296 reviews
I see many reviews here that denigrate the film, and a few that celebrate it. I believe it deserves neither fulsome praise nor vitriol, as it is a somewhat better than average film betrayed by bad choices.
I'll keep this short: The concept is decent, the execution is mediocre, the result is that I give it 7 out of 10 stars.
I would have graded this far higher had the creators spent more time making several of the characters more human (which is funny, given that "humanity" as compared to a more machine-like existence is a core concept of the screenplay), but they didn't. The only character in the film who achieves anything like true humanity is Bruce Willis', and this occurs only because the plot requires it.
When a film's construction and leverage depend on the very definition of humanity as it's core concept, leaving the humanity of most of the characters behind is something more than stupid -- it cripples the film.
This doesn't mean the film is unwatchable; it has enough elements of action, pathos, suspense & revenge to make it worth your time throughout.
But it could have been so much better, if not for so many poor choices.
I'll keep this short: The concept is decent, the execution is mediocre, the result is that I give it 7 out of 10 stars.
I would have graded this far higher had the creators spent more time making several of the characters more human (which is funny, given that "humanity" as compared to a more machine-like existence is a core concept of the screenplay), but they didn't. The only character in the film who achieves anything like true humanity is Bruce Willis', and this occurs only because the plot requires it.
When a film's construction and leverage depend on the very definition of humanity as it's core concept, leaving the humanity of most of the characters behind is something more than stupid -- it cripples the film.
This doesn't mean the film is unwatchable; it has enough elements of action, pathos, suspense & revenge to make it worth your time throughout.
But it could have been so much better, if not for so many poor choices.
When you have scores of people living their lives through their online personas, each competing with one another to appear more happy, more perfect, then this movie seems rather prophetic.
I see some complaining about the wooden performances throughout the film, ignoring the fact that this is the point. The surrogates emote very little, and are uncanny to us, who rely so much on non-verbal language to understand our interactions. The moments where actual humans are allowed to emote, especially the brief scenes with Rosemund Pike, shine all the more for it.
Is this movie high art in film form? No, but it's entertaining, it's fairly well paced, and its message is cogent. I recommend watching it at least once.
I see some complaining about the wooden performances throughout the film, ignoring the fact that this is the point. The surrogates emote very little, and are uncanny to us, who rely so much on non-verbal language to understand our interactions. The moments where actual humans are allowed to emote, especially the brief scenes with Rosemund Pike, shine all the more for it.
Is this movie high art in film form? No, but it's entertaining, it's fairly well paced, and its message is cogent. I recommend watching it at least once.
It's a great concept. In the future, the Sims style online gaming, where people live vicariously through characters, has evolved to living out real-life, in the real world, via surrogate robots. Everybody stays home all the time, 24/7. They work, play and travel via their surrogates, from the comfort of their home.
I'm not spoiling anything here -- this all happens in the first 5 minutes. The result of this new era of existence is the dramatic drop in violent crimes, sexually transmitted diseases, death by accident, etc.
Well, it's a great concept. And the CGI is good. Because of the plot, every character is insanely pretty, so the screen is filled with beautiful people.
But... it just... doesn't... quite... gel. The whole thing feels like a cool episode of Star Trek, or something on TV. The story is not riveting. I didn't really care about the characters. The timing was off; things either came too late (I was bored, expecting them) or so fast I couldn't really appreciate.
Surrogates lacks that wow-factor.
Example of bad timing: At the start, one wonders, "What do the users really look like? Anything like like their surrogate robots?" I would expect that, at first, we see Bruce Willis, just some facial hair which his robot doesn't have. Then, eventually, we see that he is older than his robot, so he's "cheating" on age too. Even later still, maybe we'd see an obese person at home posing as an athlete via a surrogate which looks nothing like him. Well, "Surrogates" skips all that build up and goes straight for the punchline: within 10 minutes we see a hot chick robot making with a young man; turns out the hot chick is actually slovenly a middle-aged man. Any twists to come later, in this variety, loses all punch.
Worth a rental.
I'm not spoiling anything here -- this all happens in the first 5 minutes. The result of this new era of existence is the dramatic drop in violent crimes, sexually transmitted diseases, death by accident, etc.
Well, it's a great concept. And the CGI is good. Because of the plot, every character is insanely pretty, so the screen is filled with beautiful people.
But... it just... doesn't... quite... gel. The whole thing feels like a cool episode of Star Trek, or something on TV. The story is not riveting. I didn't really care about the characters. The timing was off; things either came too late (I was bored, expecting them) or so fast I couldn't really appreciate.
Surrogates lacks that wow-factor.
