Warning, this review will contain spoilers throughout. I would advise you to have seen both I-Robot and Surrogates before you read this review.
Last Saturday I went to see Surrogates. During the movie I was pleasantly surprised to see the part of the scientist behind the technology in the movie played by James Cromwell.
This was an important catch for me because James Cromwell played a very similar part in I-Robot. So after watching (and enjoying) the movie I decided to write about this.
So rather than being a straight up review of I-Robot or Surrogates this is a comparison of the two very similar roles played by James Cromwell, and how these roles compare and contrast. I am hoping that this will be a good way to look at the differences between a ?good? character (morality wise) and one who is ?bad?.
The basic information of the characters that we are given is the same. Both are pioneers in their field, driving forces of the technology they help to create. Both of them are shown to be sidelined by their companies as the film goes on and at a point where they have offered most of what they have to offer their respective fields.
Both characters die. The differences of their deaths are a way to examine the morality of each character.
Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell in I-Robot) dies at the beginning of the film.
He dies by getting his robot to throw him out of the window. His reason for doing so is alerting the main character to his case. He is aware of the rising threat of a machine that plans to take control of the world but is unable to get any messages out because the machine is keeping him prisoner in his own home. His death starts the investigation that leads the main character to finding and stopping the robot revolution.
The manner of his death is important. Firstly he doesn?t kill anyone else he makes sure the death is his own and since he does it to alert someone to the oncoming threat at the cost of his own life his death is a sacrifice. Secondly he gets his robot to do it. Although it is a cruel thing to ask of a person it does show that his hope of getting robots to go beyond their programming was fulfilled.
Ultimately, his death shows the faith he had in his own beliefs, and in what humanity could accomplish.
Dr. Lionel Canter (James Cromwell in Surrogates) has a death which is similar in method but vastly different in the things it says about him as a character.
This character commits suicide by taking what I?m assuming is cyanide. Unlike Dr. Lanning who died at the beginning of the movie and makes no pre-mortem appearances Dr Carter dies at the end of the movie.
By this point Canter is shown to be something of a villain. Had his plan not been stopped he would have killed millions of people. When he died it was only after revealing his plan to the main character of the film in a typical crazed fashion. His death from this point does not alter any of what follows and is a ?way out? for Dr. Carter unlike Dr. Lanning who died to stop something from happening.
The next area I will look at is the interaction of Dr. Lanning and Dr. Canter with the main characters of their movies.
In I-Robots Dr. Lanning acts through a hologram of himself to aid Del Spooner (Will Smith) in his investigation. He provides help when he can, although after his death his means are limited and his legacy as shown through his robots, interview footage and his hologram are ways for the Dr to help Spooner get closing to figuring out the truth. He is a guiding force.
In contrast Dr. Canter is more parasitic. He has a few interactions with Agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) but unlike the guiding Dr. Lanning Dr. Canter is more concerned with gaining information for himself; he does not act like a guide but as a boss being delivered a report.
In at least one point of Surrogates Dr. Canter uses the information that Greer brings him to further his own agenda and by the time of his reveal as a villainous character he has shown to have influenced events leading throughout the course of the movie. In order to achieve his plan he even went as far as to murder Greer?s partner.
So Dr. Lanning brings about his death to ensure that no others die. His death is the only death that happens as a result of his plan. Dr. Canter?s plan involves the death of millions and required several deaths to get to. Thinking off the top of my head I can think of three people that Dr. Canter killed personally and two of these deaths are for the purpose of revenge. Throughout the movie Dr. Canter acts through deceit, where as Dr. Lanning is more open.
Ideologically these characters are similar and their motivations are not as contrasting as their actions.
Dr. Lanning?s motivation was two-fold. He wanted to protect humanity from robot revolution. He also wanted to bring about evolution in robotics. At one point there is a monologue from this character that discusses in an age of A.I. what constitutes the soul.
He creates a robot that can violate the three laws, and by doing so he creates a robot that can become a person. Not artificial intelligence but actual intelligence. At the end of the movie the life of this Robot is his to live as his own.
Dr. Canter wishes to destroy the surrogates because he believes they are destroying humanity. He believes that by living their lives through robots that essentially live their lives for them they are not living themselves and describes them as dead inside the moment they stared using surrogates. Essentially what he wants to do is bring life back to humanity and preserve it. The reason he developed the technology was so that people who were disabled (Dr. Canter requires the use of a wheelchair) would be able to live their lives to the full.
What connects both these men in their motivations is that both wish to protect the idea of humanity.
Where they differ is how they get to their goal and what they are willing to do. Before he dies Dr. Canting expresses the sentiment that if his son?s death contributed to the end of surrogacy it would have been worth it.
What we essentially have here is the difference between someone who is selfless and someone who is selfish.
To conclude, while both were striving for a similar cause I would call Dr. Lanning a good person who stuck to his ideals and Dr. Canter a man who was corrupted by the end of his life as shown by their actions. The similarity between the plots of their movies and the face that they share allows for a much more personal comparison of the two.
