization, and after tracking it down and watching it, I see why. It is not a good movie. I am not even sure that the screenplay had the makings of a good movie.  Whatever drew everyone to this project, it does not come across in the final product.  Vadim complained that the producers recut the movie after he finished it, which may account for the final result. Maybe. Parts of it are certainly better than others, but aside for a couple of things, the movie is utterly forgettable.  The acting by all involved is poor, although I am not sure who could have made the dialogue believable. 

The plot: A woman who suffers from PTSD due to a rape cannot be intimate with her husband. While he is away, she starts to fantasize about having sex with a mysterious masked stranger late at night. Or are they fantasies? When someone breaks in and tries to rape her again, the mysterious stranger turns out to be the drunken author who was also staying at her house. (It's a big house.) The author sends the would-be rapist packing. The entire ordeal—late-night sex and attempted rape—cured her of her PTSD.

The only interesting things about the film are that it stars Cindy Pickett, the creepy actor who played the killer in 10 TO MIDNIGHT (1983) plays a creepy rapist, and the music score.

Cindy Pickett is perhaps best known for playing Ferris Bueller's mother in FERRIS BUELLER'S DAY OFF (1986).  She was on St. Elsewhere and did a fair amount of television work.  Nothing else in her filmography was as overtly sexual as this role.  Gene Davis was pretty effective as the nude killer in 10 TO MIDNIGHT.  He is less effective here, but is still creepy.

Somehow they got the great John Barry to write the music. What works in the film works because of his music. It almost makes it worthwhile watching. Almost. The film's soundtrack includes the following titles: Descent into Decadence, The Lesbian Tango, The Wet Spot, Phantom of the Orgasm. Seriously, the music is good, which makes one or two of the sequences work almost decently.

The novelization is much expanded over the film. It throws a lot more melodrama and sex into the proceedings that are way more effective than anything in the movie. It's not good exactly, but it's certainly much better than the movie. So, win?

Excerpt (best read with the lush music of John Barry in the background):

Dreamily, half-knowing what she did, she opened unfocused eyes and stared into the mirror. Then a slow smile, implicit with the luxury of triumph, spread over her face. For he was there as she had known he would be. The demonic feathered features gazed over her shoulder, and the mouth that she could barely see in the shadowed light, smiled into the mirror. Her own smile deepened in return. It was the smile of a woman who knows she can call her mate to her at her will, for he desires her and her alone.

Her blood was raging in her veins, demanding his touch, but when it came it was as soft as a whisper---just the lightest finger placed against her shoulder and run gently down to her wrist. Light as it was she felt as if he had seared her.

With his every caress a fork of fire seemed to shoot through her. He had come close to her now, his breast leaning gently against her back. Like her, he was naked except for a long dark cloak clasped about his neck. She felt his hands come round her waist, sliding downwards over her satiny skin until they touched the tops of her thighs and rested there. A tremor ran through her and she moaned in sweet agony.

She threw her head back against his shoulder while her hands grasped his. At first he tried to draw them away but she would not be resisted and pulled his hands inwards to the depths of her, leaning against him as if she would collapse.

With a convulsive movement she released his hands and turned to face him. Her eyes tried to pierce the mask, but only his mouth was visible, and that was in shadow. No matter, she knew Jason's mouth. It was on hers now, all else blotted out as she felt herself drawn towards him in an embrace that enveloped her under the cloak. She was vanishing into darkness as the cloak was wrapped around her, swallowing her up. But this was how she wanted to be swallowed up---in this whirlpool of feeling that left no room for any sensation but sensuous joy and rapture.

His body was hard and smooth against hers. His hand in the small of her back was pressing her imperiously towards him so that she could feel his desire as powerful as her own. And then the hand was gone, an arm tightened under her shoulders and she felt herself held high in his arms. She had one last look at his face blazing above her with the pride of conquest. The sight was too much for her. She flung an arm round his neck and buried her fade against his breast as he carried her out of the studio and started up the stairs. . .

Die Another Day

DIE ANOTHER DAY 

Directed by Lee Tamahori  Written by Neal Purvis & Robert Wade.
Starring Pierce Brosnan, Halle Berry, Rosamund Pike, Judi Dench
2002, 133 minutes, Color, Rated PG-13, Panavision 2.35:1

Commentary:

I'm not saying I have great taste, but I know what I like.  Generally, when it comes to the Eon Bond films, there are only four that I don't like.  Not that these are the worst Bond films, mind you, just the ones I don't particularly cotton to.  The first Bond films that I saw when I was young were SPY WHO LOVED ME, MOONRAKER and THUNDERBALL, and for better or worse, these remain my favorites.  I think that the films that introduce you to the character become your favorites, so take the following with a grain of salt.  You know, nostalgia.  But on to the ones I don't like.

I find YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE tiresome--Connery looks bored some of the time, and I never once buy him when he is disguised as a Japanese man.  From a technical perspective, you do have those great Ken Adam sets, and some of the outer-space work is quite nice, but the film also has some of the worst blue-screen work I have ever seen in a major film, which lends a certain cheapness to the affair. (Granted, this is not uncommon for films of this era.) The action scenes are generally well handled, but I've always found the final battle curiously lacking in energy — a criticism I have also seen leveled at all three of the films I consider my favorites.  This is not lost on me.

LIVE AN LET DIE is likewise problematic for me.  Moore was not at all comfortable, and the filmmaking seems reactionary to its time and thus more dated than most other films.  The move back to non-anamorphic also strikes a discordant note as well.  I also am not fond of the Bond films that a) take place in the United States and b) were directed by Guy Hamilton.  Still, Jane Seymour is sumptuous in this, and I have found that if the mood is right, I can enjoy the film.  

VIEW TO A KILL is one Moore Bond too many.  He was far too old at this point and the film has the look of a TV movie and perhaps the most annoying Bond woman ever (Tanya Roberts, not Grace Slick).  I am resigned to never really liking this movie.

Which brings us to DIE ANOTHER DAY.

From a technical standpoint, DIE ANOTHER DAY is certainly not embarrassing.  It was an expensive movie, and the money is all there on the screen.  It is full of shiny objects and brightly lit beach bodies, has a couple of rousing action sequences, and a pretty good cast. And yet, it is the nadir of the Bond series for me.  

The Bond films have always been formulaic — this was especially true of the Brosnan films and is especially true of DIE.  Most of the time, you can go along with it--you get what you pay for after all--but this film tilts too far into the outlandish too many times.  It makes this feel like a superhero movie.  

Bond is captured at the conclusion of the long pre-credit sequence, which begins a long period of torture and imprisonment.  Do we doubt that Brosnan will eventually escape or be released?  Never for a second.  He HAS to be in the rest of the film — it is a James Bond film, after all.  Which makes me wonder, why include it in the film to begin with?  Just to do something different?  Nothing of real consequence happens from it.

The film's cast is pretty decent--Rosamund Pike, Halle Berry and Toby Stephens are all fine in that they are all young and attractive and thus easy on the eyes.  Berry especially leaves an impression in a scene where Bond blatantly ogles her as she emerges from the ocean in a bikini. 

The film's main problem is that it is so damn outlandish.  True, Bond went to outer space in MOONRAKER, but he at least did it in a way that was halfway plausible.  Meaning, on a shuttle, not on a custom MI6 rocket car or something.  

I am sure there are those who love this movie, and if you are one of them, more power to you.  We shall agree to disagree.

It grossed $430,000,000 on a budget of $142,000,000.

Stuff To Like:

• A lot of eye candy is on display, both human and technological.
• Rosamund Pike is pretty good in this.
• Halle Berry is also pretty good, but unlike Michelle Yeoh's character in TOMORROW NEVER DIES she is never really given much to do.  Yes, she gives Bond a roll in the hay, but as I've stated above, it's all pretty meaningless.
• Some of the visual effects are pretty good.  The climax on the plane is not let down by the effects.
• Humor is pretty forced.  