Example of bad timing: At the start, one wonders, "What do the users really look like? Anything like like their surrogate robots?" I would expect that, at first, we see Bruce Willis, just some facial hair which his robot doesn't have. Then, eventually, we see that he is older than his robot, so he's "cheating" on age too. Even later still, maybe we'd see an obese person at home posing as an athlete via a surrogate which looks nothing like him. Well, "Surrogates" skips all that build up and goes straight for the punchline: within 10 minutes we see a hot chick robot making with a young man; turns out the hot chick is actually slovenly a middle-aged man. Any twists to come later, in this variety, loses all punch.
Worth a rental.
With the number of mainstream movies centered around a future human dependency on robots, it would be incredibly stupid if we actually let that happen. "Surrogates" is the latest of these concepts and surprisingly one of the more well thought-out ones. Based on the graphic novel by Robert Venditti and Brett Weldele, "Surrogates" imagines a world where humans interact with the world solely through robot versions of themselves called surrogates. They don't have to leave their homes and are impervious to danger.
Writers Michael Ferris and John D. Brancato, who previously collaborated with director Jonathan Mostow on "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" and sadly also wrote the Halle Berry "Catwoman," do their best work with this script, which is of course not saying much. The positive here is that they truly embrace and explored the possibilities of a word where people don't interact with people -- just the robot versions of themselves. It's the saving grace of the film.
Bruce Willis stars as a homicide detective assigned to the very first case on record where the actual human operator of a surrogate died when the surrogate was killed. With nearly all of the planet using surrogates, any knowledge of danger would throw the world into panic. Willis -- Det. Greer -- must track down the weapon that did the damage. When his surrogate is destroyed, Greer begins to re-examine life through non-virtual eyes.
Without question, however, the concept and the setting are far more clever than the script. Ironically like robots, when you boil down the exterior of "Surrogates," it's composed of overused clichés and recycled components of Isaac Asimov and Philip K. Dick stories. The simple premise and thoroughly conceived world of "Surrogates" manages to override some lousy story lines and character development, but I'm not sure that most viewers who come to "Surrogates" looking for more action and less high-concept science fiction will be able to say the same.
The subplots and back stories given to Greer and other characters are throw-away. At 89 minutes long, "Surrogates" offers just enough in terms of story development to be a glorified TV detective show set in the future. The twists are foreseeable and the character motivations barely scratched at, but it keeps your attention and stays focused enough on the central story that you never have to actually dwell on the more hollow elements of the film. The venerable James Cromwell, who plays the disgruntled inventor of surrogates, has never looked more shallow in a role, but it's hardly of any consequence.
Sci-fi epiphany? None here, but a well-calculated exploration of a possible new technology - - yes. "Surrogates" is not mindless fun, but it's not artistic science fiction perfected to a tee either. It does just enough to intrigue the future-curious mind with a different cut from the same robot mold.
~Steven C
Visit my site moviemusereviews.com
Writers Michael Ferris and John D. Brancato, who previously collaborated with director Jonathan Mostow on "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" and sadly also wrote the Halle Berry "Catwoman," do their best work with this script, which is of course not saying much. The positive here is that they truly embrace and explored the possibilities of a word where people don't interact with people -- just the robot versions of themselves. It's the saving grace of the film.
Bruce Willis stars as a homicide detective assigned to the very first case on record where the actual human operator of a surrogate died when the surrogate was killed. With nearly all of the planet using surrogates, any knowledge of danger would throw the world into panic. Willis -- Det. Greer -- must track down the weapon that did the damage. When his surrogate is destroyed, Greer begins to re-examine life through non-virtual eyes.
Without question, however, the concept and the setting are far more clever than the script. Ironically like robots, when you boil down the exterior of "Surrogates," it's composed of overused clichés and recycled components of Isaac Asimov and Philip K. Dick stories. The simple premise and thoroughly conceived world of "Surrogates" manages to override some lousy story lines and character development, but I'm not sure that most viewers who come to "Surrogates" looking for more action and less high-concept science fiction will be able to say the same.
The subplots and back stories given to Greer and other characters are throw-away. At 89 minutes long, "Surrogates" offers just enough in terms of story development to be a glorified TV detective show set in the future. The twists are foreseeable and the character motivations barely scratched at, but it keeps your attention and stays focused enough on the central story that you never have to actually dwell on the more hollow elements of the film. The venerable James Cromwell, who plays the disgruntled inventor of surrogates, has never looked more shallow in a role, but it's hardly of any consequence.
Sci-fi epiphany? None here, but a well-calculated exploration of a possible new technology - - yes. "Surrogates" is not mindless fun, but it's not artistic science fiction perfected to a tee either. It does just enough to intrigue the future-curious mind with a different cut from the same robot mold.
~Steven C
Visit my site moviemusereviews.com
- Movie_Muse_Reviews
- May 16, 2010
- Permalink
Surrogates' great and very interesting concept and the amount of talent on display were its selling points, and Surrogates on the whole delivers, its good parts being pretty great actually. Of course it's less than perfect, but none of the not-so-good things come over disastrously, more unevenly if anything else.
