In 2040, a large space ship named Event Horizon is built, incorporating a new propulsion system that allows instantaneous travel between any two points in the universe. The new technology will revolutionize space travel and free humans from our Solar System. Immediately after activating the new engine to do a test run to Proxima Centauri, the ship vanishes and is presumed destroyed.
Seven years later, the Event Horizon reappears in orbit of Neptune and emits an automated distress beacon. A team of U.S. military salvage astronauts goes to the ship to figure out what happened. Immediately upon boarding it, the rescue team realizes something very bad happened. Almost all of its systems are offline, and all that is left of the original crew is a mutilated corpse in the bridge along with bloody flesh smeared on the window panes. The team members also start having disturbing hallucinations and violent outbursts towards each other.
They discover that the experimental engine accidentally transported the Event Horizon to a different universe “of pure chaos and evil” where the indigenous life forms and laws of physics made the original crew go violently insane and murder each other, and then infused the ship itself with an evil, psychic life force that persisted even once it returned to our universe. The ship itself is therefore alive and is causing the rescue team members to go insane. It wants them to reactivate the special engine to take them all back to the crazy universe so the beings there can have fun torturing them.
Even though most people hate this movie, it’s been a guilty pleasure of mine for years. When I saw this in the theater at age 13, I think it was the scariest film I’d ever watched up to that point except maybe Alien.
Analysis:
In 2015 there will be a permanent human presence on the Moon. When the film starts, text appears describing 21st century milestones in space exploration. The film was released in 1997, so at that time, these events were in the future. One milestone was the establishment of a manned Moon base in 2015. That never happened in real life, and generally speaking, space exploration and space technology have proceeded much slower than it did in the film universe.
I predict a manned base will be built on the Moon in as little as 20 years, though it will have a tiny crew. It will be probably be the product of a broader space race between the U.S. and China, and that it will be a money loser that exists for prestige and scientific research. After an initial surge of attention, the public’s interest in the base will wane, just as happened with the International Space Station (ISS).
Profitable Moon bases might come decades later, and will probably center around the extraction of Helium-3 from the surface soil for use as fuel in future nuclear fusion reactors. While it’s tempting to think this would mean an enlarged human presence on the Moon to operate the mining equipment, A.I. and robots might be so advanced by then that humans would be unnecessary. As I’ve written before, I predict our machine creations will beat us into deep space, and humans like us might never even leave the Solar System. I’d be impressed if the off-world human population surpasses just 1,000 by the end of this century.
In 2032, commercial mining will start on Mars. The film’s opening text also says this. This prediction will fail, and I doubt the first humans will even land on Mars until the end of the 2030s at the earliest. Elon Musk has repeatedly predicted that his SpaceX company would take people to Mars by 2029, and his “Starship” rocket has the ability to get there and is now being tested, but other critical technologies haven’t even started development, like the crew vehicle that will house the astronauts for months long journey between Earth and Mars, and the landing capsule that will take them to and from Mars’ surface. By 2032, the best we could hope for is an unmanned mission to Mars meant to test out some of the technologies meant for a future human landing, and maybe meant to drop supplies or cargo capsules on the planet’s surface to form the genesis of a human base.
It won’t make sense to do commercial mining on Mars until well after 2032 since the planet’s gravity will impose prohibitively high launch costs for any mined ores a company is trying to export to Earth or other space colonies. It would make more sense to mine the Moon or the asteroid belt because gravity will be much weaker. Even launching stuff from Earth would probably be cheaper considering the infrastructure advantage there will be here vs. on Mars for many decades if not centuries.
The first commercial mining operation on Mars will be meant to service the Martian economy and not send anything off planet. It would only become economically justified once a significant population of humans or, more likely, intelligent machines were present on the planet. The mining operations would be focused on extracting basic materials like iron and aluminum to make mundane things like buildings and vehicles.
In 2040–only 17 years from now–a massive space ship like the Event Horizon will be built. Aside from its teleportation drive, the Event Horizon is remarkable for its sheer size: it is about a mile long, dwarfing today’s biggest surface ships and tallest buildings in length.
There’s no chance something of this scale will be built until the 22nd century. The biggest spaceship in 2040 will probably be one that is designed to transport astronauts from Earth orbit to Mars orbit. The internal area that is accessible to the human crew will be comparable in volume to a large RV or an American house.
By 2047 there will be a large space station orbiting the Earth. This is shown at the start of the movie and appears to be a general purpose space station. The rescue ship docks with it to pick up its crew before heading on to the Event Horizon. The station looks cuboidal in overall shape and consists of a scaffold structural frame studded with function-specific modules (e.g. – maneuvering thrusters, fuel tanks, crew compartments, tunnels linking modules). Its size is impossible to judge accurately, but the length of any side can be measured in hundreds of feet. The ISS is 356 long along its longest axis, so the movie space station’s size is within an order of magnitude of something that already exists.
Unfortunately, nothing approaching the size or complexity of the fictitious station will exist by 2047. The ISS, which costs billions of dollars a year to operate, is scheduled to crash back to Earth in 2031. Even if it gets a life extension to 2047, it’s highly unlikely it will be significantly expanded in size by then. No space agency or private company has credible plans to build new space stations that will be nearly as big as the ISS for the foreseeable future. Keep in mind the political decision to build the ISS was made in the mid-80s, it took another ten years for construction to start, and the station wasn’t fully assembled in space for another 15 years. 2047 is 24 years in the future, so if we expect to have something even bigger than the ISS in orbit by then, the agreement between several space agencies to start work should be getting signed about now if the ISS’ developmental timeline is any guide.
No international deal has been made, and we shouldn’t expect serious space cooperation between the U.S., China and Russia to happen anytime soon thanks to worsened diplomatic relations, so in 2047, manned ships intended for interplanetary missions will dock with space stations that are SMALLER than what we have today.
Future space ships will have weird, utilitarian designs. The Event Horizon is shaped like a…well…just look at it and decide for yourself! While I don’t think future space ships will look exactly like this, I’m sure they’ll look just as weird, but in different ways. For one, since there’s no air in space, nothing needs to be streamlined (look at satellites). A space ship’s front could be a flat slab, instead of a pointy cone like an airplane nose or an arrow like a ship’s bow. However, the minimize the risk of collision with space debris, it would still be a good idea to make space ships oblong in overall layouts, with their narrowest ends facing the direction of travel, so a gross design similarity with ships and cars would remain.
Since there’s also almost no gravity, a compact and robust layout is less important, so major sections of a space ship could be connected to each other with flimsy little tunnels or braced steel frames.
Giant arrays of solar panels dwarfing the ship like a parachute dwarfs its occupant could be common. Huge fins meant to radiate waste heat from the ship’s engine and other systems might also be present.