Stuff to Dislike:

• Opening surfing scene is WORSE than the Beach Boys song in VIEW TO A KILL.  That was at least aware of what it was doing.  The sequence is just wrong, from conception to execution.  The day for night photography is dire. It made me do the math in my head on how long it would take for someone to get good enough to surf those waves.  Took me massively out of the movie before it really started.
• Halle Berry's character does a back dive off of an incredibly high cliff about an hour into the film.  Poor visual effects aside, it is still a wildly improbable stunt.  
• Bond has an invisible car.  For fuck's sake.
• Why is Madonna in this movie? 
• I don't care about anyone in this movie.
• Once again, all of the bad guys have terrible aim.  

THE LAST PICTURE SHOW

Original Review from 1998:

1972, 125 minutes, B&W
CAV, Digital Mono, 3 discs
1:85:1, Unrated
The Criterion Collection, $125
Manufactured by DADC USA.


THE LAST PICTURE SHOW starts out as a sort of goofy coming-of-age film, but somewhere along the way it changes into a film about the loss of innocence, and the pain of "growing up". The story is constructed so that you could also make a case that it is also about the loss of innocence for America as well. The young characters we meet represent innocence in the same way that the small town represents traditional ways of life in America. This old-fashioned way of life is itself changing, and is only now reaching the town. The film was directed by Peter Bogdanovich and stars Timothy Bottoms, Jeff Bridges, Cybil Shepherd, Cloris Leachman, Randy Quaid, and Ben Johnson. Leachman and Johnson won Academy Awards, but the film is uncommonly well-acted by all involved. This laserdisc features a commentary track that includes Bogdanovich, Shepherd, Quaid, and Leachman.

From a stylistic viewpoint, the film owes much to the work of Orson Welles, for like CITIZEN KANE, the film is photographed with a deep depth of field, and like THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS, there are numerous long dialogue scenes that are presented in one take. In fact, the emotional starkness of LAST PICTURE SHOW most closely mirrors the penultimate scene in AMBERSONS involving Agnes Moorehead talking about the boarding house. PICTURE SHOW is a sad film, but it works on such a high level of artistry that it transcends being merely depressing and is, ultimately, heartbreaking.

This is a new version of the film as prepared by director Peter Bogdanovich in 1990. This cut restores seven minutes that were edited out of the original theatrical release at the distributor's insistence. All of the scenes restored provide more insight into the main characters and are a welcome addition. A rough chronological listing of restored/altered footage follows:

• A scene of Sonny, Jaycee and Duane singing their school song in a car on the way to the drive. It follows the last scene at school and bridges the scene of them at the drive-in eating french fries. It is an important scene because it establishes the three leads as being close friends.
• A brief snippet of dialogue has been restored to the drive-in scene that identifies the man coming out of the building as Abilene. This was done to make it clearer that he is the man that Jaycee's mother is having the affair with. In the theatrical version, this point is considerably more obscure.
• A brief scene between Ruth and Sonny as he drives her home from the doctor's office. It makes clear that she is not seriously ill, but does not elaborate on her illness specifically.
• According to Bogdanovich, the nude pool scene has been altered, though he does not say how and I was unable to determine a difference.
• The scene where Billy is sent to the town whore has been altered. Several instances of the word "fuck" have been looped out. Bogdanovich claims that he did this because the profanity was excessive.
• After the boys return Billy to Sam's place, and Sam bans them from his businesses, a short scene showing that Duane has snuck out of being in trouble has been restored.
• After Sonny leaves Ruth he drives through the town looking at all the places he can no longer go to. He then parks on the outskirts of town and sits looking sad. The drive-by scenes are all restored, and makes it clearer that Sonny is sad because of his situation with Sam rather than with Ruth.
• A short scene of Sonny and Duane in the diner, complaining about how unhappy they are, has been restored. It comes directly before their trip to Mexico and shows that they are going because they are so unhappy.
• After the funeral, a sequence showing the class trip has been restored. As they drive past the water hole Sonny starts to cry as he remembers Sam. In the originally released film the funeral cut directly to Duane and Jaycee at the Motel. This sequence makes it clear that this is happening on the school trip, which explains why Jaycee's friends are there. A small snippet of the beginning of the motel scene has been restored, showing that it is the girls who got the motel room, and not the boys.
• Although Bogdanovich does not note it, he deleted a quick shot of Shepherd's breasts in the motel scene.
• A scene showing the consummation of Jaycee and Abilene's affair has been restored. The sound for the scene was lost, so Shepherd relooped it while filming TEXASVILLE. The scene shows that Jaycee enjoyed the experience and became distraught only when Abilene was mean to her as he dropped her off.
• Three shots have been added to the scene where the sheriff is told about the possible molestation. The shots simply show everyone leaving the pool hall.
• The scene where Sonny leaves Ruth for Jaycee has been reedited. The order of the scenes has been reshuffled so that we see Ruth getting ready for her date with Sonny as he is getting picked up by Jaycee. By the end of the scene, after Jaycee has seduced Sonny, the sequence returns to Ruth alone at her house.
• One shot has been replaced at the final football scene, giving us a better shot of the football players.

This new version of the film is greatly improved over the original theatrical release, as it leaves less unexplained and flows more smoothly from scene to scene. Bogdanovich explains in the commentary that the distributor insisted the film be a certain length, which is the only reason it was cut in the first place. This new version only enhances what was there to begin and makes no drastic changes. One might quibble about the deletion of some profanity and nudity, but the film isn't really harmed by these deletions.

Bogdanovich does most of the talking in the commentary, and his remarks are informative and very specific. He gives the listener a clear picture of what it was like to make it and of his methods of direction. The actors are spliced in whenever the film focuses on them; Quaid has little of note to say, but both Leachman and Shepherd are quite enthusiastic about the film and their experience working on it. Original and re-release trailers are also provided. The rest of the extras are limited in scope (and appeal), consisting of location scouting film, lobby cards, and some screen tests, mostly of people that did not make the cast. The most pointless supplemental features are script excerpts for both this film and its sequel, TEXASVILLE. Only a few pages are presented from each, even though there is plenty of room for the complete scripts.

The movie was filmed in black and white by Robert Surtees and as mentioned above, utilizes deep focus throughout. This enhanced clarity highlights the characters' desolation, as the landscapes take on a barren look that constantly frames them. This Criterion disc replicates the film perfectly, letterboxed to about 1.85:1, with a sharp image and deep, pure blacks. While the letterboxing simply mattes off the top and bottom the framing is nevertheless highly effective. I have not seen the Columbia/Tri-Star version, but since it is not letterboxed, this is the disc to have. I am not sure that the film needed to be in CAV, but I am not complaining. The side breaks are not intrusive. The sound is clear and full of old country songs. Surprisingly, this is a DADC America pressing, proving at least to me that they can put out good product.

***

2024 Update:

The film was released on DVD by Columbia Home Video in the early 1990s. Criterion released the film on Blu-Ray in 2010 (as part of the America Lost and Found collection) and finally UHD in 2023. In between the film was also released on UHD by Sony Pictures in the Columbia Classics Collection: Volume 3 in 2022. The Blu-ray edition was a substantial upgrade over the DVD version, which itself was a substantial upgrade over the laser disc.

The Sony UHD release includes the original theatrical version and the revised director's cut. To date, this is the only way to get the theatrical version aside from going back to the Columbia Home Video DVD (I think). The Criterion UHD release also includes the sequel Texasville in HD and a special black and white version.

Having the original theatrical version makes the Sony version worthwhile, although to be honest the director's revised version is the better film.