The film is a very good-looking one, the sci-fi/technological look very handsomely rendered and imaginatively surreal. It's also beautifully shot and crisply edited and there are some good special effects on display. That is not to say that all the special effects are great, some of them looking rather cheap and being more at home in a film from the late 80s-early 90s. The music has its bombastic, pulsating moments as well as a hauntingly understated quality. Some of the script is interesting and probes a lot of thought, but other parts are on the weak side, with some very clichéd dialogue and it doesn't develop its characters as well as it could have done. James Cromwell's character especially is very underutilised and shallow.
From a story point of view, most of it works. There are some good ideas and subplots that are in a good amount if not all cases explored intelligently and intriguingly but what was really remarkable was the subplot with Greer and Maggie's failing relationship, which brought an emotional core that really resonated with me. It's not completely successful, some of it does plod, especially the conspiracy elements, and much more could have been done with the ending, which felt underdeveloped and confused. The action's a mixed bag, some are energetic and exciting but others are pedestrian and on the silly side. Surrogates is directed efficiently and the cast do a great job, though James Cromwell has been much better and more engaged in other roles.
Particularly impressive were a charismatically world-weary and no-nonsense Bruce Willis and Rosamund Pike's excellent, sympathetic performance ranks among her better roles. Radha Mitchell is also touching. Overall, has some uneven moments but a most intriguing film that delivers on most levels. 7/10 Bethany Cox
The film is a very good-looking one, the sci-fi/technological look very handsomely rendered and imaginatively surreal. It's also beautifully shot and crisply edited and there are some good special effects on display. That is not to say that all the special effects are great, some of them looking rather cheap and being more at home in a film from the late 80s-early 90s. The music has its bombastic, pulsating moments as well as a hauntingly understated quality. Some of the script is interesting and probes a lot of thought, but other parts are on the weak side, with some very clichéd dialogue and it doesn't develop its characters as well as it could have done. James Cromwell's character especially is very underutilised and shallow.
From a story point of view, most of it works. There are some good ideas and subplots that are in a good amount if not all cases explored intelligently and intriguingly but what was really remarkable was the subplot with Greer and Maggie's failing relationship, which brought an emotional core that really resonated with me. It's not completely successful, some of it does plod, especially the conspiracy elements, and much more could have been done with the ending, which felt underdeveloped and confused. The action's a mixed bag, some are energetic and exciting but others are pedestrian and on the silly side. Surrogates is directed efficiently and the cast do a great job, though James Cromwell has been much better and more engaged in other roles.
Particularly impressive were a charismatically world-weary and no-nonsense Bruce Willis and Rosamund Pike's excellent, sympathetic performance ranks among her better roles. Radha Mitchell is also touching. Overall, has some uneven moments but a most intriguing film that delivers on most levels. 7/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- Apr 19, 2015
- Permalink
Although this movie boasts a great Sci-Fi concept, there are a couple of elements in the setting that is just too flawed even for science fiction. I'll come to those flaws shortly.
Having accepted the implausible environment, i.e., a world where 98% of humankind stay at home with their minds plugged into their surrogate robots that they live their life through, the rest of the plot is pretty damn riveting. The mood of the film is more akin to Minority Report and certainly feels like a Philip K Dick narrative. The future depiction is not overly futuristic in technology other than the Surrogates themselves so don't expect a big budget effects ridden movie. Having said that, the Surrogates robotic power makes for a couple of excellent action scenes comparable with the Will Smith vehicle "I, Robot".
But as usual, it is the awesome Bruce Willis who carries the movie both as surrogate (a disturbingly young look with a frightening wig!) and in human form. Thank god he carries it though because there are hardly any significant supporting characters in the story as it focuses on him most of the time as he investigates a rise in rare human murders. There is just something re-assuring about watching him on screen, regardless of the film quality. Going into the 4th decade since Die Hard, he is still in my view a bona-fide movie star.
I said there were flaws in the whole concept. Well, I find it impossible to even speculate the possibility that 98% of humankind will love sitting at home plugging their minds into a surrogate robot that they can live their lives through and let their natural bodies wither away with no exercise or self esteem. It seems they prefer to have sex as robots, and flirt with young women surrogates who may be controlled by an old man or...well you get the gist. The appeal is supposed to be a 99% reduction in crime rate where accidents or crimes against a surrogate does not affect the human host. That concept is too flawed even for science fiction. What is stopping a surrogate from burgling a house killing its human owner for example? I don't knock the concept of surrogates itself, its an excellent one but I don't buy the social environment.
All in all this was a very very decent entry in the intelligent Sci-Fi movie library. Despite my gripes I enjoyed it and I expect most Sci-Fi lovers will too.