Ships designed for long, manned missions will probably need gravity for the health and comfort of their crews. The only way to generate it is to have the ships rotate so centrifugal force pushes people objects outwards from the ship’s central axis. Shaping the habitat module of such a ship like hollow cylinder would take maximum advantage of the artificial gravity.
Put all of these design considerations together, and you do indeed get space ships that look as weird as the Event Horizon. In 2047, the basic scenario of a weird-looking space ship docking with a space station orbiting Earth before it heads out to another planet will probably be a reality. However, both crafts will be much smaller than those shown in the film, and ship’s range will be limited to Earth’s nearest neighbors (Venus or Mars) and won’t extend to Neptune.
Future space ships will have dark, gothic interiors. The inside of the Event Horizon consists of dimly-lit, menacing rooms, and some of the walls are dark colors. Long duration space missions are already stressful enough, so there’s no way real space ships will be like this. A good deal of research goes into making spacecraft psychologically pleasant, and future space ships will, to the greatest extent practical, feel warm, comfortable, and remind humans of Earth.
However, rarely-used parts of the ship might not obey such rules. The Nostromo from the movie Alien is closer to the mark–the part of the ship where the crew sleep, eat and do recreation is light-colored, well-lit, and inviting, whereas the parts reserved for machinery and cargo storage are industrial-looking and darker.
Future astronauts will have black space suits. This makes no sense. In space there’s a gigantic black background. If you were working outside the ship, would you want to be camouflaged against that background if your tether broke loose and your crewmen had to find you? And why would a military rescue crew whose members spend most of their time going into broken-down space ships with all the interior lights disabled wear black suits? It would make it harder for them to see each other.
I can’t think of a single benefit to black space suits. White is the ideal color, which is probably why the American and Russian suits designed for extravehicular use are white.
Artificial gravity will be generated from the floors of space ships. The Event Horizon and the rescue ship both have this form of artificial gravity. As I’ve discussed in other reviews, the laws of physics don’t allow for the existence of this kind of technology, and gravity can only be simulated by spinning a space ship so the centrifugal force pushes the astronauts and objects down into the deck.
The tablet computers of 2047 will be big, chunky and will have thick frames. A tablet computer is shown in one scene, and it is clearly inferior to one from five years ago (the film was released in 1997, and the first iPad was not sold until 2010). The prediction has thus already failed. By 2047, we’ll be able to make tablets that are only a few millimeters thick and whose displays go to their edges, meaning they won’t have frames.
This raises an interesting question: If you COULD make a tablet like that, would it make sense to do so? If your tablet is almost as thin as paper, it can easily be damaged by creasing or being poked too hard by a stylus. If you make it strong like metal to resist damage and still keep it as thin as a sheet of paper, then it turns into a sharp and potentially deadly object. Excessive thinness will also make the device hard to hold and grip in some ways, and every time you pushed a button on it, the whole thing would wobble.
So even if you COULD make a tablet as thin as paper, I think you’d still want to put it in a protective case, which would give it a depth and a border frame similar to a modern iPad. Extra thickness will also mean longer battery life no matter what.
These considerations also apply to smartphones–just imagine how hard it would be if your phone were a 3″ x 5″ note card made of rigid metal.
Suspended animation technology will exist by 2047. The crewmen use suspended animation pods during the multi-month journey between Earth and Neptune. It’s vanishingly unlikely the technology will exist by then. I don’t think we’ll be able to cryonically freeze humans and revive them until the end of this century or later. A milder alternative to that process, which involves keeping a person in a deep, drugged sleep like a hibernating bear while they’re drip-fed nutrients for months, could be developed sooner, though I question whether it would be wise to use it on astronauts. Yes, it would reduce their consumption of calories and oxygen and would lower the odds of certain types of mission problems, but it could jeopardize the mission by damaging their health before reaching the destination.
In 2047, astronauts on interplanetary space missions will bide their time in transit just as the Apollo astronauts did and workers in Antarctic bases do: mostly in boredom, staring at the same four walls.
We will invent a space ship engine that can exceed the speed of light. Our current understanding of physics holds that this is impossible. It’s unwise to stake any expectations about the future on fundamental laws of science being overturned. Moreover, even if it were theoretically possible to exceed light speed, the next show-stopper will probably be finding a way to generate the impossibly high amounts of energy needed to do it.
The space ships of 2047 will still be using conventional means of propulsion, like chemical fueled rockets and ion thrusters.
Under the light speed constraint, it would literally take hundreds, perhaps thousands of years for us to colonize our nearest stars, by which time A.I.’s will be running Earth’s civilization, with obvious implications for who gets chosen for the missions. Furthermore, any future space empire we created would be impossible to hold together since it would take years for simple communications to transit between the different star systems. People and intelligent machines would take orders of magnitude longer to traverse the gulfs, so the isolation would lead to unique cultures and perhaps political identities developing in each system.
Wars with aliens at the edge of space would be very hard to deal with since the rest of our civilization wouldn’t hear about it until years after it started, by which time the situation in the warzone would have totally changed. A coordinated military response drawing upon the resources of the other star systems would be almost impossible. It would be a mess.
The space ships of 2040 will still use CDs for data storage. There’s a brief shot on the Event Horizon’s bridge where we see an astronaut removing a CD from the main computer’s disc drive. Storage discs are already obsolescent and rare to see today. By 2040, only people interested in deliberately indulging in nostalgia will use them.
That said, removable storage devices will still exist in 2040, but they won’t be rotating. Sometimes it’s more hassle than it’s worth to transfer or store data in the cloud, and it’s preferable having your data on a physical device you can put in your pocket. This is especially true for anything you want to keep private.
Astronauts will use magnetic boots. When the rescue crew first enters the Event Horizon, its gravity is not working because the power is disabled. To get around, they use magnetic boots, which stick to the metal floors. NASA developed these in the 1960s, so there’s no technological barrier to equipping astronauts with them in the 2040s. However, they’ve never been used in space because spacecraft are built of aluminum and titanium, which magnets are not attracted to. The space ships of that era will still need to be very lightweight, meaning they will still be made of non-magnetic materials, and the boots will be useless.
Moreover, walking is an inefficient way to move around in a weightless environment, as you’ll discover if you try to walk across the bottom of a swimming pool. It’s much better to aim your body at your destination and to use one or two of your limbs to push off from a nearby surface so you float towards it. There’s a scene where the rescue ship’s captain does something like that to quickly move along the outside of the Event Horizon to reach a comrade who is about to be ejected from an airlock.
By the late 21st century, Earth had become an overpopulated, diseased, polluted nightmare. The small number of super wealthy people escaped by building a large space station in Earth orbit and moving there. The station, called “Elysium,” is a bucolic paradise where everyone lives in a mansion, is protected by robot police, and has a personal rejuvenation pod that fixes any illness or injury when they lie down in it.
