Eric D. Snider

Surrogates

Movie Review

"Surrogates"

Review by Eric D. Snider

Grade: B+

Rating: PG-13

Released: Friday, September 25, 2009

Directed by:

Cast:

In "Surrogates," almost everyone in the world never leaves the house anymore. There's no need, thanks to the proliferation of "surrogates," robotic doubles that look like you (only smoother and prettier) that you can control from the comfort of home. You send them out in your place and live life through their eyes and sensors, safe and sound back at home. It started as a luxury item for people who wanted to experience, say, skydiving without risk of injury, but now everyone uses surrogates for everything.

Well, that's the way with these things, isn't it? Less than 15 years ago the Internet was an entertainment and information tool that we might use for a few minutes a day. Now it's so vital to our lives that we have it on our phones, lest we ever spend a moment without access to it. (Oh, yeah -- we also carry phones around with us all the time.) Surrogates caught on in the same way: once a novelty, now utterly indispensable.

This is the world imagined in a graphic novel by Robert Venditti and Brett Weldele, now adapted as a surprisingly smart, fleet-footed sci-fi action flick. (Part of the surprise is that the screenplay was written by Michael Ferris and John D. Brancato, the duo behind "Terminator Salvation" and "Catwoman.") No, it's not brilliant, but with swift direction by Jonathan Mostow ("Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines," "U-571") and a solid lead performance by the ever-reliable Bruce Willis, it's one of the year's more entertaining sci-fi films.

Willis plays Greer, an FBI agent who, like nearly everyone else, conducts his public life entirely via surrogate. (His model looks like him only younger, with softer skin and an absurd blond head of hair.) Most of his private life is conducted that way, too -- he and his wife, Maggie (Rosamund Pike), haven't seen each other for real, in person, in ages, even in their apartment. (They have separate bedrooms. If they ever have marital relations anymore, one assumes there's a separate room for that, too, where the surrogates do it.)

In the tradition of the hard-boiled detective, Greer -- who is grizzled and careworn in person, barely resembling his more presentable surrogate (you tend to let yourself go when no one ever sees you) -- has grown weary of all this and is wondering if mankind might have been better off before the surrogates came around. Then, as if to prove the point, someone gets killed. A mystery man deploys a strange weapon against a surrogate, frying its motherboard and somehow sending a charge back to the user and melting his brain. Needless to say, this goes against the whole point of surrogates, which is to protect the user from harm. And anyone who can melt your brain via remote control is obviously not to be trifled with.

Greer and his partner, Peters (Radha Mitchell), are assigned to the case, which grows more interesting when they learn the victim was the son of Lionel Canter (James Cromwell), the billionaire who invented surrogates and was subsequently forced out of the company that makes them. Is someone trying to get back at the inventor? Maybe one of the rising number of people who oppose surrogacy and have started living in machine-free communes on the outskirts of major cities? Maybe their leader, an enigmatic fire-and-brimstone fellow who calls himself the Prophet (Ving Rhames)?

Like most good sci-fi, the story considers the human ramifications of advanced technology while still doling out plenty of just-for-kicks entertainment and nifty "what if?" scenarios. (What if you connected to someone else's surrogate?) Greer and his wife lost a son a while back, which helps account for their desire to draw inward. There is more than one shot of a character disconnecting from his or her surrogate and crying over what he or she has seen through its eyes. (When someone disconnects, of course, the surrogate just stands there, blank-faced. If a conversation gets too intense, you can escape by literally shutting yourself down.) It's a very sad idea, this notion of trying to experience life safely, without truly interacting with anyone.

Greer and Maggie's fractured marriage could have been explored better than it is, and Radha Mitchell's performance as Greer's FBI partner is rather wooden. (Yes, she's a robot most of the time. But so is everyone else, and they don't act like that.) Like I said, this isn't groundbreaking stuff. But it's smart and enjoyable, and the message is "go outside, nerds!," which is always nice to hear.

Grade: B+

Rated PG-13, a little profanity, moderate violence, very brief mild sexuality

1 hr., 30 min.

Digg! Stumble It!

This item has 6 comments

  1. Stacy says:

    Saw it last night. I thought it was very entertaining and I loved the concept. I did have a few problems with the premise though. I kept asking myself, "Okay, how do Ethiopians afford Surrogates? And are the Ethiopians' surrogates gargantuamly fat models?"

  2. mommy says:

    Stacy i love that...so it fails on what I call the bambi test. I'll accept ALL of this crazy stuff...but this one thing is too much. So Ethiopians are your breaking point with possible surrogacy? The technology, potential power outages, short circuits, memory, programming in teensy common sense issues, breaks in communication, smoothness of functioning, cross signals...none of that would be difficult, but those darn ethiopians!

  3. Stacy says:

    Hehehe, yeah...

    I was able to accept things like the other technology not coinciding with the existence of these hyper advanced robots because I assumed that the film was made on a low budget. Otherwise I would have been like... "What, all these hyper perfect aesthetic advances to robots to please vain humans, and they couldn't make the Prius look a little less ugly in this alternate universe?"

    The Ethiopian thing bothered me because the mere idea of 98 percent of the world being run in surrogacy can't be explained away with a budget issue. The timeline of being driven into surrogacy bugged me, too. These things could have been fixed by stretching the timeline to 50 years instead of 14 or 15 or whatever it was and changing that percentage to, say, 40 percent of the world or so. I could live with 98 percent of Americans being surrogate users for the sake of coolness factor because I live this country where a poor guy might buy a Mercedes and live in a trailer. That would have been believable.

    I really really liked the movie, mind you. It's just funny. Another thing was that I don't think people would stop at just changing their race or sex. Honestly, if I lived in that world, I would not want a supermodel-me robot. That's a bit too boring. I'd be walking around as a Succubus from WoW or something or give myself cat ears and a tail. Now that's the world I wanna live in.

  4. Eleanor says:

    I'm with you, Stacy! Why look like yourself when you can be a supercool elf-thing with wings, or whatnot?

  5. Robert Sapp says:

    Where'd you get 98% of the world? The movie didn't say that. The biggest number used in the movie was a billion people, as an offhand remark. That's 15% of the world at the most.

  6. John Doe says:

    Not that special, this movie. Didn't seem that original or special to me.

    ***spoiler***

    I rather hated the ending. What gives him the right to destroy everyone's surrogate? And then they just show a happy ending. Despite all the destruction of property and the massive change of life-style everyone will have to go through, it's all just sunshine and rainbows. How many cars were destroyed, not to mention homes and other things? If the creators had any guts, his wife would've committed suicide and he'd have to live with that consequence. It was a cowardly ending, the way they were like "nobody knows what happened" so he gets to force everyone to live like he wants them to, but not take responsibility for it.

Add your comment:

The following HTML elements are allowed: <span class="spoiler">content</span>, <strong>, <em>, <a>, and <img>.

Before posting, please read the rules.


Subscription Center

Eric D. Snider's "Snide Remarks"

This is to join the mailing list for Eric's weekly humor column, "Snide Remarks." For more information, go here.

Subscribe

Eric D. Snider's "In the Dark"

This is to join the mailing list for Eric's weekly movie-review e-zine. For more information on it, go here.

Subscribe
 
Come read about baseball and web development at www.jeffjsnider.com