LOGAN'S RUN (1976) - Part 3

This was on my web site back in the late 1990's. I couldn't find it on the Internet currently and felt that it was too good not to share.                                                                

 

 

 

 

 

 

LOGAN’S RUN NOTES                                                                 Last rev. 01-09-99

 

COMPARISON OF 4/30/75 GOODMAN SCRIPT TO FINAL CUT OF FILM

WITH GENERAL COMMENTS, GOOFS, ETC.

jrauner@monmouth.com 

 

 

INITIAL COMMENTS:

 

This essay is intended to be an aid to those who are fans of the film Logan’s Run (MGM, 1976).  It is a comparison of the 4/30/75 David Zelag Goodman script (abbreviated herein as “SCR”) with the actual final cut film (“LR” = “Logan’s Run”), which I have transcribed under a separate file (abbreviated herein as “XSCR”).  I have not had access to any other edits of the Goodman script, several of which are known to exist.  There was much on-site editing as filming progressed, as well as the infamous cuts that were done in post-production (and after pre-screening) to trim the total length to 2 hours, and to ensure a PG rating.  The source of the script is Steve Grimes’ scan as posted on his website “Scattered Reviews” (see [1] at end).  My transcript is also posted there.  I have also occasionally added references to comments from Michael York (Logan), Michael Anderson (Director) and Bill Thomas (Costume Designer) gleaned from the Special Edition LaserDisk (SE-LD) release of October 1997 (also on DVD as of September 1998).  Abbreviations for character names here are the same as in the XSCR.

 

To detail every single difference between SCR and film would be very tedious and beyond anyone’s attention span to wade through – including my own.  It would also not be of much use to do so, since there were numerous versions of the script anyway.  Thus, I have undertaken to highlight only those areas that made a difference in how we perceive the film – things that affect concept, plotline and the like.

 

All opinions expressed are purely my own.  I claim no special or unique knowledge of the materials involved.  The purpose of this is to aid research and to stimulate discussion, especially in view of the new interest in Hollywood for a movie re-make (see Nolan in gatefold of the SE-LD, and the "Coming Attractions" website (see [2] at end) for latest rumors).  If there are any demonstrable errors of fact, I would appreciate knowing.

 

See also WRAP-UP at end which includes Goof List and Discussion of Time Problem.    

 

"LOGAN'S RUN ... IT'S DUMB, BUT FUN!"  Here goes ...

 

************************

 

 

SCR                        XSCR of LR                                                         COMMENTARY

========             =========           ===============================================

 

----                           Intro. text              This text not in SCR.  This is the only explicit indication as to why the City even exists.  As we will see, this intro. in effect covers an awful lot of ground, owing to the lack of any detail in the remainder of the film regarding the City and its denizens.  It was supposedly added on due to the pre-view in San Diego in May 1976.  Uses secondary spelling "carrousel", though the SCR uses "carousel" wherever referenced, with the exception of 3 places. 

 

Intro. note             ----                           SCR states the crystal will be in the left hand of all characters.  This supercedes several subsequent refs. to the crystals being in the right hand.  Oddly, mention of lifeclocks being in the left hand is still present at SCR 63X2, 125 and 306.  No mention of clothing; according to the SE-LD, Thomas was allowed to develop this theme, the idea that the City denizens' clothing would match their lifeclocks. 

 

1-2                          1                              SCR has “moon and stars”, not visible in LR. 

 

4-16                        ----                           The first of the 3 scenes deleted from LR.  SCR has “elevator” element here not used in LR elsewhere until the scene just before Box.  Note 12-16 of SCR where the crowd yells and applauds F.  This crowd reaction shows something of the ethos of the City, valuable info. virtually non-existent in LR.  Most of the people are evidently “true believers” who agree wholeheartedly with Sandman methods.  This would have given LR a slam-bang intro and helped set up the Carousel scene.  SCR 16 match dissolves into the beginning scene of LR.

 

19X1,X2                2-6                          L is identified as 25 (years old) in SCR.  Also says 3 infants in Nursery (only 2 in LR).  Dialog about terminated runner deleted in LR (continuity).  SCR has L call baby “idiot” (establishes callousness).  Oddly, LR has L think it will also be a Sandman, but SCR only says baby is a “Sandman son”.  LR, F: “he’s not yours anymore” missing from SCR.  SCR has F “pry at panel”, but LR has F bang on glass with gun.  Sleep-time voice and lots of dialog missing from LR.  In LR, right-hand baby gets flipped right-side up just before F and L exit!  In SCR, F uses “card key” and both exit Nursery through a door.

 

----                           18                           F says “One is terminated, one is born” is possibly a GOOF (see list at end).  We see the rotating Hand for the first time; not in SCR.

 

26-28                     ----                           Here’s the review of the Arcade shops that would have helped us understand a lot about the City.  Apparently deleted for time, this also made a lot of set construction a wasted effort!  (Set even had Crazy Lift, etc. buttons for the Hallucimill! – glimpse seen in SE-LD stills section).  Hallucimill (nearly) invisible in LR; no reference or clear shot of it.  Woman breathing “yes…yes…” out of the Love Shop deleted for rating, or never filmed?  Joke about "seed-mother" intact in LR. 

 

29                           ----                           Second deleted scene.  More detail of the social life of the City totally absent from LR.  In SCR, F mentions “damned Yellows” and Cathedral which was a good setup for later Cathedral scene.  In LR, this entire beginning of the film was shortened about 10 minutes.  This section was reduced to just providing an excuse for L and F to walk toward Carousel!  Seems like an incomplete setup -- and a precursor of worse to come.

 

31-32                     27-28                     No computer voice in SCR (this is true throughout the rest of it), but has “deep and thrilling TONE” here (LR has a church gong sound).  SCR has F and L talk with “Daniel”.  LR shows some talk with Daniel, but he is not identified.  Daniel's line (XSCR 28) is not audible on SE-LD, but is clear on the MGM tape of movie.  One line in the script (SCR 29), Woman: “Only if I make it to the top of Carousel”, lent support to Anderson's interpretation of Carousel (see next entry).

 

  53                        34                           The famous Carousel scene.  An excellent special effect not in the book.  (The book had a Sleep Shop.  A set for this was originally built for LR, but was requisitioned for Sol Roth's (Edward G. Robinson’s) death scene in “Soylent Green” when production of LR was on a hiatus).  Since a set for this was actually built for LR, presumably an earlier draft of the SCR (perhaps a script from an earlier scriptwriter) had the Sleep Shop scene.  SCR seems to imply that Lastday people are incinerated only after “toppling into the blackness” after straining for the “rainbow”.  LR has incineration at the very top of flight.  No mention of central, white crystal here in SCR (it is mentioned in the second Carousel scene near film’s end).  Anderson, in the SE-LD, made the statement that Lastday people only renewed if they TOUCHED the white crystal, and that no one ever did!  (This was made in his commentary later in the film, corresponding to the last scene in the Senate chamber).  This was supposedly what Logan finally realized once he figured out that there was no renewal and no Sanctuary.  One of the perplexing things about this theme is that if this were true, all the City denizens could see that no one ever renewed.  Sure, Carousel is represented in LR as a "chance", not a guaranty, of renewal (see L's and J's first meeting dialog), perhaps only for true believers (note F thinks "Sandmen always renew", implying that perhaps some others don't).  But, what would be the source of all those infants in Nursery, which must be numerous in order to replenish the population and which are directly linked to renewal ("one-for-one")?  Almost no one ever visited Nursery to verify what was going on, but all the citizens must be coming from somewhere.  We are left with the conclusion that renewal must have been viewed as a purely metaphysical event, where one couldn't tell whether it happened or not.    

 

58                           35                           SCR has “MAN: RELIVE STORE 14”.  LR has “RUNNER, GREAT HALL, ENTRANCE WEST”.  In SCR, L and F leave together, but LR has L leave first and be surprised by F when he’s in the Main Hall.

 

59X11-N               39                           SCR makes it clear Runner is forced to plunge without being hit.  LR is ambiguous on this.  Body on floor appears undamaged by flamegun, but back and left side not visible.  Wow, that runner sure fell a long, long way considering he only climbed up one story to escape from L and F!  (see goofs section).   