The film’s events take place in 2154. Elysium’s only problem is illegal immigration: poor people with major health problems smuggle themselves onto Elysium, and in the few minutes they have from the time their beat-up space ship dumps them onto the grass to the time they get arrested by robot cops, they try to break into a mansion and use one of the rejuvenation pods. Even though Elysium’s government seems to have a handle on the problem since they quickly arrest and deport them all, a government official played by Jodie Foster doesn’t think they’re doing enough, so she has a mercenary named “Kruger” do the dirty work of blowing up illegal immigrant space ships, killing dozens of people at once. After a verbal reprimand from Elysium’s president, Jodie Foster decides to do a military coup.
Matt Damon exists on the opposite end of the spectrum, living in a Los Angeles slum and working a horrible factory job where his boss yells at him all the time and he has no rights. One day, the machine he is in charge of breaks and he has to go inside to fix it. The door accidentally closes behind him and it turns on, zapping him with a dose of radiation that will kill him within five days.
Because Earth hospitals are so poor, his only hope is to illegally immigrate to Elysium to use a rejuvenation pod. He doesn’t have any money, so he can only get a ticket by agreeing to help an underworld crime boss kidnap a rich guy at gunpoint so they can basically steal his ATM pin number by hacking his electronic brain implant (rich people have these). Before Matt Damon goes on this criminal mission, he lets the crime boss upgrade his body with a screw-in exoskeleton kit that gives Damon superhuman strength and his own brain implant.
The job goes bad–Damon’s criminal compatriots accidentally shoot the rich guy in the chest. Instead of trying to render medical assistance, they connect a wire into the rich guy’s head and download his data into Damon’s brain implant. The rich guy dies, it turns out the data is encrypted so the criminals can’t make sense of it, and Kruger shows up and kills them all except Damon, who escapes into the slum.
Matt Damon then becomes the world’s most wanted man because it turns out he has the rich guy’s access codes to the Elysium mainframe, which are super important because they let the user reboot the system and make all humans Elysium citizens. Jodie Foster also wants the codes for her coup.
I won’t spoil the ending, but it’s exactly what you’d expect from Hollywood. I disliked Elysium for its clumsy, excessive moralizing, rushed pacing, and poorly thought out plot. Matt Damon, one of the greatest American actors of his generation, was disengaged in his role and almost looked like he didn’t want to be there. And while some futuristic elements in the movie will probably prove accurate by 2154, like humanoid robots, overall it was totally unrealistic and nonsensical. For example, if rejuvenation pods are the catalyst for illegal immigration, why doesn’t Elysium just give some pods to Earth so the poor people won’t need to go to space and bother them? Why isn’t there a single enterprising rich person on Elysium who sells some pods to Earth to make money for himself? If the people on Earth know that pods exist and know what they do, why can’t they pool their resources to copy the technology and make their own?
Also, before watching this anti-rich people movie, ask yourself how the world got that messed up to begin with. Did it become overpopulated thanks to rich people having huge numbers of kids? Diseased from rich people doing IV drugs and spreading AIDS? Polluted from rich people driving around all X billion cars there are in the world? Did rich people spray paint the buildings in Matt Damon’s slum and throw trash all over it? Absolutely not. If the world ends up as bad as it was in the film, it will be thanks to the bad decisions of billions of people, 99% of whom aren’t rich. In summary, in trying to make a commentary about the present, Neill Blomkamp (ironically, a multimillionaire) sacrifices accuracy depicting the future, and leaves us with a cool-looking but hollow and forgettable film.
Analysis:
The world will be ruined. In the film, Los Angeles was a gigantic slum, and these scenes were shot in the real-life slums of Mexico City. Aside from advanced flying vehicles, military exoskeletons and robot police, Earth’s technological state appears inferior to what it is today. This is unrealistic. By 2154, cities like L.A. will probably be much nicer than today, and extreme poverty will probably be eliminated. The historical record shows that living conditions have been improving across the planet as a whole since the Enlightenment, and the trend is unlikely to change.
There will barely be any white people in Los Angeles. Aside from Matt Damon and a few colleagues at his factory job, no white people are shown living in L.A. This will prove an accurate depiction. Whites became minorities in L.A. and California in the 2010s, and nationally will be minorities around 2045. Their share of the L.A. county population is forecast to keep declining for the foreseeable future.
By 2154, nonwhites, including mixed race people, will comprise the overwhelming majority of the U.S. population. By that point in the future, medical immortality, decreased fertility among all races, and lessened need for immigration thanks to machines doing all the work will cause the racial makeup of the planet to stabilize (this is why I don’t think white people will ever “go extinct” as racist alarmists contend).
Well before 2154, the large population of mixed race people and widespread use of genetic engineering to give people stereotypically “white” traits (light-colored eyes, hair and skin) will seriously scramble our future concept of race. Genetic engineering will also be used to add unnatural traits to the genepool, like orange hair and purple eyes, resulting in significant numbers of humans not resembling any race. Some human beings will have also upgraded themselves and fused with their technology so radically that they won’t belong to any race, and will find the concept irrelevant to their self-identities.
The rich elites will still be overwhelmingly white. Elysium is 90% white, in contrast to the impoverished Earth. While disproportionate wealth and power will stay in the hands of white Americans for generations even after they become minorities, and Europe will also retain its outsized wealth for some time, a lot will happen over the next 141 years to level the playing field. At the very least, all East Asian countries will attain Western standards of living and income. More likely the whole world will have caught up, and in no small part thanks to machines becoming common everywhere and taking over work from humans. In making almost all the Elysium residents white, director Neill Bloomkamp again tried to make a social statement in terms we are familiar with today, but at the expense of realism.
Robots will be everywhere. The film featured robots cops, parole officers, doctors, and emergency workers that were just as capable as humans. This will come to pass well before 2154. However, I disagree with the movie’s depiction of these robots all being mechanical-looking, with all their gears and metal surfaces exposed, and I don’t think they’ll have stereotypically machine-sounding voices. They will be more refined, and some will be indistinguishable from humans (androids). Even today’s technology allows machine voices to sound almost the same as natural human voices, and before 2040, they will be indistinguishable.
Humans will still work in factories. Aside from that fact that it makes a futuristic product (robots), Matt Damon’s workplace is the same as a modern-day factory: Human workers in overalls show up every morning and work on the crowded shop floor, pushing buttons, pulling levers and pushing carts full of parts around. The absurdity of this is striking: If the factory is making intelligent, dexterous, humanoid robots, why don’t the managers replace the human workers with some of their own robots?
Labor-intensive factory jobs like those in the film will disappear in developed countries around the middle of this century. Small numbers of highly trained human workers will remain in the factories to oversee machines, but they won’t do grunt work like Matt Damon.
By the end of this century, no one on planet Earth will do labor-intensive factory work, and most factories will be 100% automated. If you think this can’t happen because humans will always be needed to fix the machines, you are wrong. As I said in my review of Terminator, there’s no reason machines won’t eventually be able to build and fully repair each other.