Having accepted the implausible environment, i.e., a world where 98% of humankind stay at home with their minds plugged into their surrogate robots that they live their life through, the rest of the plot is pretty damn riveting. The mood of the film is more akin to Minority Report and certainly feels like a Philip K Dick narrative. The future depiction is not overly futuristic in technology other than the Surrogates themselves so don't expect a big budget effects ridden movie. Having said that, the Surrogates robotic power makes for a couple of excellent action scenes comparable with the Will Smith vehicle "I, Robot".
But as usual, it is the awesome Bruce Willis who carries the movie both as surrogate (a disturbingly young look with a frightening wig!) and in human form. Thank god he carries it though because there are hardly any significant supporting characters in the story as it focuses on him most of the time as he investigates a rise in rare human murders. There is just something re-assuring about watching him on screen, regardless of the film quality. Going into the 4th decade since Die Hard, he is still in my view a bona-fide movie star.
I said there were flaws in the whole concept. Well, I find it impossible to even speculate the possibility that 98% of humankind will love sitting at home plugging their minds into a surrogate robot that they can live their lives through and let their natural bodies wither away with no exercise or self esteem. It seems they prefer to have sex as robots, and flirt with young women surrogates who may be controlled by an old man or...well you get the gist. The appeal is supposed to be a 99% reduction in crime rate where accidents or crimes against a surrogate does not affect the human host. That concept is too flawed even for science fiction. What is stopping a surrogate from burgling a house killing its human owner for example? I don't knock the concept of surrogates itself, its an excellent one but I don't buy the social environment.
All in all this was a very very decent entry in the intelligent Sci-Fi movie library. Despite my gripes I enjoyed it and I expect most Sci-Fi lovers will too.
- theycallmemrglass
- Jan 1, 2010
- Permalink
Heavy handed, but surprisingly effective.
On the effects of a remote life, thanks to the interwebs and Uber.
And a surprisingly contemporary ending, with people in their dressing gowns coming out in the streets -- is this what the end of the Covid confinement will look like?
Ps-yes, Bruce Willis is scary with that wig. Get over it. In 10 years we won't even have actors.
On the effects of a remote life, thanks to the interwebs and Uber.
And a surprisingly contemporary ending, with people in their dressing gowns coming out in the streets -- is this what the end of the Covid confinement will look like?
Ps-yes, Bruce Willis is scary with that wig. Get over it. In 10 years we won't even have actors.
- spamcatcher-10034
- May 1, 2021
- Permalink
Finally saw this and I'm with the majority here... a solid 7/10 film.
This surprisingly compelling sci-fi film takes a while to set up its universe but delivers down the stretch. It's borderline whether they establish enough credibility so as to invest real emotion in to the characters and buy in to the premise. If you allow yourself to buy in to the bizarre concept of living life through android duplicates, then the film works on a few levels. It's somewhat weak on certain of those levels but raises interesting questions concerning the level of our technological dependency as we live our lives. The emotional aspect of this movie plays better thanks to a fine performance by Bruce Willis. His character's journey through this bizarre world is obviously the heart of the film and it's written and portrayed very well.
This surprisingly compelling sci-fi film takes a while to set up its universe but delivers down the stretch. It's borderline whether they establish enough credibility so as to invest real emotion in to the characters and buy in to the premise. If you allow yourself to buy in to the bizarre concept of living life through android duplicates, then the film works on a few levels. It's somewhat weak on certain of those levels but raises interesting questions concerning the level of our technological dependency as we live our lives. The emotional aspect of this movie plays better thanks to a fine performance by Bruce Willis. His character's journey through this bizarre world is obviously the heart of the film and it's written and portrayed very well.
I first viewed Surrogates upon its home format release and positively found it very ordinary. Viewing it again, with focus and in solitude, it proved to be a far better experience.
The action scenes are what you would expect for a multi-plex appeasing popcorner, loud, colourful and owing great debt to modern technology. Yet to dismiss this totally as one of those easy money making blockbuster movies is most unfair.
Surrogates oozes intrigue, even if it doesn't quite deliver on the smartness written on the page. The idea that in the future robotic alter egos can carry out our everyday mundane functions is cracker-jack, and it opens up a whole can of berserker worms.
This is not merely an excuse to have Bruce Willis running around exploding surrogate robots, as much fun as that is of course, there's a deeper emotional core pulsing away as Willis fights the good fight to make sure being human is not cast aside like a thing of the past, that as flawed as we are, hiding away in a surrogate is not the answer.
This axis of the story is beautifully realised by the plot strand involving Willis and Rosamund Pike as his wife, with both actors doing fine work to give it the required emotional heft. It may ultimately lose itself to a standard conspiracy plot, but there's intelligence within to make Surrogates a better film than it first appears. 7/10
The action scenes are what you would expect for a multi-plex appeasing popcorner, loud, colourful and owing great debt to modern technology. Yet to dismiss this totally as one of those easy money making blockbuster movies is most unfair.
Surrogates oozes intrigue, even if it doesn't quite deliver on the smartness written on the page. The idea that in the future robotic alter egos can carry out our everyday mundane functions is cracker-jack, and it opens up a whole can of berserker worms.
