tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post1644924569267646857..comments2024-03-28T14:49:36.133-04:00Comments on John Kenneth Muir's Reflections on Cult Movies and Classic TV: CULT MOVIE REVIEW: Surrogates (2009)John Kenneth Muirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-5728943959050796332010-02-23T21:04:40.914-05:002010-02-23T21:04:40.914-05:00I was on the fence about this one and I still am a...I was on the fence about this one and I still am after your thorough analysis John and some great comments. I loved Dark City and I, Robot was such a step back for Alex Proyas. I've never liked much of his stuff since then. I, Robot was disappointing and it sounds as though Surrogates is walking that same line.<br /><br />I like Bruce Willis and it looked intriguing, but I had my reservations about it with Disney's hand in the mix. Could the "push/pull" have been Disney? I love Disney for some things, but they make me nervous when it comes to science fiction. I do still have some fondness for the Black Hole.<br /><br />I enjoyed Breakdown as well.SFFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04256589316922398158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-18754638182995352552010-02-23T18:24:28.045-05:002010-02-23T18:24:28.045-05:00Banapaulo:
You said it well -- both in the simil...Banapaulo: <br /><br />You said it well -- both in the similarities to I, Robot (which were unnecessary and counter productive) and in the sort of limp execution. <br /><br />I'm a big Mostow fan (I love his 1997 movie "Breakdown") but there's just something off about Surrogates, despite the occasionally moments where it nails the social commentary.<br /><br />best,<br />JKMJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-50268686848343948382010-02-23T17:46:35.496-05:002010-02-23T17:46:35.496-05:00Your review hits the nail on the head. I found the...Your review hits the nail on the head. I found the movie very prosaic. I don't think the actors were given particularly good direction, and they seemed to be positively encouraging comparisons to I, Robot through the predictable storyline and casting of James Cromwell. It's a shame because, as you point out, the film makes a solid stab at the science fiction elements. Rather than just using the surrogates angle as an excuse for an action film (there is actually surprisingly little, and sub-par, action), the film tries to deal with the consequences of its core idea in an often intriguing and almost poignant way. Which is what makes it even more frustrating that the film is so unsure of itself, and ultimately too limp and underwhelming to really be considered any kind of success.<br /><br />Also, could Radha Mitchell possibly have been any more underused?banapaulonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-40028058594576239792010-02-23T13:34:03.574-05:002010-02-23T13:34:03.574-05:00J.D.
I totally agree with you. There was some ki...J.D.<br /><br />I totally agree with you. There was some kind of creative push-pull here, I'm sure of it. One that made the film less than what it could have and should have been.<br /><br />Thanks for commenting,<br />JKMJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-59744404883251983302010-02-23T10:37:21.923-05:002010-02-23T10:37:21.923-05:00"Yet, honestly, the film is one of the few &q..."Yet, honestly, the film is one of the few "future police procedural" examples that gets the speculative sci-fi right, and the standard cop elements/investigation wrong."<br /><br />This is the problem I had with this film as well. On one hand, it wanted to be a high-falootin' SF concept film a la BLADE RUNNER and on the other hand it wanted to be a roller coaster action film and I never felt that the screenplay blended these two elements together well enough.<br /><br />Still, there is enough in the film that I did like and I really did admire the attempt.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08164105442273577128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-35034919979462864742010-02-22T16:18:39.222-05:002010-02-22T16:18:39.222-05:00Le0pard13:
Thank you for your comment. You know,...Le0pard13:<br /><br />Thank you for your comment. You know, you bring up a great point: I have no evidence of this, but I suspect you are right. The movie feels like it's been cut back to the bare bones; like critical elements were trimmed back to increase the pace, or make for an easier sell.<br /><br />All of that -- as you indicate -- is clearly to the movie's detriment. I'd love to see a director's cut if this is indeed the case.<br /><br />best,<br />JKMJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-64641545295256365582010-02-22T16:10:11.069-05:002010-02-22T16:10:11.069-05:00Great look at this, JKM. I have this in my queue t...Great look at this, JKM. I have this in my queue to watch (the trailers just didn't have that must see now vibe). And the reviews weren't that great for it. I'm wondering, given that 88-minute run time and the critical points you make about the orphaned sub-plots, whether this film was really hacked to death in the editing room. Perhaps, one day they'll be a real director's cut of this movie. The idea behind it is compelling. I have no doubt the current set of brain-dead studio executives have much in imagination or know how to market sci-fi as it should. This release has the tinge of a neglected film. Thanks for this.le0pard13https://www.blogger.com/profile/09421175808461787862noreply@blogger.com