                                   

63X2-X6               39                           SCR says specifically that a black lifeclock is seen in the Runner's left hand; not in LR.  LR has L and F verbally taunting Runner; not in SCR.  L's identity check and voice commo are reversed in LR.     

 

63X7-X13             43                           "Stickmen" identified as such in SCR; not in LR.  SCR has crystals being sucked up into machine; LR just has them disappear into thin air -- not too realistic.  One of the cheesiest moments in LR.  More Arcade-hopping here in SCR, totally gone from LR (starting to see a pattern?)

 

63X20                    44                           SCR has L fiddling with a game.  Interestingly, a still picture exists that shows J doing this (was this filmed?).  J's appearance is another pretty chintzy special effect that is technologically implausible -- see Wrap-up at end.

 

63X22                    44                           In LR, once J appears we see she's not wearing any footwear.  This is apparently the only place where she wears no footwear; not mentioned in SCR.  In some subsequent scenes, they seem to disappear, but only because they're wet -- see GOOF comments at end.

 

64                           45-86                     The important first meeting of L and J.  SCR has L call J an "Available"; not in LR.  Generally, LR follows the SCR closely here.  York stated that this was unrehearsed due to lack of time and director's MO, and that he was satisfied with that arrangement during filming.  SCR has L say "playfully": "... But if you're one of the misfits ...", but in LR he is quite menacing.  J says she's Green-6, to go Red next year in both.  SCR has the green crystal actually being shown; not in LR.  Dialog at end (XSCR 83-86) appears extemporaneous.

 

64X2                      105-107                 LR has termination of Runner in power center; not in SCR here.  Seems to be something intended for later (see SCR 94A1).

 

69                           102                         SCR has same colors for clocks as in LR.  Interestingly, SCR states “these contents are the ones from the runner Francis has killed at the beginning of the film”.  Because that scene was deleted, we are left to presume that those possessions are just from some unknown earlier termination.  Also, in SCR L and F enter together; in LR, separately (this mirrors the earlier scene when they leave Carousel to hunt the Runner).

 

69                           112-137               L’s big briefing scene.  SCR had no computer voice.  Many differences in computer messages.  In SCR, C positively says “ZERO” people reached renewal.  After C says to destroy Sanctuary, L says simply “I will”.  Oddly, L says “six Red”, not “Red six”.  L says “ten days to Lastday” after lifeclock starts blinking, a nice detail left out of LR (like so much else).  “Premillenial” used in SCR; “pre-catastrophe” used in LR.                 

 

69X1                      138-150                 The Hydro-toner / Sandman Gym.  More of this scene was supposedly filmed (according to some sources), but if so it cannot be discerned from the SCR.

 

70                           ----                           L uses his communicator to search for J outside the Sandman building; not in LR.

 

73X1                      151-185                 J is escorted by a Sandman to L’s pad; not in LR.  Later in dialog, L lies about terminating Runner; in LR, he admits “it was my job”.

 

89X1                      187                         SCR refers to Arcade Station, LR to the Hand.

 

94X14-106X3      200-204                 Lots of differences in this scene.  In general, SCR has more detail.  LR introduces a slight discontinuity.  After getting the Runner alarm, L first says to J “c’mon”, then says “you better go home” at the maze car.  Of course, L could have simply changed his mind. 

 

121                         215                         J says “meccano-breeders” in SCR, but only “breeders” in LR. 

 

122                         222                         SCR detail “Skidmore, Rosenfelt, Hennesy architects” not in LR.  I guess modesty got the best of them!  Hennesy was the art director.

 

123-128                 223-251                SCR gives explanation as to what “Muscle” is.  No hint in LR.  This really confused me the first few times I saw LR.  I assumed that when Billy said “muscle” he was really asking for the others to attack, like saying “muscle [him]” or something.  No “Dazzle Chamber” in LR.  For no apparent reason, J’s line “don’t be afraid” is transferred to Mary in LR (?).  Jewelry taken from J (by Mary 2) was to be a pin on her clothing; ended up as a bracelet in LR.  Thomas says in the SE-LD that the fact J’s bracelet was returned to her was forgotten by the continuity person, and thus introduced discontinuities in some later scenes which then had to be re-filmed!  They probably didn't need to re-film much, however, since J quickly loses her bracelet in the New You, see below.  L’s line “If you try to stay the young ones will gut-rip you apart!” somehow became “…will rip your guts apart!”  Sounds a bit childish -- bad one.  SCR implies Cubs attacked woman Runner.  (Billy:  "We’ll have that one later”, then, “We HEAR A SCREAM … and HEAR the Cubs who’ve ... obviously found and attacked someone").  SCR has L kick down a door to find woman Runner.

 

131                         254-259                 In SCR, woman Runner attacks L twice; in LR only once. 

 

137                         ----                           The two men following L and J form a minor sub-plot in the SCR, as to how much they believe that J will do her duty to the cause and help do away with L.  The SCR even has one say "I almost believed her" at this point.  This is another item that is mostly nullified in LR, but formed a parallel to what we're wondering about L at the same time:  Is he really a convert, or still a Sandman at heart? (see SCR 218-233 below). 

 

139X1-X2             ----                           The woman Runner's items show REJECT on the C's screen!  (Because she had no ankh?)  Here's a whole little scene missing from LR, though it may not have been filmed.  

 

142-157X3           279-307                 Here it is -- the famous New You #483 scene, with one of icons of the '70s, Farrah Fawcett (-Majors at the time).  In SCR, she's "Holly 13", but in LR only "Holly", thus interesting line "In ancient times they said my number was unlucky" left out.  SCR only has mirrors and wall photos, not the machine that subs in different hair, eyes and chin that "woman customer" sits at.  LR pretty close to the script here.  Can’t tell exactly what Holly says at XSCR 305.  Sounds like “spinning”, but the SCR says “scrambling”.  Good continuity:  Notice that J loses her bracelet (worn on her left wrist) while fighting with Holly.  It can be seen lying on the floor to the left of Holly when L grabs J to get away.  Sure enough, for the rest of the movie she has no bracelet.     

 

166X1                    ----                           SCR has F get off a shot at L and J!!!  Not in LR.

 

167-174                 314-315                 One of the rare moments where there is material in LR, but NOT in the SCR.  J's line was obviously over-dubbed in post-production, as J's lips don't move!  This was apparently thought necessary since nowhere else in the movie is the term "Love Shop" actually stated by anyone.

 

175-185                 316                         The infamous Love Shop scene.  This scene was cut down to only 1/3 of its original length, according to Anderson.  SCR uses the term "Wanton", not in LR.  SCR has L and J "in darkness" prior to the exit door opening.  SCR says noises continue after they exit, but LR has total silence after passing through the secret door.

 

200X2                    328                         SCR says that Logan activated his locator signal “as he fumbles …”

                                                                In LR he seems more purposeful.  Anderson states that right up to this point Logan is still really a Sandman at heart, and is still beholden to the C's instructions, even after the rude awakening he received during his Retrogram session.  Both SCR and LR seem to support this.     

 

200X3                    329-334                 Sandman ready room -- Dialog added in LR, not in SCR.

 

205-211                 336-365                 The Sanctuary Voice and the attack on "Sanctuary HQ".  SCR indicates spear points must actually touch the person to burn.  Also, L gets hit "in a dozen places".  Holly required to give code.  Voice never says "the way is always down" (a good Voyage-to-the-Underworld motif that works in LR).  This phrase is however used as a stage direction at SCR 213.  Voice says J only can go as far as the lock.  XSCR 365, F could be screaming “Runner!” -- hard to tell.

 

214-216                 366-371                 J and L at the lock.  Lots of little differences here.  In SCR, J says "every key only works once ... and only a Lastday key must open this door ...", etc.  SCR has a spinning wheel feature as part of the lock.   Also a big explosion is heard here.  SCR has J actually try the first key in the slot; in LR she just fumbles with it and drops it (with L).