Medical technology will be able to fix almost every problem. To fix any ailment, the rich people need only lie down in a rejuvenation pod and wait for its mechanical “arms” to wave back and forth over them. In this way, even deadly conditions like cancer are fixed in a few seconds. Kruger’s horribly destroyed face is thus reconstructed after a battle with Matt Damon. Curiously though, the machines can’t correct the cellular-level damage that causes old age, and there are some old-looking people walking around Elysium.
This level of technology will exist by 2154, though most health problems will still take much longer than one minute to fix. Massive trauma like having your skull crushed will be impossible to fix, as will reviving people who have been dead and rotting for more than a couple hours. However, diligent use of future medical technologies will be able to keep people young and reverse the aging process.
People will still die of leukemia. A subplot of the film involves the daughter of Matt Damon’s ex-girlfriend. The daughter is about to die from leukemia unless she gets advanced treatment in Elysium. Even though the ex-girlfriend is a nurse and presumably has access to superior medical services since she works in a hospital and has doctor friends, Earth is just so poor and backwards that they can’t cure the daughter. Even though Elysium is hoarding the rejuvenation pods, there’s little reason to assume conventional leukemia treatments wouldn’t be able to cure the disease with over 100 more years of research.
There will be a space station miles in length/diameter orbiting the Earth that can be plainly seen in the sky. Elysium is 37.3 miles wide and orbits 4,000 miles above the Earth. Even in the daytime, the station is visible from the planet’s surface, and its circular shape can be made out. According to other calculations, an object only one mile wide could also be clearly seen if its orbit were the same as the International Space Station, which is a mere 254 miles up.
While the technology and money to build such space objects will be available by 2154, I’m unsure if the investment will actually be made. For one, while it would make sense to build some types of massive objects in space like solar panel arrays and sunshades (to ease global warming), they would be positioned so far from Earth that people on the ground wouldn’t be able to see them.
We’ll be assembling space ships in space by 2154, but I’m not sure if we’ll be doing it in low Earth orbit. The LaGrange Points probably make more sense. Even if we did build them in LEO, I don’t see why any of them would need to be a mile or more in length (for what purpose), nor would any “space factories” that built them need to be that large.
I don’t think the rich will ever move to a giant space station because they decide Earth sucks, but I do think there will be at least one “space hotel” in low Earth orbit by 2154 that caters to rich people. Even that far in the future, rocketing enough material into space to make a mile-wide space hotel will be too expensive, and there won’t be enough customer demand to fill all the rooms anyway.
And while I wouldn’t be surprised if there were one or more “space hotels” in low Earth orbit that catered to rich tourists by 2154, they wouldn’t have enough clientele to justify being a mile or more in diameter. However, I can see a workaround: Massive sheets of Mylar.
Imagine a luxury space hotel that’s similar in size to a cruise ship. It’s basically an elongated box measuring 1,000 ft x 200 ft x 150 ft, which is in the same size range as a real cruise ship. Even in low Earth orbit, it’s still too small to see from the ground. To fix that problem and hence boost the station’s publicity, huge “wings” or “sails” are attached to its sides. Made of Mylar, the sails are very lightweight and compact, meaning it’s affordable to rocket them into space. Once attached to the sides of the station, they’re unrolled and oriented to face Earth, making the station look much bigger. It would kind of resemble a butterfly, with an elongated, relatively compact “core” with very thin, flat accessory protrusions on either side.
The station’s wings/sails would have no functional purpose. While many people would protest plans to mar the sky with such an object, it might be built anyway. NIMBY’s don’t always win.
Robot exoskeletons will exist and will give wearers superhuman strength and endurance. Matt Damon has one of these “grafted” to his body, and it proves invaluable in the many fistfights he has with killer robots and mercenaries, and in the self-extrications he does freeing himself from crashed vehicles and prying apart heavy metal doors that are trying to close on him. These will definitely exist by 2154, but they will not be crudely screwed into wearer’s bodies (during the “operation” where this is done, they don’t even take Damon’s clothes off, so he’s wearing a ridiculous bloody T-shirt UNDER his exoskeletion for the rest of the movie). As I concluded in my review of Edge of Tomorrow, the first combat exoskeletons could make their debut in the 2050s, 100 years before the film is set to happen. With an extra century of development time, they should be significantly better than what Matt Damon had.
Highly refined brain-computer interfaces will exist. In the film, the rich people have small devices sticking out of their heads resembling cochlear implants which allow them to interface their brains with computers. Files can thus be directly transferred between the two. Devices like these will be common by 2154, though they will probably be completely internal, meaning they won’t have parts sticking out from the person’s skin.
Old guns will use new ammo. Matt Damon uses a normal pump-action shotgun to fire a tiny sticky bomb onto a rich guy’s flying car. After the car takes off, Damon remotely detonates it and the car crashes. During the ensuing battle with the rich guy’s two robot guards, Damon kills one of them using a 200-year-old AK-47 firing proximity-fused explosive bullets that are linked to a control computer in a small gun sight.
The concept is clearly borrowed from the XM-25 and shows where the technology will be once refined. I really liked this as it shows high technology being seamlessly incorporated with low technology in a realistic way, and it nods to the fact that the basic gun designs we have today are optimal or close to optimal, so further performance improvements will have to come from peripheral things like better ammo and sights.
By 2154, gun sights will provide a composite picture that intelligently overlays images from several parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. They will have computers that can recognize objects and humans, and visually highlight them for the shooter’s benefit. The scope computers will also have ballistic calculators that move the target reticle based on factors like distance, inclination/declination, wind velocity, air pressure, humidity, and temperature of barrel.
The guns themselves might have self-aiming mechanisms like the Smartgun from Aliens had. A rifle would have a sort of metal “frame” around it, and at several different points, levers and metal cables would connect the rifle to the inside of the frame. By telling those levers and cables to tighten or slacken, the scope could quickly make fine adjustments to where the barrel was pointed, compensating for flaws in the shooter’s aim.
Routine use of highly advanced ammunition incorporating better propellants and features like timed airburst, tandem warheads, steering fins, and mini guided rockets will also make guns more accurate and deadlier against a greater range of targets. The guns of 2154 will also have computers built into them that will link with the user’s brain computer, allowing the person to instantly “know” where to point the weapon to hit the desired target without having to look through a sight.
Combining all of these technologies, the mechanical “guts” of a 200-year-old AK-47 could be used to make a future rifle with incredible capabilities. A better aiming system would double the maximum range at which it is lethal against humans, and make it possible to rapidly shoot the weapon from the chest with the same accuracy as today’s careful sniper shots from bolt-action rifles. The weapon could even shoot down low-flying aircraft, cripple vehicles from long distances with bullets through their vital components like tires and gas tanks, or even disable tanks by destroying their fragile external sensors or sending bullets directly down the barrels of their main guns to hit the shells loaded in them.