This is not merely an excuse to have Bruce Willis running around exploding surrogate robots, as much fun as that is of course, there's a deeper emotional core pulsing away as Willis fights the good fight to make sure being human is not cast aside like a thing of the past, that as flawed as we are, hiding away in a surrogate is not the answer.
This axis of the story is beautifully realised by the plot strand involving Willis and Rosamund Pike as his wife, with both actors doing fine work to give it the required emotional heft. It may ultimately lose itself to a standard conspiracy plot, but there's intelligence within to make Surrogates a better film than it first appears. 7/10
- hitchcockthelegend
- Jan 30, 2014
- Permalink
- gregsrants
- Sep 24, 2009
- Permalink
The important thing to understand about this film is that it is not a prediction of something that is likely to happen. Rather, it is a metaphor for something that has already happened.
Television was the earliest foray into this phenomenon. How many of us form a significant portion of our impression of the world based on what we see through this artificial sense organ? With television, we are all 5% closer to the creature depicted in Surrogates. As I sit here at my computer writing from this remote location, I am 10% of the creature depicted in this film. When I get on a discussion forum with an avatar that represents my impression of myself or possibly the impression of myself that I wish to project, I am 20% of the creature depicted in this film.
I have begun to teach an online class. My students, instead of seeing me as a living flesh and blood person, now see me as an intellectual engine that they may visualize in any number of ways. I have the option of posting a picture, but have not gotten around to that yet. I now do part of my work from a safe remote location—as an abstract disembodied entity.
After leaving the theater, I had an overwhelming urge to spend more time with my dogs. They are very physical and can never relate to the concept I herein discuss. Actually I had a new insight into their possible impression of all the time I spend watching television: "Stop staring into the scrambly box and pay attention to us. Snap out of it!"
Television was the earliest foray into this phenomenon. How many of us form a significant portion of our impression of the world based on what we see through this artificial sense organ? With television, we are all 5% closer to the creature depicted in Surrogates. As I sit here at my computer writing from this remote location, I am 10% of the creature depicted in this film. When I get on a discussion forum with an avatar that represents my impression of myself or possibly the impression of myself that I wish to project, I am 20% of the creature depicted in this film.
I have begun to teach an online class. My students, instead of seeing me as a living flesh and blood person, now see me as an intellectual engine that they may visualize in any number of ways. I have the option of posting a picture, but have not gotten around to that yet. I now do part of my work from a safe remote location—as an abstract disembodied entity.
After leaving the theater, I had an overwhelming urge to spend more time with my dogs. They are very physical and can never relate to the concept I herein discuss. Actually I had a new insight into their possible impression of all the time I spend watching television: "Stop staring into the scrambly box and pay attention to us. Snap out of it!"
- scottwallvashon
- Sep 26, 2009
- Permalink
As with most films, the trailer made this look like it would be something good – an action movie with an interesting sci-fi concept behind the world created for us. For this reason I was a bit surprised to see the "finishing time" of the film being listed as barely 90 minutes after the start time because I thought it would be hard to do all the things that the trailer proposed in such a comparatively short time. Leaving the film at the end, I found it easily fitted into the 90 minute time period and sadly it achieved this by not actually doing a great deal that I had hoped it would. The plot sees us in a world where the majority of humans live their lives from the comfort of their homes, experiencing life through the android clones (surrogates). Although pockets of humanity have banded together to resist this, generally they are seen as weirdos rather than having any sort of point. Due to the surrogates, accidental death has been nearly eliminated while crime is at an all-time low. However when the destruction of a surrogate leads to the death of the user, Detective Tom Greer is assigned to the case – a case that becomes even more high profile when the victim turns out to be the son of the creator of the surrogacy system.
The potential is there in the plot and the various things they put in around it (Tom's marriage, the loss of a child etc) but it doesn't really deliver on much of it. The subject matter isn't really that thought provoking, partly because it doesn't hold out a lot for consideration by the viewer but partly because the film doesn't even seem happy with its own world creation. The whole idea is full of holes to the point that the film can't hide them or distract from them for very long and you get the sense that it is rushing a bit before it all runs out through its cupped hands. This is a shame because it niggles the whole way through and becomes worse whenever we see what surrogates can do (their speed, strength etc) because you wonder why the world looks the same as it does when full of "normal" people. Outside of this though it is still an action film of sorts so one hopes for thrills of that side.
Unfortunately this doesn't really spark either. The running/jumping effects are not perfect and the scale of some of the action sequences means that some come over as being remote and not engaging or thrilling – a bit like watching someone else playing an video game that you don't really care about. It isn't bad though – the effects do still work, the action is still noisy and the plot is decent enough to at least not irritate – but that is the sort of level of film we're dealing with, one where my "praise" of it includes me saying its not too irritating! The performances sort of match the patchwork feel to the world and the film – it doesn't seem to be sure of itself and neither are they. Willis does his best (despite the wig etc he has to wear) but doesn't manage to balance the action with the character stuff and, thanks to the material, doesn't really deliver on either. Mitchell is so-so, as is Pike, while Cromwell essentially dials in a character he has sort of played before (but it made sense in other films) and Rhames is just plain odd.