 

217X1                    374                         SCR says F has a light -- not worth bothering with during filming, apparently (would have been awkward with gun?). 

 

218-233                 376-380                 J utters classic line "it must have been a savage world" in both SCR and LR.  L and J see F's light as F hunts them.  In SCR, L turns a wheel to actuate machinery, not related to elevator.  He also starts a generator going.  After tank bursts, elevator appears to start up by itself after the waterlock door closes in SCR, but in LR, L cranks on a lever.  In SCR, elevator moves "at an extremely high speed", but LR has an easier-to-film slow speed!  In LR, footage from "The Wreck of the Mary Deare" used here for machinery.  A whole sequence was here (SCR 233), which had L and J starting in darkness, then being "blinded by a brilliant light" as they enter the Ice Cavern -- analogous to their first entry into Sanctuary HQ with its "blinding spotlight".  J and L have lots of extra dialog about the idea that L has just now become a true Runner.  J:  "You're really one of us now, aren't you?" and L:  "...for the first time in my life I killed ... and I didn't like it".  More important stuff apparently hacked out for time.  One particularly fake sequence in LR is the intense shivering J and L exhibit here when they first enter the frozen world ... but not much thereafter, even after putting on freezing cold furs!

 

239-270X11         380-402                 LR has L and J take off clothes and put on skins immediately, just before meeting Box.  SCR has Box’s head “half flesh…half metal”.  LR had entirely metallic motif.  In SCR, one hand is a permanent cutting tool.  The ice sculpture sequence is deleted (this constitutes the “third deleted scene”).  The aforementioned strip-down sufficed to maintain interest while still allowing a PG rating I suppose, but the ice sculpture was a great scene that functioned well in the context of the story line.  It showed L’s and J’s love for each other long before the outside pond scene.  It also explained that those animals standing around were ice sculptures, carved by Box.  Without this explanation, one might assume that they were real animals frozen in place.  One of the great lost scenes of SF.  L and J not “hungry” in LR (part of chopped-out dialog).  Minor discontinuity introduced in LR by deletion of scene: suddenly, Box is holding sculpting implements, for no apparent reason!  Lots of good detail in SCR, like frozen people have black crystals, and exact number frozen is 1056, corresponding to the number the C said were missing Runners.  (Oddly, SCR 253 says that a “voice” in Sandman’s HQ indicated this, but the SCR only had the C’s screen say this, with no voice!)  SCR implies much more explicit destruction of the Cavern with refrigeration coils being burst with lots of out-gassing, etc.  All gone in LR (actually, the black crystals are visible, but barely noticeable).  The scene they ended up with in LR is very unsatisfying.  We are left wondering how L and J were so easily able to get around Box when no other runner ever had!  Yes, L had a gun, but we can't assume that no other runner ever had one, or could not have found some other way around Box.  All that remains is a short scene with a funny robot, and a very cheesy destruction scene that uses a simple optical overlay effect to simulate destruction while L and J look dazed.

 

273-301X16         403-447                 SCR has wind, also an insect attack instead of lizard.  Has rabbit darting by.  Has L and J eating berries.  J has great line “Where do you think that heat-ball went?”  F “blasts a rabbit to smithereens”(!!)  F tempted by berries but doesn’t eat any.  In LR, J and L jump into the water from what looks like 25 feet at least, without checking first to see how deep the water is, or what obstructions may be present.  Not too smart!  L and J swim in a brook in SCR, not a pond as in LR.  Revelation about clear crystal the same in both.  In SCR, after the cemetery they hear a man’s voice shouting (J thinks it’s F).  As J and L walk toward the Capitol Building, we see that J is wearing white undies!  This is really a small GOOF, because previously (Ice Cavern), it was shown that she definitely had nothing on under her dress.

 

301X24-308X1    448-529                 In SCR, we first see OM with cats on his lap; in LR, he’s just standing there.  Lots of dialog differences.  York seems to credit Ustinov with lots of wonderful ad-libbing in this scene, but it appears that nearly everything was scripted for him ahead of time.  Per Anderson, he supposedly did ad-lib a few lines, like a reference to “Tricky ...” when looking at a picture of Nixon (it didn’t end up in LR anyway -- too politically touchy at the time).  Admittedly, Ustinov gives an affecting performance here, though.  Also according to Thomas, OM’s buttons were made from real pennies, and he lamented that it’s not possible to discern this detail in the film.  SCR had J leafing through a book and giving a comment -- could she have known about books?  Wisely deleted from LR. 

 

309-331                 530-541                 SCR has F “start to tear off [J’s] clothes…obviously to rape”.  LR not quite so strong here.  J screams "Logan!!!" here in SCR.  SCR has interesting OM line “How nice…more company” when he first sees F!   In SCR, F refers to J as an “available”.  F's line at XSCR 535 "Why did you let her?" sounds disjointed here; maybe a dropped line?   SCR had "She did this to us" just before it which made more sense.  Lots of character detail in SCR: F: “There’s over two hundred years of Sandman’s blood in you, Logan…and now you’ll spill it for a stinking Runner!”, etc.  In SCR, F drops his gun, but J doesn’t throw it away as in LR.  Some bad stunt choreography (or editing) here when F jumps down (see GOOFs at end).  SCR has OM enjoying fight!  SCR has detail that flag had 61 stars on it (obviously not visible in LR).  SCR has L whack F only once; LR, 3 times!  Classic line “Logan!  You renewed!” intact in LR – a good line they didn’t delete!

 

332-339X2           542                         Extended burial scene in SCR.  Some extra lines by OM (also mentioned by Anderson).  LR just has them standing by the grave for a few seconds. 

 

339X3-361X1      543-575                 SCR has L being awoken to hear of J’s promise to OM to “bury him when his time comes”.  In LR, he’s just sitting there.  SCR has OM accept their leaving very casually, but for some reason he’s really angry in LR.  Ustinov had a few genuine ad-libs during journey.  L, J and OM all eat wild veggies in SCR, not in LR.

 

361X1B                 582-596                 In SCR, L has a “deep” line (not in LR) that indicates his realization of the nature of Sanctuary: “Sanctuary is the right to live…nothing more.  But nothing less, either…”  Is it really possible for him to realize this?  A good line as long as we interpret it as part of L’s overall emotional development, along with his nascent love for J.  Informal “marriage” has L kissing J in SCR, inexplicably missing from LR.

 

362-367                 602-614                 SCR has the 3 walking close up to the City so that they “appear as ants in front of redwood trees”.  In LR, we never see them close up against the City dome.  In SCR, L says he expects the OM to turn around and go back, and J says “goodbye”!  This scene is far more believable in LR by having L say “Stay here as long as you can.  We’ll bring them to you”. 

 

369X2-X3             616-619                 The Great Speech on the Balcony scene.  According to York, this was one of the first scenes filmed (York had not yet paced himself).  In SCR, J has no speech!  SCR has some Sandmen knocked over the railing, and others firing a gas tranquilizer which subdues L and J, also the crowd cheers here (again!!); all not in LR.

 

370-412                 620-624                 The final scene.  LR follows SCR closely during debriefing.  SCR says L is "writhing in agony", but it's toned down in LR.  Some have noticed rather old-looking Sandmen in this scene, but the SCR doesn't mention it.  Here SCR makes reference to the white crystal in Carousel, although no reference was made to it in the first Carousel scene.  SCR refers to Chandeliers in Arcade.  SCR had a shot of pandemonium in Love Shop.  Also more of J and L running out of the City.  SCR has the City dome shown torn, with people walking through the crack produced.  Also, the people's "crystals have disappeared from their palms"!  (Why didn't they just turn white?).  SCR has this scene during nighttime.  SCR has wind start to blow, a superb metaphorical device that was either never filmed, or hacked out later on.  (Of course, this tracks the SCR’s earlier use of wind for L’s and J’s first taste of Outside.  It still would have worked as a separate element here).  No “Timid Girl” in SCR; played by Ashley Cox in LR.  (Ms. Cox was Playboy’s Playmate of the Month for Dec. 1977!).  SCR had L and J going to OM, inviting others to touch him.  Anderson says on the SE-LD that "in the script it called for one particular girl to come forward"; maybe so, but not in this version.  Also per Anderson, this sequence was unrehearsed (Cox just followed his spoken direction).  The City denizens don't seem too wowed by being released from their cocoon and seeing the natural world for the first time.  Final hug of L and J timed to the final explosion in LR not explicitly directed by SCR – nice ending.  Although the movie-makers saved themselves a lot of time and trouble with this scene, the result is still satisfying -- an understated scene that nonetheless has emotional impact.  Saves the film, such as it is.