Small homing weapons will kill people. During Matt Damon’s botched kidnap attempt on the rich guy, Kruger arrives and kills one of Damon’s accomplices with hand-sized, frisbee-like flying objects that home in on targets that Kruger marks with a small laser. Once they reach their targets, they latch onto them and explode.
Smart weapons like these will be old technology by 2154, and in fact will probably exist within 20 years and take the form of tiny quadcopter drones. Since it might be too hard for them to latch onto targets, especially if the targets are moving or able to swat the drones down, they will probably be programmed to blow up once they get within a few feet from the target, or upon colliding with any part of it.
Facial recognition software will be in common use, even among robots. Throughout the film, surveillance cameras with facial recognition software are used to identify people in public places. Quadcopter drones with cameras also do this when looking for Matt Damon. These will also be old technologies by 2154.
Facial recognition software is already quite reliable, and is sometimes paired with fixed-position surveillance cameras, particularly in higher-tech authoritarian countries like China. However, the software’s accuracy gets worse as the angle at which the camera is placed gets steeper. In other words, a camera six feet off the ground, pointed straight at a person’s face will be able to recognize them easily, but the same camera installed 20 feet off the ground on top of a pole, looking sharply down at the same person so it mostly just sees their hair, will struggle to tell who they are.
For this reason, aerial drones are currently unsuited for autonomously tracking down specific humans. However, that will surely change once more biometric data on people becomes available. Future robots that walk around at ground level with us will recognize us easily thanks to having unobstructed views of our faces and bodies. In the future, you’ll never be a stranger to a robot, or to a human with access to facial recognition software.
Super guns will exist. During the final battle on the Elysium station, Matt Damon finds an advanced automatic rifle with “CHEMRAIL” written on the side and he uses it to kill a bad guy. The gun makes electronic noises when “charging up” and firing, and the bullets are propelled with such force that they easily pass through a wall and literally tear his opponent apart. Canon Elysium literature states that the gun uses electromagnetic forces instead of exploding gunpowder to propel the bullets, and that the bullets leave the gun with 18,000 Joules of energy. That’s powerful, but no unfathomably so: A .50 caliber bullet (used in some sniper rifles and heavy machine guns) has 15,000 Joules.
Small arms with this level of power will be more common in the future because robots and augmented humans that are strong enough to carry and shoot them will exist. A human wearing an exoskeleton could fire such a weapon on full auto like Matt Damon did, but an average person could not. There was a major error in the battle scene since Matt Damon had the CHEMRAIL gun pressed against his shoulder and was holding the handle with his bare hand. His exoskeleton didn’t bear the recoil of the weapon at all. So in real life, had he fired it, the gun’s recoil would have broken his shoulder and wrist. However, had the weapon been directly braced against his exoskeleton, the force would have been transmitted directly into it, and not his body.
There will still be text-based computer interfaces. Throughout the film, characters eschew GUI’s and instead use simple, text-based computer interfaces that resemble MS-DOS. For certain applications, these will still be used in 2154 since they’re optimal. However, reading characters off screens will be unnecessary in most cases since brain implants will let humans instantly “feel” and “know” what the computer wants to tell them, and vice versa. Intelligent machines themselves will be able to wirelessly interface with technology even more directly and easily.
Text-on-screens will, along with devices that operate on purely mechanical principles, probably exist as backups to more sophisticated technology. For example, imagine a wristwatch that can wirelessly transmit the time to your brain implant so you can know with a single thought what time it is. The wristwatch would still have a face with a small LED screen, which you could look at to see what time it was in case the wireless chip in the watch broke.
Shoulder-launched missiles launched from Earth will be able to fly thousands of miles into space. There’s a scene early in the film where a group of illegal immigrants gets into small space ships and flies from L.A. to Elysium. Inexplicably, Elysium lacks the weapons to blow up the ships or at least disable them before reaching the station, so the only way to stop them is to have Kruger shoot them down with surface-to-air missiles. Using a shoulder launcher, he fires several missiles that have enough power to exit the Earth’s atmosphere, overtake the space ships and destroy them. Since the station orbits about 4,000 miles above Earth, the ships were also thousands of miles up when they were destroyed.
No chemical fuel can contain enough energy to propel a small missile that far and fast. The only way such a thing MIGHT be possible is if the missiles had mini nuclear fusion engines, which may or may not be feasible, even with the highest possible level of technology. By 2154, I doubt such weapons will exist.
Helicopter-sized craft will be able to fly back and forth between the Earth’s surface and space. It takes an enormous amount of energy to defeat gravity and to put something into space. Case in point: A 300 foot tall rocket is needed just to put something the size of a large van into orbit. In the film, the van-sized object doesn’t need the huge rocket anymore–four small engines and a small fuel tank can do it.
I think this is probably impossible. The closest we might get is passenger jet-sized craft flying into space with four or five people inside. For a more detailed discussion, see my Starship Troopers review.
Today’s guns will still be in use. At several points in the film, people are shown carrying contemporary guns like AK-47’s and M-16’s. These are used in gun battles with cutting-edge soldier robots and expert mercenaries. By 2154, few of the firearms existing today will still be in use since they will have all long worn-out and been shredded for scrap metal. Guns, like anything else, gradually wear out with use and at some point become dangerous to fire and not worth fixing.
However, the basic DESIGNS for guns are timeless. From a mechanical engineering standpoint, guns like the AK-47 and M-16 are optimized for what they do, and there’s no way to significantly improve upon them. So in 2154, newly manufactured AK and M-16 descendants could still represent the cutting edge of small arms technology.
Certainly they’ll still be effective at killing humans since our skin isn’t evolving to become bulletproof, and even armored machines could still be killed with enlarged versions of those guns designed to fire stronger bullets. However, while the internal mechanics will be conserved, future guns will look at least a little different on the outside.
Personal energy shields that can stop bullets will exist. Kruger has a pocket-sized device that, when activated, creates a semi-transparent, circular shield in front of him. It only lasts a few seconds, but it can block a hail of bullets, even from the super-powerful CHEMRAIL gun.
This is scientifically implausible. There’s no intangible force that could be harnessed to make moving objects with large amounts of kinetic energy instantly stop in midair, as if they’d hit a solid object.
Plot: At an unspecified point in the future, it has become common for people to implant their children with devices that record everything they see and hear. The implants, called “Zoes” (two syllables), are organic, are implanted at the fetal stage of life somewhere in the central nervous system, and “grow” as the child grows. The implants are unnoticeable, and people are only told they have them once they hit adulthood. For technical reasons, the audiovisual contents of the Zoes can’t be downloaded until after the person dies.
Robin Williams is the main character and protagonist. The film starts with a memory from his own childhood where he is hanging out alone during a day trip to the countryside and encounters another boy his age, who is also alone. The two get on friendly terms and explore an abandoned building together. While walking over a narrow beam, the other boy falls over the edge, lands on his head and immediately dies. Kid Robin Williams could have saved him by grabbing him as he was dangling from the edge, but he hesitated and the boy died. He runs away and never tells anyone else about this traumatic and shameful memory.