Surrogates is not an awful film – but it is a distinctly average one thanks to the amount of things it half does. Whether it is the action, the substance, the effects, the performances or whatever, it all appears to be "OK" but never pushing for more than that. Improved focus, a stronger script and a longer running time could have made this a better film but ultimately it was just average.
The potential is there in the plot and the various things they put in around it (Tom's marriage, the loss of a child etc) but it doesn't really deliver on much of it. The subject matter isn't really that thought provoking, partly because it doesn't hold out a lot for consideration by the viewer but partly because the film doesn't even seem happy with its own world creation. The whole idea is full of holes to the point that the film can't hide them or distract from them for very long and you get the sense that it is rushing a bit before it all runs out through its cupped hands. This is a shame because it niggles the whole way through and becomes worse whenever we see what surrogates can do (their speed, strength etc) because you wonder why the world looks the same as it does when full of "normal" people. Outside of this though it is still an action film of sorts so one hopes for thrills of that side.
Unfortunately this doesn't really spark either. The running/jumping effects are not perfect and the scale of some of the action sequences means that some come over as being remote and not engaging or thrilling – a bit like watching someone else playing an video game that you don't really care about. It isn't bad though – the effects do still work, the action is still noisy and the plot is decent enough to at least not irritate – but that is the sort of level of film we're dealing with, one where my "praise" of it includes me saying its not too irritating! The performances sort of match the patchwork feel to the world and the film – it doesn't seem to be sure of itself and neither are they. Willis does his best (despite the wig etc he has to wear) but doesn't manage to balance the action with the character stuff and, thanks to the material, doesn't really deliver on either. Mitchell is so-so, as is Pike, while Cromwell essentially dials in a character he has sort of played before (but it made sense in other films) and Rhames is just plain odd.
Surrogates is not an awful film – but it is a distinctly average one thanks to the amount of things it half does. Whether it is the action, the substance, the effects, the performances or whatever, it all appears to be "OK" but never pushing for more than that. Improved focus, a stronger script and a longer running time could have made this a better film but ultimately it was just average.
- bob the moo
- Dec 8, 2009
- Permalink
I basically agree with Ebert's review on this one. This is definitely only a simple action flick, but it is well made, the acting is decent, the f/x very good, the film is never tacky, boring or overtly see-through. Enough to keep e viewer interested and entertained while lounging on a couch eating popcorn and drinking beer on a Sunday afternoon. What's wrong with that? In addition, it poses a couple of interesting questions about our current and especially future relationship with machines, the morality of it, etc. These questions will become more and more important as each day passes, and even though the movie does not even attempt to analyze or answer them, it is not unimportant to have posed them. A classical, typically Hollywood-ian ending offers no real solutions, all the wrong certainties and faulty answers, albeit populist ones.
- claudio_carvalho
- Feb 12, 2010
- Permalink
- Sirus_the_Virus
- Jan 20, 2010
- Permalink
Surrogates (R, 1:48) — SF, 2nd string, crossover
It's been a century since E. M. Forster wrote the classic SF short story "The Machine Stops", but its theme of human isolation and alienation continues to be relevant in the 21st Century.
Some updating must be expected, of course. Where Forster contemplated a world of navel- gazing academics communicating among each other only to exchange critiques of summaries of analyses of synopses of reviews of dim-past original works, the graphic novel by Robert Venditti and Brett Weldele (on which the film is based) envisioned a different pastime for a world full of hermits isolated in their individual chambers. Gone are the spartan scholars' cubicles, replaced by lush apartments and glistening offices. Gone is the introspection, in favor of giddy, active, colorful lifestyles. Gone are the computer-channeled messages as the primary means of human contact; now people interact via their surrogates, essentially remote-controlled androids. The one constant is the central control machine, which of course is also the common achilles' heel of both of these narcissistic, almost solipsistic societies.
Surrogates can be made strong, fast, durable, and coordinated, so nobody chooses anything else. Needless to say, they're also all stunningly beautiful. And, because violence against a surrogate does no damage whatsoever to its operator, their 90% market penetration (in only 14 years) has resulted in the virtual elimination of crime.
Into this halcyon picture creeps a note of disquiet. A pair of "surreys" has been fried in a particularly nasty way, and the eyebrow-raiser for FBI Agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) and his partner Jennifer Peters (Radha Mitchell) is that the robots' operators met their ends at exactly the same time, brains liquified in the skulls, a form of biofeedback that bodes ill for the technology. Their boss, Agent in Charge Andy Stone (Boris Kodjoe) directs them to pursue the case without blurting its implications all over the media, lest it cause a panic (and, not incidentally, a financial whack for Virtual Self Inc., the megacorp that monopolizes the market).