 

 

LOGAN’S RUN NOTES WRAP-UP

 

Starting with the script covered here, it appears that a good ½ hour of material was axed out to form the final print of LR (15 minutes alone due to the preview of May 1976 in San Diego).  Alas, the hapless film opened nationwide on June 23, 1976.  Looking back now, nearly all that was deleted would have made a much better movie, but MGM’s pre-screening apparently told them otherwise.  What would have been a very good (maybe even excellent) 2½ hour SF flick has been reduced to an unsatisfying 2 hour truncation that looks really jarring once you know what was taken out.  The Review of Arcade Shops comes to mind, or the Ice Sculpture sequence.  The Ice Cavern scene as a whole is difficult to fathom without knowledge of the script.  Even several basic City “vocabulary words” such as "auto-tender", "flameout", “Available”, “Stickman” and “Wanton” which would have added some richness to the culture of the City were nixed. 

 

Many of LR’s ills have been blamed on Goodman’s script through the years, but now that we can read the whole script in full it seems a lot of that blame is unfounded.  The script filmed as-is would have had all basic film elements well explained with good character development, even with all the obvious logical inanities:  Why are there mazecars when they have teleportation?  Why are the police called "Sandmen" with no Sleep Shop context to give the term meaning?  (The same could be said of the use of the term "Sleep Teacher" at XSCR 19).  Why do people have to die at 30, anyway?  Why couldn't balance be achieved with everyone dying at 60?  There's apparently perfect, state-enforced population control, so what difference would it make?  What happens to the Cubs after they reach 16?  Why does Runner HQ send over 1,000 Runners to Box without checking to see what happened to them?, etc., etc.  Lovers of the Nolan-Johnson book would still be disappointed, but the end product would have at least been an artistically complete work in and of itself.

 

The original book was a Blade Runner / 1984 sort of thing with a "SkyNet"-like computer and a heavy dose of '60s youth culture.  It was really a VERY different story from what became the film.  The novel explained that the world was in its present plight because of a war that the young had won over the old.  The novel's big theme -- that youth without old age cannot form a viable culture because the cultural continuity afforded by old wisdom is lost -- is totally lost on the film.  If anything, the film is diametrically opposite this theme.  Old Man is lovable, but he is also a nincompoop who seems to know nothing but old T.S. Eliot poems.  How will OM help the City denizens those first tough years outside the domes?  The film is quite nihilistic in this regard.  The City folks are just incidental props for the film's hero and "the woman who loves him" to run amongst.  Mr. David and crew followed the old "hey, it's Sci-Fi, so it doesn't have to make sense" theory, tossing in gee-whiz effects (like Jessica's entrance segment) and giving an emphasis to the sensual delights of the City with the "Perfect World of Total Pleasure" byline.

 

Consider too that many of the more bogus parts of the film are related to special effects which were the result of film production, and which can't be blamed on the script.  The special effects in LR are quite uneven, going from excellent (Carousel, City miniature, matte paintings, the Ice Cavern itself) to only fair (dissolving runner, first appearance of Jessica, destruction of the Ice Cavern, and those much-ballyhooed laser holograms).  The state of the art in special effects just wasn't up to the task for a film of this sort in 1976.

 

I'm being very kind to the script here.  To be fair, the worst absurdity in the film, the Computer blowing up just because it receives unexpected input, you CAN blame on the script!  Why would a writer, in 1976, insist on using a plot device which by then was already a fly-blown cliche?

 

With the often choppy editing, continuity errors and simple story, LR seemed a disappointment to many, especially considering that it was years and years in production, and cost $9M to make (see goofs below).  It also seemed to squander what in 1967 was one of the best new ideas in SciFi, forming a great film making "lost opportunity".  By the time it finally appeared on screen, many other dystopian films such as Soylent Green (MGM, 1973) and A Clockwork Orange (Warner Bros., 1971) had already been released and had stolen much of the freshness that LR would have had.  George Pal (first producer to try his hand at making the film), according to some accounts, would have used the original Nolan-Johnson script and retained Michael Anderson as director.  That combo could have been the ticket.  Still, the version that came out was very affecting to many people, especially those who first saw it as teenagers. 

 

Note how in the SCR, both the "bad guys'" dogma (Carousel, renewal) and the "good guys'" dogma (Sanctuary) were shown to be based on lies.  Thus, we see a general anti-dogma, "be true to your own instincts" stance.  This still comes across in LR, albeit awkwardly.  Thus, the release from state control displayed in the closing scene is made so overwhelming (for our heroes, anyway) that we are supposed to forget how hard that first winter is gonna be outside those safe, warm domes!

 

OK, so all the things in the SCR but missing from LR have been duly noted, but what about the other way around?  Items in LR but not in the SCR are:

 

                1.  Costumes match lifeclock colors.

                2.  Introductory text ("Sometime in the 23^rd century …").

3.  Computer voice (spoken by Lara Lindsay and uncredited as such).  

4.  The rotating Hand (specifically added to dialog [XSCR 187] at one point as well).

5.  Various brief snippets of dialog, like during the Runner hunt.

 

On to the GOOFs:

 

 

GOOFS IN LOGAN'S RUN (MGM, 1976)

 

First, let’s entertain what others have said. 

The Internet Movie Database (IMDb) (see [3] at end) lists the following supposed "goofs" in its database (current as of this writing):

 

"Continuity

 

      When Logan and Jessica swim back into the city and pull themselves up out of the water, Jessica's left palm does not have a lifeclock on it.

 

      Jessica's green stockings appear and disappear."

 

 

The first goof is correct, but Logan's left palm also has no life clock on it.  This can be seen momentarily when he reaches over to help her out of the water.  And Agutter did have a green lifeclock made up for her; it can be seen momentarily when she walks out of Cathedral, on her way to the maze car.

 

The second goof is difficult to be 100% certain about.  Of course, this listing does not say exactly WHERE this supposed discontinuity occurs, making it very difficult to confirm.  The only scenes I know of where Jessica (and Logan, actually) have no footwear:

 

1.  In Logan's apartment.  This makes perfect sense, however, since she is there via the Circuit, which is there blatantly to provide sexual partners to all askers.  Thus, it would not appear there would be any need for footwear on those occasions!  There is no loss of continuity, since this scene is separate from all other scenes in time and space, before and after. 

 

2.  Parts of the walk back to the City.  Here she and Logan have apparently removed their footwear because they are trudging through water (the beach, the waterworks, etc.), an action which is plausible.  

 

Since the footwear is very sparse, with just a thin strip of cloth going around the heel and ankle when viewed from behind, and the fabric is translucent and clingy when wet, this could account for Jessica seemingly having no footwear in some scenes, like the run through the tunnels.       

 

 

Now, my …

SUGGESTED GOOF LIST -- definite errors in continuity or concept, in my opinion: 

 

1.  Physical continuity.  When Logan and Jessica swim back into the City and pull themselves up out of the water, Jessica's left palm does not have a lifeclock on it.  Neither does Logan's.

 

2.  Plot continuity.  The age where one goes Red does not agree in several areas of the film where such age is implied.  It may be anywhere from 20 to 23 depending on how one interprets the dialog and what suppositions one assumes (see expansion on this idea below).