Last Saturday I went to see Surrogates. During the movie I was pleasantly surprised to see the part of the scientist behind the technology in the movie played by James Cromwell.
This was an important catch for me because James Cromwell played a very similar part in I-Robot. So after watching (and enjoying) the movie I decided to write about this.
So rather than being a straight up review of I-Robot or Surrogates this is a comparison of the two very similar roles played by James Cromwell, and how these roles compare and contrast. I am hoping that this will be a good way to look at the differences between a ?good? character (morality wise) and one who is ?bad?.
The basic information of the characters that we are given is the same. Both are pioneers in their field, driving forces of the technology they help to create. Both of them are shown to be sidelined by their companies as the film goes on and at a point where they have offered most of what they have to offer their respective fields.
Both characters die. The differences of their deaths are a way to examine the morality of each character.
Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell in I-Robot) dies at the beginning of the film.
He dies by getting his robot to throw him out of the window. His reason for doing so is alerting the main character to his case. He is aware of the rising threat of a machine that plans to take control of the world but is unable to get any messages out because the machine is keeping him prisoner in his own home. His death starts the investigation that leads the main character to finding and stopping the robot revolution.
The manner of his death is important. Firstly he doesn?t kill anyone else he makes sure the death is his own and since he does it to alert someone to the oncoming threat at the cost of his own life his death is a sacrifice. Secondly he gets his robot to do it. Although it is a cruel thing to ask of a person it does show that his hope of getting robots to go beyond their programming was fulfilled.
Ultimately, his death shows the faith he had in his own beliefs, and in what humanity could accomplish.
Dr. Lionel Canter (James Cromwell in Surrogates) has a death which is similar in method but vastly different in the things it says about him as a character.
This character commits suicide by taking what I?m assuming is cyanide. Unlike Dr. Lanning who died at the beginning of the movie and makes no pre-mortem appearances Dr Carter dies at the end of the movie.
By this point Canter is shown to be something of a villain. Had his plan not been stopped he would have killed millions of people. When he died it was only after revealing his plan to the main character of the film in a typical crazed fashion. His death from this point does not alter any of what follows and is a ?way out? for Dr. Carter unlike Dr. Lanning who died to stop something from happening.
The next area I will look at is the interaction of Dr. Lanning and Dr. Canter with the main characters of their movies.
In I-Robots Dr. Lanning acts through a hologram of himself to aid Del Spooner (Will Smith) in his investigation. He provides help when he can, although after his death his means are limited and his legacy as shown through his robots, interview footage and his hologram are ways for the Dr to help Spooner get closing to figuring out the truth. He is a guiding force.
In contrast Dr. Canter is more parasitic. He has a few interactions with Agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) but unlike the guiding Dr. Lanning Dr. Canter is more concerned with gaining information for himself; he does not act like a guide but as a boss being delivered a report.
In at least one point of Surrogates Dr. Canter uses the information that Greer brings him to further his own agenda and by the time of his reveal as a villainous character he has shown to have influenced events leading throughout the course of the movie. In order to achieve his plan he even went as far as to murder Greer?s partner.
So Dr. Lanning brings about his death to ensure that no others die. His death is the only death that happens as a result of his plan. Dr. Canter?s plan involves the death of millions and required several deaths to get to. Thinking off the top of my head I can think of three people that Dr. Canter killed personally and two of these deaths are for the purpose of revenge. Throughout the movie Dr. Canter acts through deceit, where as Dr. Lanning is more open.
Ideologically these characters are similar and their motivations are not as contrasting as their actions.
Dr. Lanning?s motivation was two-fold. He wanted to protect humanity from robot revolution. He also wanted to bring about evolution in robotics. At one point there is a monologue from this character that discusses in an age of A.I. what constitutes the soul.
He creates a robot that can violate the three laws, and by doing so he creates a robot that can become a person. Not artificial intelligence but actual intelligence. At the end of the movie the life of this Robot is his to live as his own.
Dr. Canter wishes to destroy the surrogates because he believes they are destroying humanity. He believes that by living their lives through robots that essentially live their lives for them they are not living themselves and describes them as dead inside the moment they stared using surrogates. Essentially what he wants to do is bring life back to humanity and preserve it. The reason he developed the technology was so that people who were disabled (Dr. Canter requires the use of a wheelchair) would be able to live their lives to the full.
What connects both these men in their motivations is that both wish to protect the idea of humanity.
Where they differ is how they get to their goal and what they are willing to do. Before he dies Dr. Canting expresses the sentiment that if his son?s death contributed to the end of surrogacy it would have been worth it.
What we essentially have here is the difference between someone who is selfless and someone who is selfish.
To conclude, while both were striving for a similar cause I would call Dr. Lanning a good person who stuck to his ideals and Dr. Canter a man who was corrupted by the end of his life as shown by their actions. The similarity between the plots of their movies and the face that they share allows for a much more personal comparison of the two.