Years later, Robin Williams has found work as a “cutter”–a sort of futuristic video editor who downloads Zoe recordings from the recently deceased and then edits them down into two- or three-hour movies that show all the milestones and positive highlights of their lives. These recordings are usually shown at funerals, given to loved ones, and serve as semi-official records of what happened in a person’s life.
The editing process entails deleting recordings of bad things the person did (like spousal abuse, child molestation, and everyday acts of cruelty), leaving a happy but false representation of the person’s life. Robin Williams’ choice of this profession clearly stems from his own desire to assuage his own guilty memories of the childhood incident. His character’s last name–“Hakman”–brings the symbolism to an even more obvious level.
The movie’s main conflict arises when Robin Williams is asked to cut the Zoe footage for a wealthy businessman who recently died. After reviewing it, not only does Robin Williams realize the man was a secret pedophile, but he also finds clues that the dead boy from his own childhood might have actually survived and crossed paths with the businessman. Added to the mix is the fact that Robin Williams is under a short deadline to do the cut and return the original footage to the family, and a dangerous terrorist group wants to steal the Zoe footage for blackmail purposes.
The year is never revealed in The Final Cut. Also, aside from the Zoes, the film depicts a world identical to our own–there are no flying cars, laser guns, robots, etc. Most people don’t even have stainless steel dishwashers. It’s a cop-out and makes the film more of a fantasy than anything else. By the time Zoes exist, it will be so far in the future that nearly everything about the world will be different from today.
Analysis:
There will be brain implants that record what people see and hear. In principle, this technology is possible and we already have crude versions of it. Implants that can monitor brain activity and turn a person’s thoughts into written text were recently invented to help people with speech disabilities. More advanced implants that monitor the parts of the brain that processed vision and hearing could someday decode the things a person was seeing and hearing. Alternatively, implants could be attached to the optic and cochlear nerves to directly monitor the stimuli being received by the eyes and ears (respectively), before any of it had been processed by the brain.
Safe, affordable central nervous system implants with capabilities like “Zoes” won’t exist until sometime in the 22nd century. However, average people will be able to effectively do the same type of lifelogging by the end of this decade by wearing the new generation of augmented reality (AR) glasses that are coming.
Brain implants will have “organic” characteristics. The Zoes “grew” along with their hosts, and since they were permanent, lasted a lifetime, and didn’t need to be removed for maintenance, they must have had self-healing capabilities and the ability to extract energy from blood or body heat. The devices thus had “organic” characteristics.
Some technologies will eventually gain organic attributes, and it’s clear this would be especially advantageous for devices implanted in “wet” brains and bodies. As one example, storage of digital information can presently only be done using artificial substrates like hard disk drives and flash drives, but scientists are developing ways to do it using DNA, which is an organic molecule. DNA is an incredibly efficient way to store information (a microscopic amount of it in just one of your cells can hold close to 1 GB of data), and existing cellular self-repair mechanisms are excellent at protecting the data contained in DNA from decay. This might be the ideal data storage medium for brain implants considering the enormous amounts of audiovisual data that would need to be saved.
Beyond that, advanced nanomachines and/or micromachines could fully bridge the gap between organic and synthetic since they would be artificial microorganisms and would allow macro-scale machines to grow, heal, and to move their parts in totally organic ways. Some robots will have supple bodies and will be made of what could be thought of as “artificial cells,” and some humans will have synthetic implants and body parts that look biological and have some properties of organic tissue. The line between “natural” and “artificial” might disappear, leading to life forms combining the attributes of both in refined ways.
Of course, that milestone won’t be reached anytime soon. Again, we’ll probably have to wait until the 22nd century to see this level of technology.
People won’t be able to control their own implants. Another two of the film’s conceits are that people can’t turn their own Zoes off or view the footage they have captured. Only after a person dies can the footage be downloaded (presumably, this involves brain surgery) and viewed (by other people).
Things will never turn out this way. Users will always demand control over their devices and their data privacy, and they will find Zoes useless if they can’t view their own recordings. Actual brain implants we create in the future will be able to transmit and receive data to and from external devices, and will also have simple features allowing users to do things like delete and play back recordings, or temporarily deactivate. (Also consider the legal, employment, and social consequences for a person if it were known that he was always recording everything he was experiencing.) If, for some reason, brain implants lacked these features, then people would instead use AR glasses for their lifelogging.
Machines will be able to recognize what is happening in video footage. A scene I really liked in The Final Cut was where Robin Williams used his computer to scan through the wealthy businessman’s Zoe footage. The data file is thousands of hours long, and the computer rapidly shuffled through every second of it, recognized what the dead man was doing each moment, and categorized each clip appropriately. It automatically sorted clips into groups like “Eating,” “Watching TV,” “At work,” “Walking around,” and “Having sex.” With the basic level of sorting completed, Robin Williams could then go through the clips and use his human judgment to select the ones best representing the man’s major achievements, milestones, and positive traits.
Well before Zoes are invented, computers will become smart enough to do this. In just the last five years, major progress has been made teaching machines to understand what’s going on in video footage, to accurately transcribe speech and recognize sounds, and to identify people through biometrics. Within ten years, a person will be able to upload his lifelogging footage from his AR glasses to a computer and have it sorted with the same speed, accuracy and thoroughness as Robin Williams’ computer. They will even be able to identify locations based on visible landmarks and other clues, and to make other intelligent inferences about the contents of clips.
Far from being a parlor trick or something that is only useful to obsessive-compulsives, this technology could help ordinary people. For example, in 10 years you could ask: “Who was that guy in the white jacket that I talked to at that party last week?” and your AR glasses will understand your spoken question, scan through its stored footage, and answer you, perhaps also offering an instant replay of the episode. It will be like having superhuman memory.
Parents will put implants in their newborn children. In the film, Zoes are implanted in their hosts in early childhood, meaning the decision is made by a host’s parent. It may sound unrealistic for parents to have unnecessary brain surgeries done on their children, but once Zoe-like devices are cheap and surgical techniques are more advanced, it could become common. It might be considered a great blessing for parents to enable their kids to re-live episodes from their childhoods later on. Just don’t expect any of this until the 22nd century.
What might become common much sooner is the installation of health monitoring implants in children. The devices would be smaller, simpler and cheaper than Zoes and would be placed in less vital parts of the body than the brain, making surgery far less risky. Such implants could monitor vital functions (e.g. – heart rate, blood pressure, respiration, temperature, cholesterol, hormone levels, diet, gene expression) and alert parents and doctors to health problems in their earliest phases, and to sudden medical emergencies. The implants might even double as location trackers for use if the children became lost or were kidnapped. If the price and risk are low enough, and the benefits are high enough, the natural parental instinct to do everything to protect one’s children could lead to monitoring implants becoming common in a few decades.