In the police procedural that follows, we discover that not everybody is enamored of surrogates. Notable among the opponents are the Human Coalition, led by The Prophet (Ving Rhames), which has convinced the government to guarantee it semi-autonomous "reservations", free not only of surrogates but most kinds of machines. Less extreme than these latter-day luddites but more influential is Dr. Lionel Canter (James Cromwell), the genius who invented surrogates in the 1st place but who got bounced from VSI by his business partners after he became disillusioned with the results. It turns out that one of the murder victims was his son Jarid, and therein lies the detectives' 1st lead.
Surrogates has more of the intellectual and emotional content that Gamer (4) didn't even aspire to, particularly the subplot in which Greer hasn't been in the actual physical presence of his wife Maggie (Rosamund Pike) since shortly after their son was killed. But it also ignores some of the techie details (like radio shadows, transmission lag times, and limited bandwidth) that Gamer, for all its mindless violence, at least mentioned. Willis does a nice job of conveying the uncertainty and anxiety that accompany the induced agoraphobia he's experiencing after years of going abroad only in the persona of his surrogate (also played by Willis, with tons of makeup and a weird-looking blond wig).
There are a number of morals to the story, not least of which are paying due respect to the virtues of decentralization and off-site backup.
Not in the same class as "The Machine Stops" primarily because its core premise can no longer be completely original, Surrogates nonetheless provides a nice modern gloss on that base. Good, solid SF, not great, but worth seeing.
It's been a century since E. M. Forster wrote the classic SF short story "The Machine Stops", but its theme of human isolation and alienation continues to be relevant in the 21st Century.
Some updating must be expected, of course. Where Forster contemplated a world of navel- gazing academics communicating among each other only to exchange critiques of summaries of analyses of synopses of reviews of dim-past original works, the graphic novel by Robert Venditti and Brett Weldele (on which the film is based) envisioned a different pastime for a world full of hermits isolated in their individual chambers. Gone are the spartan scholars' cubicles, replaced by lush apartments and glistening offices. Gone is the introspection, in favor of giddy, active, colorful lifestyles. Gone are the computer-channeled messages as the primary means of human contact; now people interact via their surrogates, essentially remote-controlled androids. The one constant is the central control machine, which of course is also the common achilles' heel of both of these narcissistic, almost solipsistic societies.
Surrogates can be made strong, fast, durable, and coordinated, so nobody chooses anything else. Needless to say, they're also all stunningly beautiful. And, because violence against a surrogate does no damage whatsoever to its operator, their 90% market penetration (in only 14 years) has resulted in the virtual elimination of crime.
Into this halcyon picture creeps a note of disquiet. A pair of "surreys" has been fried in a particularly nasty way, and the eyebrow-raiser for FBI Agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) and his partner Jennifer Peters (Radha Mitchell) is that the robots' operators met their ends at exactly the same time, brains liquified in the skulls, a form of biofeedback that bodes ill for the technology. Their boss, Agent in Charge Andy Stone (Boris Kodjoe) directs them to pursue the case without blurting its implications all over the media, lest it cause a panic (and, not incidentally, a financial whack for Virtual Self Inc., the megacorp that monopolizes the market).
In the police procedural that follows, we discover that not everybody is enamored of surrogates. Notable among the opponents are the Human Coalition, led by The Prophet (Ving Rhames), which has convinced the government to guarantee it semi-autonomous "reservations", free not only of surrogates but most kinds of machines. Less extreme than these latter-day luddites but more influential is Dr. Lionel Canter (James Cromwell), the genius who invented surrogates in the 1st place but who got bounced from VSI by his business partners after he became disillusioned with the results. It turns out that one of the murder victims was his son Jarid, and therein lies the detectives' 1st lead.
Surrogates has more of the intellectual and emotional content that Gamer (4) didn't even aspire to, particularly the subplot in which Greer hasn't been in the actual physical presence of his wife Maggie (Rosamund Pike) since shortly after their son was killed. But it also ignores some of the techie details (like radio shadows, transmission lag times, and limited bandwidth) that Gamer, for all its mindless violence, at least mentioned. Willis does a nice job of conveying the uncertainty and anxiety that accompany the induced agoraphobia he's experiencing after years of going abroad only in the persona of his surrogate (also played by Willis, with tons of makeup and a weird-looking blond wig).
There are a number of morals to the story, not least of which are paying due respect to the virtues of decentralization and off-site backup.
Not in the same class as "The Machine Stops" primarily because its core premise can no longer be completely original, Surrogates nonetheless provides a nice modern gloss on that base. Good, solid SF, not great, but worth seeing.
