Based on the graphic novel by Robert Venditti and Brett
Weldele, and directed by Jonathan Mostow--who gave us Terminator 3: Rise Of The Machines--Surrogates takes place in the near future, where people stay at home all day long. They go out and intermingle with the rest of the world via their surrogates, which are remotely operated robots that look exactly like them (only more idealized). The advantages of this situation appeal to the homebody within us all: you can go out and work, or play, without ever worrying about getting sick, or getting into an accident. The surrogate does all the work, while the person stays at home in a comfy recliner, usually clad in their pajamas.
Main Review Page | SF Reviews |Email Me |Buy Surrogates on DVD Here
But in the best tradition of SF/action films, this nice little set up is shattered when two destroyed surrogates are found at the scene of an accident. The FBI agents working the case, Greer (Bruce Willis) and Peters (Radha Mitchell), immediately find something is drastically wrong when they see the "dead" surrogates’ eyes have been burned out. And the case becomes even stranger when they look up the operators of the surrogates, only to find them dead--instantly killed the moment their surrogates "died." But this shouldn’t happen, since the surrogates normally have a safety feature that protects their user from dying along with them.
The story becomes more Byzantine in nature, with various plot twists and the occasional action scene--yet it was hard for me to really get involved with this one. Part of the problem is the actors, who play their own surrogates in an almost flat, emotionless state, which makes it difficult to relate to them. Another problem is that the film itself falls flat because the concept isn’t as well thought out as it should be. Director Mostow states in his commentary (which is thoughtfully provided with English subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing) that he set the film in the present because he didn’t want the viewer to be "distracted" by a futuristic setting with flying cars and whatnot.
But if you have a groundbreaking piece of technology, which is what the surrogate program is, won’t it will also feed other aspects of society? For example, look at the computer, which is now in nearly every home in the US--and, if you own a car less than ten years old, it’s got a computer inside it, as well. Computers are now everywhere, in the unlikeliest of places, just as the surrogate technology should be. In the film, we see surrogate soldiers, but wouldn’t there also be surrogate astronauts, as well? And if so, the space program would be thriving under these circumstances, which would offer even more advanced technologies.. 
It’s possible to make a science fiction film that’s set in a technologically
advanced setting that won’t "distract" the viewer, just look at Spielberg’s AI. If a filmmaker is afraid of people being distracted by science fiction elements, then perhaps they shouldn’t be making an SF film at all. As it stands, Surrogates is a mildly amusing action film (that still has SF elements within it, despite Mostow’s claims) that tries to make a valid statement about the internet, and how it encourages people to create "surrogates" of themselves whenever they log online. But if the filmmakers can’t be bothered to treat the theme of their film with the proper attention that it deserves, then why should the viewer even be bothered?
--SF