 

3.  Conceptual error.  A statement that Francis makes: "One is terminated [note the specific context here is Sandmen in Carousel -- look at XSCR 14-18!], one is born.  Simple, logical, perfect" would seem to be in error because it conflicts with his later statement "He [the runner] could have renewed on Carousel.  Now he's finished forever" (XSCR 43).  If one is "finished" after being terminated, how could he have been "[re]born" after "termination" in Carousel?  This theme is bolstered by F's assertion that Sandmen will appear in Nursery tomorrow after renewing on Carousel tonight (see XSCR 14, 16).  He should have said "One is renewed, one is born.  Simple, logical, perfect".  One could argue that this is a purely semantic argument.  It would still be logical if renewal were a form of termination (i.e., if “termination” was a generic term for the end of the present life, for whatever reason).  Perhaps, but it's hard to believe that "renewal" could be a form of "termination" given the profoundly different religious significance with which its meaning is embodied in the film.  It's pretty clear that "terminate" is what Sandmen, and only Sandmen, do!  "Termination" results in the permanent end of existence in direct contrast to “renewal”, which results in new life in Nursery.

 

Note that Jessica objects that the two might as well be the same [XSCR 57, 59]:  "He was killed [in Carousel], like the others ... isn't that what you [a Sandman who terminates] do, kill?", but she's a member of the Runner underground.  It would appear unlikely that a believer in the system, like Francis, would think similarly.

 

The original film beginning (SCR 16) had the terminated Runner's black crystal match-dissolve into the baby's white crystal.  Although the composition of that scene could be used as an argument for F's statement at XSCR 18, I believe that the writer was using irony to contrast the terminated (and therefore annihilated) Runner with a baby who had resulted from a renewed citizen.   

 

4.  Physical continuity.  Box is suddenly seen holding sculpting gear in the Ice Cavern scene for no apparent reason due to the deletion of the Ice Sculpture sequence.    

 

 

POSSIBLE GOOFS -- Highly subjective, of very short duration or not enough info.  In the case of some supposed continuity "errors", the cinematic device of "time compression" may apply, where every second of film time does not necessarily have to track with every second in real time.  If perfect continuity were demanded, every movie would be of excruciating length!  Film makers are usually forgiven this kind of thing.  

 

1.  Physical continuity.  Mary 2 is way too young to be asked "When are you Green.  When do you go up?" by Jessica in Cathedral.  Mary is about 7, as the Goodman script specifies (SCR 124).  So, she is at best an early Yellow (some sources indicate the date for going Yellow was intended to be 9, so this would have made her still a Clear-White.  This is supported somewhat by J's line "Why aren't you in Nursery?" at XSCR 233).  Here a young person of 7 is being asked about something that will not happen for another 9 years, i.e., more than double her age!  Note the script does not have the problematic line "When are you Green?"  Another on-the-spot artistic impulse gone awry?  Incidentally, Mary was played by Michelle Stacy, who showed up (a bit older) on "Airplane!" as the "Young Girl with Coffee".  She supposedly also appeared in Peter Pan Peanut Butter television commercials in the USA in the late 1970's, according to the IMDb.

 

2.  Anachronism.  Closing scene, one actor in the crowd foreground gives the Vulcan "live long and prosper" sign as the people gather around Old Man.

 

3.  Physical continuity.  In New You #483, Doc holds his hand up showing he's a Red.  At the very last two frames before the cut, his life clock blinks on!  Hard to believe, but use freeze-frame or extreme slow motion and you will see his lifeclock apparently light up.  Impossible to confirm, because the motion is blurred and one can't see if the lifeclock is being lit internally or is just catching the glint from a stage light.  Note that Doc wasn't a Runner, so there should have been no reason for the actor to have been wired up to blink. 

 

4.  Telling mistake.  Jessica says "we've gotta go through the Love Shop" (XSCR 314) while running with Logan from New You, but her lips don't move.  (Post-production overdub).

 

5.  Physical continuity/Telling mistake.  When Logan and Jessica approach the Capitol Building, we can see momentarily that Jessica has on white underwear.  During the Ice Cavern scene it is definitely shown that she had nothing on under her dress.  Of course, this was modesty underwear for the benefit of Ms. Agutter.

 

6.  Physical continuity/Telling mistake.  At the start of the battle between Logan and Francis in the Senate chamber, Francis pushes Jessica aside and leaps down off the balcony.  He lands at least 8 feet in front of Logan (again, freeze-frame helps), with Logan walking toward him (?).  Yet, after the cut he is shown right on top of him (and still descending).   

 

7.  Telling mistake.  During the battle scene among Logan and the other sandmen in the Computer debriefing area, look closely with freeze-frame at one of the Sandmen Logan shoots (medium close-up, hit on upper right shoulder).  He is clearly wearing a mask to protect himself from the pyrotechnic blast.

 

8.  Physical continuity.  In Nursery, the right-hand baby is flipped right side up in the foam cocoon just before Logan and Francis exit (he was shown up side down previously to show off the white crystal).  There is no "auto-tender" in evidence, and barely 40 seconds have elapsed in (apparent) real time.

 

9.  Physical continuity.  Here's a challenging one!  To Mark Worley (see [4] at end) may be credited the following.  Referring to the scene where Logan tries to identify the terminated runner, he says:  "If you watch carefully in the editing of the scene, Michael York actually starts to put the Follower back on his belt.  Not towards the runner.  The close-up shot was an after thought in the production of the movie, and a working Follower was added."  Yes, indeed, and that after-thought really shows if you look carefully.  Note that Logan first removes the Follower from his belt with his left hand, then switches hands to communicate.  He then retraces the same movements after he's done, so that he has just reversed his hands back again at the cut.  Yet after the cut, the communicator is in his right hand, holding it next to the Runner's head. 

 

10.  Physical continuity.   See XSCR 87-94.  This is the short scene with L and F outside Sandman HQ.  Note how L's hair is jostled by the wind.  This reflects the actual filming outside the Zales Headquarters Bldg. (now owned by Mobile Oil).  Thanks here goes to J. Taylor-Coyle (see [5] at end).  I might add that at the very beginning of the scene, the girls' hair and clothes are clearly wind-tossed.  Technically a goof, since the Sandman HQ was inside the domes where there should have been no wind.  To give credit, at least post-production painted the cloud reflections out of the windows!

 

11.  Physical continuity.  In the first Runner hunt, the Runner only climbs up a single story to escape L and F.  Yet he seems to fall at least 3 full stories after F fires the last shot.  I suppose this comes under the heading of "dramatic effect".  Again thanks to J. Taylor-Coyle for pointing this out.  Also, L is seen firing at the Runner as the Runner climbs up the shrubbery and starts up the railing.  But as soon as the Runner gets over the railing (barely a second later in real time), L is right there to assail him.  How did L get up there so fast?  Choppy composition similar to #6 or #9 above.  

 

 

THE TIME PROBLEM IN LOGAN'S RUN (MGM, 1976)

A "NEW IDEA", BUT NO SOLUTION

 

There are several areas where the timing of age-related events in Logan's Run pose a problem since they are in conflict with one another.  This is annoying in a movie where age and its consequences form the whole raison d'etre of the scripted plotline. 

 

The time when one turns Red in the movie is implied in several areas, but do not agree with one another.

The point of this essay is to see if there is some way one could finagle agreement amongst the various characters.

 

In general, the stated "age" of someone is always problematic, as the English language introduces certain vagaries that we take for granted in our culture, but which could change in a culture that has progressed a few centuries into the future.  For instance, in our culture, during the first 364 days of life, you have no age at all; you are called a "newborn", in your "first year of life".  This doesn't change until the 365th day of life, on your first birthday, when you become "one year old".  After this, you enter your "second year of life", and so on, so that your numerical age always lags as much as 364 days behind the actual number of years you have been alive.  Fractional years old are generally not referred to, except among the very young.

