Soylent Green (DVD)

Great movie

This is one of my favorite movies and one that has a deceptively complex morality question deep inside the sometimes kitschy ideas of the future as seen through an early 1970s lens. A whole generation of people have been born and grown to maturity who haven't seen it and I sure hope the large number of reviews and continued sales on Amazon will introduce them to this great movie.First off, this is one of the "Holy Triad" of Charlton Heston's sci-fi films. The other two are Planet of the Apes and Omega Man, of course. Both very worth a see as well. Also shining in this movie are Edward G. Robinson in his final film appearance (and it is a poignant and beautiful role for him) and Joseph Cotton in a brief but pivotal role.The story centers on a murder that Thorn (a cop played by Heston) investigates in a near future New York City where over-population and increasing environmental damage have nearly destroyed the modern way of life. Thorn's "Book" named Sol (a type of research assistant) played by Robinson uses some loot that Thorn found at the scene of the murder to open up clues to a conspiracy that is so dark and far reaching that it will shake the world if it comes out. What follows is the exciting, tragic and heartbreaking search for the truth.Some of the most important parts of the movie are those that are least talked about. If you think about these almost subliminally disturbing aspects of the film, one can be left with a new and very strange take on morality in difficult situations.One: The question of furniture. In this future, the very wealthy live in apartments that we might see as middle class today and have access to things like real meat (though not great quality) and actual fruits and vegetables (also not great but real). They also have humans included with the furniture and actually call them such. In this case, it is Shirl, a pretty girl whose function is obvious and like a good couch, meant to be comfortable and unobtrusive for the owner of the apartment. For most of us the thought is totally appalling, but is it really? In a world where most won't live to adulthood and death is likely to be drawn out and horrible, furniture live lives of relative security for at least as long as they are young and pretty. Interesting question.Two: Death and Suicide. In this future, the living are too numerous and it can't be sustained. The plankton that fed such a populous as the world dustbowled have now also died out in the super heated future. In response to this, the government sponsors beautiful places where anyone can go to "go home". It is nothing short of an assisted suicide/euthenasia clinic. It is also one of the only places of peace and beauty left for anyone. When Sol finds out what he does during his research and goes to one he has one of the most beautifully filmed and realized death scenes in movie history. It is perhaps even moreso since Mr. Robinson never had another film appearance before his own death. Thorn finds him and tries to stop him, but it is too late and in seeing how this plays out for those who go there to die, one can almost see the positive morality of such a place in such dire world circumstances. It is, after all, the choice of the person who goes there...no one elses.Three: Ultimate Recycling. SPOILERS HERE. Most people know the line..."It's made of People!!". Not all of them know that it is from this movie, which is amusing. In the final scene of the movie we see Thorn trying to get the word out that Soylent Green...once made of plankton for protein...is actually made of the people who go to die at the euthenasia centers. We also see that no one is listening. While our initial reactions as this is discovered during the course of the film is one of disgust, it does beg the question...why? The world is too full of humans and there is no longer the resources to bury them all as they leave this world. What do you do with them? In this future, they break them down into slurry...just the basic proteins...and make a type of cracker out of them. When we consider that the FDA has an allowable amount of contamination for food that is human in nature, it changes the metric some. Is it, in reality, any different than the wonderful crops that come in the years after a battle happens on a field? It's equally appalling and thought provoking.Four: Environment and humanity. One of the most interesting responses I've seen to this movie happens in the first couple of minutes. A montage of scenes depicts real life progress and the pollution that it brought. Most often I hear a comment about how realistic that looks for a 1970s movie. What most are surprised to hear is that almost all of them are real images of real life. How shocking that is to people born after the Clean Air and Clean Water acts. Younger generations have no idea that LA used to be so smog choked that people died or that swimming in a natural body of water could easily kill you or give you cancer quickly. While I'm generally against too much intervention by government I'm often surprised that anyone could ever assert with a straight face that people in business to make money will police themselves and won't intentionally harm the environment. I remember the time before the government forced companies to stop spewing filth into the air and water. Those images of what our country looked like are worth seeing the movie for all by themselves. They are eye-opening.Overall, there is a great deal of 1970s fashion and style that many today will find laughable and there is always that wrongness that happens when trying to imagine a near future (like the video games), but the movie itself is sound and entertaining. It is also dark and mature in nature. It's an excellent film that will appeal to those who like sci-fi, dystopian movies or classics of the age.