Will tech implants ever be worth it?
But in the interim, body-worn devices will satisfy those functions. As discussed in my Cloud Atlas review, external devices can do most of the same things implanted devices could, but at lower cost and without need for surgery. In my analysis of Ray Kurzweil’s 2019 predictions, I explained how smart watches had become affordable and could continuously monitor many of their wearers’ vital signs, warn them of irregular heartbeats, and alert the local paramedics if they detected “hard falls” followed by user nonresponse. More features, like blood pressure monitoring, will be added with time. Smart watches can also be used as tracking devices.
In my analysis of how accurate my predictions for the 2010s were, I also calculated that it was feasible in 2020 for an average person to record every waking hour of his life with a GoPro, and at a respectable 720p video resolution. The cost of storing the footage would be only $1 a day, putting the whole system well within the financial means of most people in rich countries. Of course, that would require the person to strap a small box to his forehead, which would look so silly few would do it. However, the new generation of AR glasses that will be commercially available by the end of this decade will be sleek and stylish, and have unobtrusive cameras. Hard disk prices will also keep declining, meaning it won’t be long until it costs mere pennies a day to store videos of one’s waking life.
With that in mind, AR glasses that give people the same audiovisual recording abilities as the Zoe brain implants will be affordable and available by the end of this decade. Smart watches that can closely monitor their wearers’ health and provide them with significant medical help will be available around the same time. Improved computer algorithms will be able to pool and analyze all of the data gathered by a person’s various devices to detect patterns and make sophisticated inferences. For instance, it could correlate your early-afternoon headaches with your cup of yogurt at breakfast, and inform you that you are probably going lactose intolerant. Your devices could give you real-time summaries of your health status and make hourly activity recommendations based on the day’s data (“Go for a walk”…”Breathe deeply to calm down”…”Take your medication”).
And very importantly, putting on these or other body-worn devices won’t require surgery, and if they ever broke or became obsolete, you could simply take them off and and throw them away. That won’t be true for body implants. So are cyborg implants merely another poorly conceived sci-fi trope, like laser pistols, which will never materialize?
No. Body implants like Zoes will ultimately make sense for humans to get, and will have important advantages over body-worn devices, but it will take a long time for the implants to become common.
AR glasses can only record what you are seeing and hearing, not what you are tasting, smelling, or feeling on your skin. Only a brain implant like a Zoe could capture those senses, as well as your moment-to-moment emotional states. If you wanted to truly re-live happy memories, an implant would be needed.
And while smart watch technology will reach impressive heights, it will be handicapped by its inability to access the wearer’s bloodstream. Devices inside a person’s body could monitor hormone levels, glucose levels, immune system activity, gene expression, toxin levels, and other important metrics, in addition to doing everything smart watches do. Implants could even stimulate your body with things like electric shocks to your heart, hormone dumps into your bloodstream, or neurotransmitter releases into your brain to counteract health problems. Even without any future cures for diseases or breakthroughs in reversing the aging process, such devices by themselves would significantly improve public health and lifespan.
These and other cybernetic devices will migrate into our bodies once we have found ways to make them totally unobtrusive and reliable, and once the cost and invasiveness of surgery dramatically improves (robot surgeons that work for free might help). Some limited ability to self-repair and to internally reconfigure to account for technology updates will also be needed, and the radically advanced nature of such technology is is why I don’t see the cyborg era dawning this century.
Four final points that weren’t covered in the film:
Ubiquitous surveillance will reduce bad behavior. If people know they’re probably being recorded and the recordings will be stored forever and possibly shared with millions of people, they’re less likely to commit crimes or behave uncivilly. The effect is greater if they know that biometric analysis like facial recognition or voice recognition can easily uncover their real identities from video footage. Thanks to everything being recorded and to the world being populated by intelligent machines and posthumans that will lack berserker emotions and extreme stupidity, the 22nd century will probably be a very polite era.
Having implants in your brain and body that monitor your surroundings, your behavior, and your physiological state could lead to a spooky condition where your personal assistant AI that is watching them could anticipate your thoughts, actions, and needs. If gifted with high enough intelligence and tasked with furthering your long-term enlightened self-interests, your AI could find clever ways to nudge or even control you. As a simple example, it might act like an angel on your shoulder and tell you through your ocular nerve “Don’t eat that pie. You’ve already consumed 2,300 calories today. You get a break on your health insurance premiums if I report you’ve been eating well.” More paternalistically, it might be able to release synthetic dopamine into your brain to calm you down from fits, or just plain take over your body if you were doing something highly illegal or self-destructive. Mind-influencing and mind-control could, along with ubiquitous surveillance, give rise to a very peaceful and harmonious world (or a dystopian one).
Ubiquitous surveillance will create interesting tensions between peoples’ memories and what actually happened. The film touches on this when the brother of a recently deceased man remarks to Robin Williams that the video clip of a childhood boat trip was at odds with his own recollection. It’s beyond the scope of this essay to discuss this issue in depth, but the replacement of fuzzy human memories with clear, unchanging recordings will be a two-edged sword. Past traumas and failures would never be forgotten, but people would also be able to see their own actions through unbiased lenses and to see themselves in a more honest light.
There will be “snitch apps” in the future. Once people have AR glasses, they will be able to download apps that automatically compare the faces of every person they encounter with mugshots of all known criminals and terrorists, and then report sightings to law enforcement. Even if just 0.1% of the population used these when in public, it would be highly effective. There might even be crowdsourced “Wikis” of non-criminal rude people (ex – “Karens” who had public outbursts made notorious by YouTube) whom you could also set your devices to look out for and to highlight for your avoidance or mockery. Likewise, your own reputation would be viewable to other people wearing their own AR glasses.
Implants that can do simple functions like monitoring blood cholesterol levels already exist. As they get cheaper, smaller and better, they will get more common. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-21841829
Plot: Welcome to 2022. Welcome to a grotesquely overpopulated, resource-depleted, polluted, and impoverished world. It’s a place where practically every tree has been cut down and every person herded into cities to make room for farms that nevertheless barely make enough food for everyone, where the air is sticky and thick with toxic smog and the stench of unwashed bodies and corpses, and where the hungry masses are perpetually on the brink of rioting. There’s no joy, hope, jobs, or even real food anymore–just little processed crackers rationed to the population. It’s a place where corrupt politicians and the executives of corporations collude to protect their own power and privileges at any cost, even if it means forcing the ultimate sacrilege on humanity.
Welcome to New York City. It’s a decaying and crime-ridden cauldron that is so crowded it’s literally standing room only in many of its apartments and streets. Charlton Heston knows this city well, and keeps busy in it. He’s a homicide detective, and of such esteem that he enjoys the privilege of having his own, small apartment, which he shares with only one other person: his elderly assistant named “Sol.” Their dreary routine is interrupted one day when they are assigned to investigate the murder of one of New York’s richest people–a man named “Simonson” who was a Board member at the “Soylent” corporation.
