"Frozen Angels" is a Millennium-era snapshot of surrogacy and the ethics of eugenics. The film's noir-ish, Blade-Runner ethos and often-annoying score, disqualify it as a feel-good puff-piece on surrogacy and its surrounding issues. There are, though, a few moments of comic relief offered by the radio talk-show host who is somewhat the protagonist of the film who, in addition to his talk-show duties, apparently runs a clinic that offers eggs and legal help to would-be parents. The film is rich territory, however, in terms of being a record of contemporary views of well-intentioned people in the new industry of producing babies. From the bioethics of selecting the sex of your child, to the out-and-out design of a child, to the implications of people from third-world countries choosing blonde-haired, blue-eyed children {a preference I cannot fathom} because they feel it will offer their children advantages, the film presents more than enough material for any medical ethics convention. In one scene, an ordinary-looking blonde girl ( who is told by her handlers she is "pretty") is discussing her (paid, of course) egg "donation" to a couple. The girl is asked if she minds if the couple is two lesbians. The girl controls her shock for the camera and says it's something she never-ever considered {that is, "thought about in advance."} Who's shocked; raise your hand... All of this information is presented without overt narrative, but I won't say that the makers don't lean their message in a "cautionary" direction. Are certain things ethical and other things not, when it comes to 'alternative reproduction' (my term, not the movie's)? Is "the natural order of things" obsolete? How Big-Brother does this all sound when you hear people talk about humans as products? And most importantly, what are the unintended consequences of this whole "industry" as those in the process call it. This viewer's conclusion: having an IQ of 180 clearly offers little or no advantage.