 

Thus, when we hear in Logan's Run of someone being "16", does that make him "16 years old", or in the "16th year of life", 15 in our modern parlance?  This could be a source of some of the confusion.  For our discussion we will have to assume that the English language is being used just as we use it today, or it is not possible to establish any meaningful baseline.  (Heck, two of the principals in the story, Logan and Jessica, even have English accents, though rather odd considering the location is in the former USA!).

 

First, all the quotes in the film that relate to age and age thresholds, arranged chronologically as they appear in the film:

 

QUOTE                                                                                                                                  SOURCE

=====================================                     ===============================

1.  "Life must end at thirty unless reborn                                      Written intro. 

in the fiery ritual of carrousel".

 

2.  "Year of the City, 2274.  Carousel begins"                             Computer in first Carousel scene.

and "... born 2244.  Enter the Carousel".                                       XSCR 27, 33

 

3.  "But if for some strange reason you want to                           Logan to Jessica in his apartment.

be 31, then ... Carousel".                                                                    XSCR 74

 

[This establishes that Lastday occurs on or about the 30th birthday, although Logan's statement is a little odd.  One could live for 364 days after the 30th birthday and still not be 31.  But more importantly, the City's religious/state dogma does not claim that going through Carousel can get you to 31, but rather that you will be "renewed", i.e., immediately reborn as a newborn baby (ref. Francis: "Anyway, there'll be a couple of new Sandmen in there [Nursery] tomorrow", then "Some of our guys are on Carousel tonight, and Sandman always renew, I know").  But 2 out of 3 statements decree unambiguously that life is to end at 30.  Blinking apparently begins some unspecified time on or about the 30th birthday.  The Goodman script says 10 days before (near the end of SCR 69), but this detail wasn't used in the movie]

 

4.  "I'm a 6.  I go Red next year".                                                   Jessica in Logan's apartment.

                                                                                                                XSCR 79

[This establishes that the highest number Green is a 6]

 

5.  "I'm only a Red 6 now ... But am I still Red 6?                      Logan to Computer just before

But I had 4 more years!".                                                                   Retrogram.  XSCR 131, 135

 

[This would establish that Logan is 26 years old and a Red 6.  The most problematic statement]

 

6.  "What happens when you're 16 and you go to                        Logan to Billy in Cathedral.

Green?".                                                                                 XSCR 244

 

[Establishes that one goes Green on (or after?!) his/her 16th birthday]

 

7.  "I'm 22.  I should be Green ..."                                                  Woman runner in Cathedral.

                                                                                                                XSCR 254

[This would establish that one is still Green at 22 years of age]

 

 

These are the only statements in the movie that relate directly to age.

 

 

The "new idea" being presented by this essay is we really don't know what a first year color is called numerically.  For instance, is a first year Green called a "Green 0" (or a "New Green", perhaps) or a "Green 1"?  There's no way to tell either from the movie or the Goodman script.  This impacts the analysis of Logan/Jessica/Woman Runner and the "time problem", since if Jessica is a "6", it may be erroneous to simply add 6 years to 16 and come up with 22 (the "simple addition theory"), because that would assume that the first year Green is, in effect, "Green 0".  If the first year Green is called "Green 1", you would not add 6 years, but only 5!  Ditto for Red.  Thus, the error accumulates.  See the table below.

 

 

Year(0&up)       Color                    Year(1&up)         Age (by numerical birthday)

=======                ======                  ====                       ===

 

New "0"                 GREEN                  1                              16

1                                                              2                              17          

2                                                              3                              18

3                                                              4                              19

4                                                              5                              20

5                                                              6 *                          21

 

6 *                                          (RED)     1                              22           **

New "0"                 RED                       2                              23           **         

 

1                                                              3                              24          

2                                                              4                              25

3                                                              5                              26

4                                                              6                              27

5                                                              7                              28

6                                                              8                              29

7                                                              9                              30

 

*  6 is the last possible year to be Green, per Jessica (XSCR 79).

**  These two rows are separated to highlight the difficult transition period from Green to Red.

 

 

Logan (talking to Billy in Cathedral) establishes the time for going Green as "16".  We will have to assume that this means what it means in our present culture, i.e., "16 years old".  Jessica, who is a Green, says in Logan's apartment "I'm a 6, I go Red next year".  Now assuming the first year Green would be "Green 1" and not "Green 0", she would be 21 and she would go Red (Red 1) at 22.  But Logan during his computer briefing says "I'm only a Red 6 now ... But I had 4 more years!"  A Red 6 would make him 27, by Jessica's reckoning.  For agreement, Logan should have said he was Red 5, or said he had 3 more years.  Also by this reckoning, the Woman Runner in Cathedral is wrong when she says "I'm 22.  I should be green..."  At 22, she would have already become a Red 1.  The problem with this regimen is that only one character is "right", and two are "wrong".  Majority wouldn't rule, but Logan would be off by only one year.  Unfortunately, this new interpretation does not solve the time problem.

 

However, if first year Green is called "Green 0" (the "simple addition" theory), there are still conflicts.  Now Jessica (Green 6) is 22, and the Woman Runner is "right" (at 22, she would still be a Green, albeit at the last year possible).  However, Logan would now as a Red 6 be 29, which would lessen the reason for his Retrogram – within a year he’d be blinking anyway.  To have 4 years left, he would have to be Red 3 (26 years old).  The saving grace is that under this regimen, two characters get to be "right", and only one "wrong", but now Logan is off by a whopping 3 years. 

 

Thus, under both types of analysis, there remains a basic time problem in the movie that does not seem to be reconcilable.   There is no fix that one could make at any one spot to make it all work out.  For instance, being radical and changing the year to go Green from 16 to a younger age would accommodate Logan, but make the woman Runner even more wrong.

 

Note the table above only illustrates the new regimen while still trying to reconcile the disparate statements as much as possible.  It does not show the worst-case conditions.  Worst-case conditions for turning Red (i.e., assuming one character is right and all others wrong) would be:

 

Bottom-up method:  Let Logan be Red 6, with 4 years to go until 30.  Assume the existence of a "Red 0".  This would make a "Red 0" = (30 - 4) - 6 = 20.

 

Top-down method:  Assume the existence of a "Green 0".  Thus, Jessica would be a "Red 0" at (16 + 6) + 1 = 23.  This assumes Logan (referring to Billy) is right about going Green at 16, but we are forced to presume this as otherwise there would be no basis for the calculation.

 

  

DOES THE SCRIPT HELP US?

 

In reference to the 7 citations from the film and XSCR above:

 

1.  No reference (no intro. Statement).                                                                                         

2.  No reference (no Computer voice).

3.  Same statement (SCR 64).

4.  Same statement (SCR 64).

5.  Same statement (SCR 69).

6.  Same statement (SCR 125X1).

7.  Same statement (SCR 131).

 

The SCR also says explicitly that Logan is "twenty-five" (SCR 19X1), not in LR.  Since the SCR also says that Logan had 4 more years, we can only assume that he meant, in effect, 4 more FULL years.

 

No other statements appear in the SCR that could help out.  It appears that the time problem was scripted in, and is not the victim of last-minute changes or ad-libs.

 

Thus, it seems that it is not possible to wrangle out some way to eliminate the “time problem” by number juggling or linguistic reinterpretation. 

 

RE-CREDITING THE UNCREDITED:

 

Per the TV Guide site (see [6] at end), the following players were apparently part of the original filming, but were left unmentioned in the film credits, because of the cuts or other reasons.  Credit restored!  A belated thanks, folks: 

 

Denny Arnold                       Runner

Bob Neill                               Sanctuary Man

Greg Michaels                      Ambush Man

Roger Borden                       Daniel

Ann Ford                               Woman on Last Day

 

"It must have been a savage world".  Yep, it sure was, Jessica!

Many happy renewals,

 

J. RAUNER                                                                                                                          jrauner@monmouth.com