Surrogates (2009) User Reviews

Better than some reviews suggest

[ajasys · 7/10 · 2 January 2010]

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.

Surprisingly timely

[spamcatcher-10034 · 7/10 · 2 May 2021]

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.

Basically entertaining

[ToddWebb · 7/10 · 26 September 2009]

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.

A sci-fi concept well examined despite predictable story patterns

[Movie_Muse_Reviews · 6/10 · 17 May 2010]

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

Good Sci Fi concept and a mostly satisfying detective thriller

[theycallmemrglass · 7/10 · 2 January 2010]

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.

a fine performance by Bruce Willis

[StarkTech · 10 October 2009]

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.

Very intriguing, while it's less than perfect the good far outweighs the not-so-good

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 20 April 2015]

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

Surrogacy is a perversion. It's an addiction. And you have to kill the addict to kill the addiction.

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 31 January 2014]

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

More relevant now than it's ever been

[corrt106 · 7/10 · 27 April 2023]

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.

A Metaphor for the Present

[scottwallvashon · 9/10 · 27 September 2009]

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!"

What will the future look like? ... Maybe like this!

[buiger · 6/10 · 11 April 2010]

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.

Average

[bob the moo · 9 December 2009]

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.

Good, but could have been better

[KineticSeoul · 7/10 · 21 February 2010]

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

In the Eyes of the Beholder

[Cineanalyst · 8/10 · 21 October 2020]

Sometimes I'm confounded by how others see movies. Take "Surrogates," with its 37% RottenTomatoes score and criticisms of action-flick banality and stupid robot stuff. Indeed, the picture's introduction during the credits explaining the entire scenario as a political thriller was unnecessary and misguided, and if one accepts it on that level, it makes some sense that they'd be disappointed. What I enjoy about it, however, is that it's about spectatorship--about gazing upon movies. Characters see the world through virtual-reality headsets to identify with their robotic avatars much as we follow figures on the screen in dark movie theatres or alone in our bedrooms. Moreover, these robots are the actors' doubles just as film is but a representation of recorded people and not their actual presence. Initially, the only "meatbag" in the surrogates' world, as opposed to the reservations for the hold-outs who prefer living in their own skin, is the guy watching the surveillance monitors tracking the goings-on of the surrogates. He's our on-screen surrogate, even as we largely identify with and follow the protagonist played by Bruce Willis--especially when even our on-screen surrogate spectator, like us, is physically powerless to affect the proceedings. Even the noir-ish, detective mystery is over the murder of people through their eyes, and the love story is about the desire to see the woman inside and not the superficial shell she inhabits--in a way a repudiation of the so-called "male gaze."

The acting isn't bad, either. There are quite a bit of little mannerisms added to suggest their second bodies' artificiality, along with the costume and production design. Willis and Rosamund Pike each have exceptionally expressive eyes. The visual effects have a hyper-realistic aspect to them that works well for the overall artificiality of the endeavor, and I even like the sense of weight when the surrogates land from leaping about. Sure, it's not perfect. Besides the opening credits, the implementation of Dutch angles seems rather haphazard. There doesn't seem to be much of anything to make of white characters possessing black-skinned surrogates, or of the transgendered potential of inhabiting any sex, and I think it's unfortunate that they have reservations for the humanity that is uprooted from their way of living, but the movie doesn't prominently cast any Native Americans. But, then again, viewing "Surrogates" as a reflection of reality I think is to miss seeing its fantastical potential as a sci-fi mediation between the screen and the spectator.

Could have been so much better.

[colormind · 5/10 · 20 October 2009]

First of all, let me start with a quote from David Brin:

"Hey! Go to Kiln People for the original concept, done a whole lot better, by the original author."

There goes it, the ideas behind the Graphic Novel that inspired the movie, are taken from a great book from SF write David Brin. The difference between the book and the movie is that the book explores so much more, the movie is extremely shallow and fails to explore the ideas of the book. If you want to see some action in a SF disguise, then go for it, but if you truly like SF I would recommend the book over the movie.