- RichardSRussell-1
- Sep 27, 2009
- Permalink
Saw this movie when it first came out back in 2009 and thought it was pretty good, despite not being particularly partial to sci-fi. Fast forward 11 years later to 2020, and I find myself constantly thinking about this movie and how it is bizarrely the reality we now live in.
Plot Summary (no spoilers) - In a not-so-distant future, society succumbs to vanity and narcissism resulting in our dependence on technology to live out our daily lives through flawlessly beautiful 'surrogate' bodies.
Even if you don't like sci-fi, give this one a try. In the age of selfies, photo filters, social media, and cyber-communication, this movie makes you stop and think - why are we so obsessed with this formulated idea of beauty and perfection, and what is the toll 'being perfect' takes on us all as a society and as individuals?
Plot Summary (no spoilers) - In a not-so-distant future, society succumbs to vanity and narcissism resulting in our dependence on technology to live out our daily lives through flawlessly beautiful 'surrogate' bodies.
Even if you don't like sci-fi, give this one a try. In the age of selfies, photo filters, social media, and cyber-communication, this movie makes you stop and think - why are we so obsessed with this formulated idea of beauty and perfection, and what is the toll 'being perfect' takes on us all as a society and as individuals?
Well this was a pretty entertaining sci-fi flick with some message behind it. So the premise is that surrogates which are better looking versions of the operators walking on the planet in year 2017 while the real people isolate themselves while they think they are living the dream life controlling these robots. So in another words it's like a real life version of that one game "Second Life". But the story mostly revolves around a FBI agent Tom Greer(Bruce Willis) that is trying to investigate a destruction of a surrogate and the murder of the operator and it goes a bit more deep as Greer investigates. The twist was decent but it wasn't all that great or interesting and there really wasn't that big of a mystery behind it, but it was still fun from beginning to end. To sum it up it's a fast paced entertaining movie, but still sort of forgetful. Wouldn't really hurt to rent it.
7.2/10
7.2/10
- KineticSeoul
- Feb 20, 2010
- Permalink
Science fiction is often used to illustrate current problems. So, this movie seems to be a modern retelling of the story of the land of Cockaigne. And like the medieval stories it heavy-handedly drives home the lesson about the Land of Plenty being a blessing and a curse.
To start with, I liked the visual style, how the Surrogates look all polished and seem to correspond to how people would like to see themselves. I also liked the idea of anonymity, that - like Internet avatars - a Surrogate could be anyone and gives you no clue as to who is operating it. Interesting as these premises may be they quickly fell apart. There are so many things that do not seem to make sense, even within the plot's own world.
Without giving away too much here are a few points that may also occur to you during the early parts of the film.
This was the list after about 20% of the film. Sadly it did not get any better. The science fiction setting has not been thought through. The murder mystery tries half-heartedly to be complex but offers few surprises and fails to deliver as little as a plausible motive. Characters just find clues because they do. In the end there is not even enough sci-fi action to support the film since Bruce Willis is not the youngest anymore and also plays a character who is very vulnerable among all the robots. Wait, does that not sound familiar? Actually, quite a number of elements seem to have been lifted straight from I, Robot. The inventor of the robots is even played by the same actor. Maybe that is it: go watch I, Robot instead.
To start with, I liked the visual style, how the Surrogates look all polished and seem to correspond to how people would like to see themselves. I also liked the idea of anonymity, that - like Internet avatars - a Surrogate could be anyone and gives you no clue as to who is operating it. Interesting as these premises may be they quickly fell apart. There are so many things that do not seem to make sense, even within the plot's own world.
Without giving away too much here are a few points that may also occur to you during the early parts of the film.
- If people depend on their Surrogates for everything, even household tasks, and hardly go out anymore why do their muscles not completely atrophy? Haven't they watched Wall-E?
- How could this advanced robotic technology and neural interfaces (Surrogates are thought controlled) have been developed within 14 years (as stated in the opening) and have become so cheap that the average Joe or Jane can afford them? And if so why is this technology not used for controlling other machines?
- Logically, for every new development there are those that oppose it. I thought they would be like everyone else just that they reject Surrogate technology. Why would they look like survivors of an apocalypse, live in abandoned building compounds, seemingly also reject all other technology and also be armed to the teeth and ready to go to war?
- And why does the main character have to be coping with some family tragedy only to illustrate that using Surrogates is bad for you?
This was the list after about 20% of the film. Sadly it did not get any better. The science fiction setting has not been thought through. The murder mystery tries half-heartedly to be complex but offers few surprises and fails to deliver as little as a plausible motive. Characters just find clues because they do. In the end there is not even enough sci-fi action to support the film since Bruce Willis is not the youngest anymore and also plays a character who is very vulnerable among all the robots. Wait, does that not sound familiar? Actually, quite a number of elements seem to have been lifted straight from I, Robot. The inventor of the robots is even played by the same actor. Maybe that is it: go watch I, Robot instead.
- darth-tobe
- Mar 26, 2015
- Permalink