Good movie

It's a classic, and something people should see at least once

Like most people, I knew the shocking secret of the film long before actually watching it. But I was truly surprised to discover what a strong film it remains to this day, presenting a grim but convincing picture of a world in rapid decline, both materially & culturally. Even better, it credits the audience with intelligence & lets us put the pieces together as we watch, rather than hitting us over the head with speeches & statistics.Are the minimal effects & overall design dated? Of course -- but that's totally beside the point. Ideas are what matter here, not gloss. True science-fiction isn't about prediction, it's about speculation: what if? And it's often commentary on & criticism of the present. This film is a perfect case in point. If the details haven't aged well, the essence remains as searingly potent as ever.What strikes me is the restrained, casual tone of the picture, presenting a corrupt & apathetic world so matter-of-factly. Our coarsened hero Thorn (an excellent Charlton Heston) is so obviously a product of that world, shaped by its anomie & mounting despair. Sol Roth (Edward G. Robinson in a heartfelt final appearance) is the dwindling counterpoint, no more than a living memory of a better, cleaner world that Thorn can't even begin to imagine. And Leigh Taylor-Young's Shirl is a tragic figure, sensitive but wearily accepting of her role in a society that has no place or pity for her humane spirit.The background is filled with throwaway lines that almost slide by without calling attention to themselves: asking a bodyguard if he can read or write, thus establishing the collapse of literacy; marveling at something as common to us as a glass of ice, indicating its scarcity; succumbing to the temptation of a rare hot shower, rather than sex or money. A sickening yellow-green pall fills the screen in all outdoor scenes; a palpable weariness & desperation covers everyone like a thickening layer of dust. The viewer feels as grimy & sweaty & unwashed as any of the characters. In some ways, it's a brutally realistic version of "Idiocracy" long before that satiric film.Most telling is the transformation of human beings into disposable commodities by the corporate masters of the world. From young women called "furniture," to the literal scooping up of hungry rioters, to the secret of Soylent Green itself, the mass of humanity exists to be used, traded, bought & sold to satisfy the greed of a handful of the rich & powerful. Which doesn't seem all that far-fetched these days ...When we get to the final scenes with Sol, dying before screen images of the green earth he knew as a child, it's as jolting to the viewer as it is to a stunned Thorn, who finally realizes just how much both humanity & the world have lost. And the age of the film is actually a reminder that the greenhouse effect & global warming were well-known over 30 years ago, only to be ignored & disregarded since that time in favor of corporate interests. Dated? Not in this regard!All in all, it's the sort of film that probably wouldn't get made today, not unless it was packed with CGI effects, massive explosions, a larger body count, and a lot less intelligence. But if you're ready for a thought-provoking story, you won't do much better than this fine science-fiction film. And the commentary by director Richard Fleischer & Leigh Taylor-Young is informative & articulate, adding to the experience. Most highly recommended!

If you haven't watched this film and have ever wondered at seeing someone turn their nose up at the popular meal replacement drinks by the same name, this is why.Released in 1973, and loosely based on a Harry Harrison story this movie has environmental and political themes that are still relevant today. Charlton Heston (The Ten Commandments, 1956 / Ben Hur, 1959) lets his hair down a little from his usual style, but he and the whole film occasionally come across as melodramatic. Something that honestly Harrison probably would have appreciated.Fans of the period, especially period sci-fi, Charlton Heston, or Harry Harrison will likely enjoy this more than others. There's something a little harrowing and perhaps too real about the predictions this story makes about the future.