Possible social impact of what we have today

[darkmax · 7/10 · 1 October 2009]

First of all, to those who find this movie unappealing, are you one of those potential surrogate users? Perhaps even like the over-sized man who was using a sexy female avatar? Stop reading this and start getting a life. A REAL life.

Games like SIMS and programs like instant messengers are the predecessors of the future this movie is trying to portray. This is the message. Artificial life is fun and all, but reality always gets back at those who escape it.

You can be as drunk as you want, but one day you will have to sober up. When that day comes, where would you hide?

Good way to start the FALL!!!

[joselnieves81 · 6/10 · 26 September 2009]

Well the summer came and went and well it wasn't really a summer blockbuster filled summer. Remakes, prequels, sequels and over loaded CGI movies dominated the summer. No real originality or fresh ideas stood out in my mid what so ever. Now fall is here and we have Surrogates! Surrogates while its not 100% original I have to say I enjoyed every 88 minutes of it. The movie starts of documentary style to explain the idea of Surrogates and it just picks up steam from there. Bruce Willis is back and kind of brought his Die Hard "John McClane" swag with him for Surrogates. Great acting by Willis, movie moves along great, action packed, no over blown CGI, easy to follow, no plot holes, endings simply great. This movie is worth the over priced movie tickets.

"The Machine Stops" a Century Later

[RichardSRussell-1 · 7/10 · 28 September 2009]

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.

A surrogate made this movie as well.....

[ArthurMausser · 7/10 · 25 September 2009]

This movie had the potential to be a really fantastic production. However, the details in this world of the future are too cut and dry. The action scenes were OK at best. The suspense was OK as well. Bruce Willis does his best to make this a good movie. I hope someone can see the comments I make about movies that have narrow misses, last second heroics, and near impossible luck in avoiding death: MESSAGE - Quit doing it. It makes the movie unbelievable.

There was a lot more that could have been done with the script but I guess "It is what it is." It's hard, after admiring the movie "District 9," to appreciate current sci-fi movies. I compare Surrogates to District 9 and there is no comparison. District 9 is still in theatres. See it before you see this.

Unbearable

[mrfilm · 1/10 · 2 October 2009]

This has to be the worst sci fi movie since Twister. I honestly cannot think of a single redeeming quality in this film. The starting premise itself was a stretch - 98% of the people in the future use surrogates. There is absolutely nothing in this world that 98% of the people agree on, not to mention a surrogate would be an expensive piece of machinery which not everyone could afford. The plot involves Bruce Willis playing a his tired "rebel-cop" persona (only looking strangely like Robbie Rotten from Lazy Town when he is in "surrogate self") and stumbling upon various conspiracies involving VSI (corporation producing surrogates), the military (of course), and the inventor of surrogates (who apparently in all his genius cannot figure an obvious explanation for his son's death and needs Bruce Willis to point it out to him). The subplot of the movie involves reservations where surrogates are not allowed and shot on sight, even if they are law enforcement surrogates. How the government decided to waive their sovereignty to a bunch of regressionist secessionists is not explained. The regressionist reservations are filled with clichéd fat hillbillies and are led by Ving Rhames with dreadlocks, who delivers his lines with a passion of a low level politician reading off a teleprompter. There are other problems that I can go into such as surrogates being strong enough to withstand collision with a car yet falling apart under the force of Bruce Willis' bare fists, as well as the non-nonsensical robot beauty salons, but if I describe every hole in the plot, I will probably have to post the entire film's screenplay. So I'll just cut to the chase: the story is absurd, the action is OK at best, the dialogue is bland in some parts, laughable in others, and the ending is meaningless.

If you want to see a decent sci fi movie, check out Pandorum instead.

Excellent Sci-Fi Flick with Great Action Sequences

[J_Trex · 8/10 · 28 September 2009]

This film was an interesting twist on the robot as human concept, with a plot that managed to keep the viewer interested right up until the dramatic ending. A high tech company has specialized in mass producing surrogates, or personal robots, which are sold to the American middle class. They are quickly adopted to perform routine functions and then essentially perform high level functions (like one's job). The main theme was how the surrogates assumed people's lives and identities to such an extent the flesh & blood owner of the surrogate could stay home and presumably pursue higher level interests. The reality was most people simply fell into a spiritual stupor, resorting to alcohol or drugs to pass their time.

