Soylent Green

The world of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New York City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. Overpopulation, air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this particular food stuff really made of? That question is at the heart of this admittedly somewhat dated but still intriguing film, based on Harry Harrison's 1966 novel "Make Room! Make Room!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly cantankerous but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the world used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that part has become immortalized into cinematic history.

Under the very professional guiding hand of director Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; FANTASTIC VOYAGE), SOYLENT GREEN is a fairly grim but thought-provoking look at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for filming as far back as 1968, after he had struck gold in the sci-fi genre with PLANET OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today.

"Soylent green" is an ecological dystopia that may not be a highlight in film history but that surely gives something to think about.

I saw it on television in 2022, the year in which the film is situated. The year also in which global warming / climate change was a real ecological worry. The film was made in 1973, a year after the Club of Rome had published his report "The limits to growth", questioning the sustainability of ongoing economic and population growth.

In the famous opening scene the effect of population growth and industrialization on the landscape is made visible, ultimately resulting in the city of New York containing 40 million inhabitants. Inhabitants feeding themselves with dried food of the company Soylent, because fresh fruit and vegetables is only affordable for the very rich.

Just like in a dystopia such as "Blade runner" (1982, Ridley Scott) the distinction between upper class and lower class is very big. Also this is a point of recognition in the "real" 2022, where growing inequality after years of neo liberalism, alongside environmental problems, is a concern. Unlike "Blade runner" the world (especially the interiors of the homes of the rich) is very 70's. As though the film accentuates that it is not the science that has evolved (for the better), but only the environment and the society (for the worse).

A minus for the film is in my opinion the role of women. They are portrayed as a sort of furniture in the houses of the rich. Furniture that is mainly there to be sexy. Overpopulation damaging the environment is plausible, overpopulation rolling back the emancipation of women is much less so.

One of the most provocative and best scenes is an old man choosing for euthanasia. He remembers very wel that he has lived in a better world long ago and he has seen enough. Even in 2022 the issue of euthanasia because you suffer from life itself (and not from some kind of disease) is very controversial. The euthanasia ceremoy consists of beautiful images of nature accompanied by the Pastoral symphony of Beethoven. With the exception of Disney's "Fantasia" (1940) this music has never been used so well in film. This dying scene was played by the old Edward G, Robinson, who died in the year "Soylent green" was released. This dying scene was the last scene in his long career.

The film ends with a shocking discovery. Of course I am not going to disclose this discovery, only that in the final scene the lead characters shouts his discovery to anyone who will listen. An ending very much alike that of "The invasion of the body snatchers" (1956, Don Siegel).

It is the year 2022 and nothing has changed even if things have gotten worse. New York City has become even more overpopulated and is just yet another city heaving in its own filth with countless "have-nots" fighting over sparse resources. Energy supplies are low, water is strictly controlled, living spaces are small and cramped and "real" food is a luxury reserved for the very rich. The masses do not have such luxuries and eat rationed supplies of high-nutrient processed foods from the Soylent Corporation. Detective Thorn is a "have-not" and just like everyone else is out to get what he can for himself and friend Sol Roth. Called to a burglary that became a murder, Thorn learns that the victim is a director at Soylent and suspects that all the curious thing about the crimes may be coming together to be far more than the work of some random thug.

Famous for its "shock" ending (which everyone must know and most people will guess) this film is actually more than just one scene and is actually an intelligent sci-fi detective story that has an engaging central story and a generally interesting vision of the future that is much more convincing than the one of Hollywood blockbusters and such. The investigation is solid but it is the world it happens within that is most interesting as we see a world where, surprise surprise, the poor people are left to make do while those better off can still enjoy the finer things while they remain. It is not an earth shattering view of the future but it is a convincing one and I enjoyed being in this story and seeing this world played out. Personally I bought it but it may help that I mistrust corporations anyway and believe that the poor will be the first to get shafted when anything bad happens, simply because they have less to work with.

The narrative is not the strongest though and in terms of it being a detective story it could have been better. Some viewers have complained about the lack of action, which I think is a pretty unfair accusation since it wasn't trying to be that type of film. The main characters are interesting. Thorn is a man of authority but he is just like everyone else, out to get what he can and takes advantage of others the first chance he gets. His relationship with Roth is not fully explained but it worked anyway and provided a touch of humanity. It helps that both actors did good jobs of it as well. Heston normally plays the gruff hero but here at least he allows the corruption within man's heart to come out. Robinson has less of a character but his performance is assured and is touching for reasons internal and external to the film. Support is not so good but it is less important in the smaller roles; Cotton is a nice find though.

Overall this is a famous film that is good but not without its faults. The narrative is reasonably interesting and carries the film all the way to a nice (but too well-known) conclusion but it is in the general vision of the future of a world where the people are struggling to get by with resources running low. A smart sci-fi that is well worth seeing.

Very interesting. The big twist wasn't as big a shock as maybe they had hoped for and it was very dated but it did get my mind working. It really got me thinking about a world without vegetation or livestock and made me appreciate the world I live in a lot more. Charlton Heston does a good job, as do all the supporting characters, and it was a very realistic film which was surprising. It lacked direction at times and a lot of the settings and background needed more explanation but it was still a surprisingly good and intelligent movie. The main fault that I could find was that I didn't want the film to end when it did, I would have liked to see what happened next.

7/10

This was Eddie Robinson's 101st film and his last, and he died of cancer nine days after shooting was complete. All of which makes his key scene in the movie all the more poignant.

Although some of the hair and clothing styles are a bit dated (also note the video game shown in the film), but the subject of the film is pretty much timeless. Heston said he had wanted to make the film for some time because he really believed in the dangers of overpopulation.

Several things make this film a classic. The story is solid.

The acting is top-notch, especially the interplay between Heston and Robinson, with nice performances also by Cotten and Peters.

The music is absolutely perfect. The medley of Beethoven, Grieg, and Tchaikovsky combined with the pastoral visual elements make for some truly moving scenes. This was the icing on the cake for the film.

And the theme (or the "point") of the film is a significant one. Yes, it's a film about overpopulation, but on a more important note it's a cautionary tale about what can go wrong with Man's stewardship of Earth. It's in the subtext that you find the real message of the film. Pay attention to what Sol says about the "old days" of the past (which is our present), and note how Thorn is incapable of comprehending what Sol is saying.

This film is one of my top sci-fi films of all time.