The actors were all very good and up to the task of portraying themselves in robotic fashion (this doesn't require great acting skill but the screenplay was quite good). I thought Bruce Willis did a good job in the lead role(s) as FBI Agent Tom Geer (he also played his "surrogate" as a very low key robot). Bruce's surrogate is investigating the death of the son of the founder of the corporation that invented and produced the surrogates. This kicked off the main plot, which centered around an armed resistance group opposed to surrogates and attempting to defeat the surrogates and the corporation that produced them.

If the plot sounds confused, at times it is, and the ending may be less than satisfying. But for a far fetched sci-fi movie about robots, this was one of the better ones I've seen.

OK, here's a 4 from me ...

[bwdude · 4/10 · 16 October 2009]

... that's a "3" for the general idea of "having a Surrogate" and an extra "1" for casting Bruce.

The movie itself, however, gets 0 points from me. It's got no heart and no soul, it's disturbingly two-dimensional and pointless, even if it has a pretty face.

Yes, you guessed it, the movie is just like a Surrogate itself! It's the next best thing to a good movie, but never quite gets there, not even close. Anything you see, you've seen a dozen times before, the outcome is foreseeable and all together you would not miss anything if you won't have seen it.

I sat through it, but I am not gonna watch it again ...

Pretty good... i'd say.

[k-r-z · 7/10 · 27 September 2009]

I have to admit - I wanted to see that movie because trailer was pretty much AWESOME! Next thing - I'm a sucker for sci-fi movies AND Bruce Willis brand made me see what's going on. About the movie - Surrogates ( robots themselves ) reminded me of "I, Robot" - I guess I'm not the only one feeling this similarity. Plot wasn't exactly too strong but was good enough and didn't fall apart during the movie - that's a plus. Bruce Willis - there's something about this guy - can't really say what it is though - each and every time when he's beaten up in a movie it adds something really special to it ;) His acting was not as good as in e.g "6th Sense" but still good. About FX - there were few dumb mistakes, nevertheless overall experience was really nice.

My rating is 7 stars - had to take some for running time - movie was actually short ,and left me unsatisfied in some way.

Entertaining and thats it !!!

[hari_msw07 · 7/10 · 27 September 2009]

For starters, i am a huge fan of Bruce Willis and he definitely didn't disappoint me with this movie. If you are looking for entertainment, then this movie is definitely one for you. A slick sci-fi thriller with good visual effects. The concept of Surrogates may seem similar to the concept of virtual society in the recently released movie 'Gamer'. But this movie is definitely a more refined version with indeed a social message. The plot is nothing exceptional, but OK. The running time is perfectly suited for the movie and i personally didn't feel the movie was rushed up. The action sequences, though not spectacular, were good. Bruce played his part to perfection. None of the the stars including Radha Mitchell or Ving Rhames had a solid role to play. All in all i would rate it 7/10.

the plot made some sense....

[MLDinTN · 6/10 · 1 August 2010]

but still too many plot holes for me to really like it. I'm not that big a fan of sci-fi movies because usually there are too many plot holes. Such as does he even third world countries have surrogates? How do people procreate if they only go out in public as surrogates? Why do people stop committing crimes just because they use a surrogate? Bruce Willis plays detective Tom Greer whom is out to solve the countries first murder in quite some time. It seems now, every one uses a surrogate, meaning they use their mind to control a robot. The robots are made to be the most attractive looking version of yourself and can run, jump like a superhero. The guy murdered is the son of the inventor of surrogates, a man that was forced out of his own company years ago and is now a recluse. There are also sections of cities that are robot free, where humans don't want surrogates.

It's up to Tom and his partner to figure out what new gadget killed the guy by killing his surrogate and what ties this to the inventor of surrogates.

FINAL VERDICT: OK, worth seeing on cable.