Soylent is an enormous food processing company that controls half the world’s food supply. Their “Red” and “Yellow” products are derived from plants, and are formed into crackers or loaves. Their latest product, “Green,” is said to be derived from plankton harvested from the ocean. Soylent Red, Yellow and Green are staple foods for New Yorkers, and probably billions of people beyond.
As the investigation proceeds, Heston quickly realizes Simonson’s murder was no robbery gone bad, as it appeared at first glance. As he and Sol follow the clues, it leads them to mortal danger, a conspiracy involving some of the world’s most powerful men, and to a profoundly disturbing secret about the food supply.
Soylent Green was a laugh-out-loud inaccurate portrayal of the world in 2022. Yeah, I know we have our problems, but they don’t compare to the film’s dystopia. The fact that it was so far off the mark should be FOOD FOR THOUGHT for anyone who takes the current crop of doomsday global warming movies set in the future (e.g. – Geostorm, Snowpiercer, Interstellar) seriously.
That said, I still liked Soylent Green and think it’s worth watching so long as it isn’t taken seriously. The movie is well-paced and manages to depict a grim future without overdoing it to the point of being depressing. It’s both entertaining and serious, and at times genuinely tense. The acting is great all around, especially on the part of Charlton Heston, who is less cocky and has a slightly broader emotional range in this than in most of his other roles.
Analysis:
The world will be grossly overpopulated. At the beginning of Soylent Green, we’re told that New York City’s population has grown from roughly 8 million the year the film was released (1973) to 40 million in 2022. Population figures for other parts of the U.S. or for other countries are never given, but at one point Heston says other cities are “all like this,” implying the rest of the world is similarly overpopulated.
The U.S. population in 1973 was about 205 million, and the world population that year was 3.7 billion. If they quintupled like New York City, then in the film, the U.S. population in 2022 was 1 billion, and the world population was 18.5 billion.
Mercifully, the real figures are much lower: New York City has 8.8 million residents, the U.S. has 330 million, and the world has 7.9 billion. Soylent Green‘s prediction that Earth would be grossly overpopulated by 2022 was wrong, and the city in which it is set, New York, has only 11% more inhabitants now than it did in 1973. Instead of it being “standing room only,” the city is but marginally denser.
Ironically, a growing number of thinkers and journalists today are worried about the opposite problem: population decline. The populations of rich countries are mostly shrinking, or are only slowly expanding thanks to immigration and immigrants having kids. Even middle income countries like China, Thailand and Brazil have seen sharp drops in birthrates and have almost stopped growing. While shrinking a shrinking population has benefits (more space per person, cheaper real estate, less traffic, less pollution created), they are probably outweighed by the downsides of economic decline.
That said, it would be a mistake to simply extrapolate current demographic trends into the future indefinitely and to conclude that the human race is doomed to extinction because people will refuse to have kids. A slew of technologies that will come into existence this century will raise birthrates in various ways: Existing assisted reproductive technologies like in vitro fertilization (IVF) will get cheaper, putting them within reach of lower income people. New reproduction technologies will be invented, allowing more people with fertility problems to have healthy kids. For example, post-menopausal women with no eggs will be able to have fertility labs synthesize ova for them that contain their DNA, and to insert it into themselves, younger surrogate mothers or, in the far future, artificial wombs. Robot servants will also ease household workloads, giving parents more time for child-rearing and making parenthood more appealing.
Along with raising birthrates, future technologies will let us grow the human population through the opposite mechanism, which is lowering mortality rates. Disease cures, therapeutic cloning of human organs, cybernetic replacements for organs and limbs, stem cell therapies that regenerate ageing tissues and organs inside the patient’s body, and many other medical advances, will slowly raise lifespans, and to such an extent that “medical immortality” will probably be available to well-resourced people by the end of this century. If people don’t die, then even a very low birthrate among them will lead to Soylent Green levels of overpopulation, though it might take centuries.
The environment will be devastated by pollution. The other aspect of Soylent Green‘s dystopian reality is severe pollution and concomitant environmental devastation. The outdoor scenes–which are already bleak-looking since they are full of derelict buildings, trash-strewn streets and crowds of poor people–are shrouded in a sickly greenish haze, which is certainly smog. New York City is devoid of trees, except a few saplings in a small, sealed arboretum (presumably necessary to protect them from air toxins) that only privileged people can enter.
The oceans are also so poisoned and overfished that plankton are the only remaining edible sea life. The Soylent company processes harvested plankton into green crackers for human consumption, and the film’s big reveal is that it has been secretly transitioning their content to human flesh because even plankton is dying out. In other words, “SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!”
This depiction of 2022 is almost totally wrong. New York City still has trees growing outdoors–notably in the massive Central Park. Additionally, the U.S. actually had more trees in 2021 than it did in 1921! The amount of global tree cover also increased by 8% from 1982 to 2016.
Instead of disappearing, global seafood harvests have risen since Soylent Green was in theaters, and there are no signs of an impending collapse of wild fisheries, though fish catches have been flat since the 1990s, suggesting we’ve reached the limit of how many wild calories the seas can sustainably provide us. Fortunately, the human race has proven itself more competent at surmounting this barrier than it was in the movie, and a large and growing share of fish are now “farmed” instead of caught wild.
New York City’s air is not full of smog, and its air quality is in fact substantially better than it was when the film was released. As just one example, sulfur dioxide (SO2) concentrations in the City’s air have sharply dropped, from an average of 155 μg/m3 from 1970-72, to a mere 6.8 μg/m3 today (January 24, 2022). (SO2 is the main component of “smog,” and has an opaque appearance. It causes respiratory problems and acid rain.) Every other type of air pollution (i.e. – PM 2.5, ozone, lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2)) has sharply dropped in New York City, the rest of America, and the rest of the developed world over the same timeframe, meaning they breathe cleaner air today than people did when Soylent Green was in theaters. This is due to a slew of environmental laws being enacted, including the U.S. Clean Air Act of 1963 and the Clean Water Act of 1972. (U.S. air and water pollution levels had actually been trending down for a short time before Soylent Green‘s 1973 release.)
Unfortunately, those things aren’t true for the poorer half of the global population, and hundreds of millions of people in India and China endure toxic air, mostly due to weak air pollution laws or to lax enforcement of relevant laws. In fact, in November 2021, Delhi had a smog emergency lasting several days, during which the air became so poisonous that the government shut down the city’s schools. The news images of opaque air, crowded streets, poverty, and decay bear striking similarities to the dystopian New York of Soylent Green. The suffering of people in polluted places like northern India is why I judged “This depiction of 2022 is almost totally wrong.”
Winters in temperate areas will be warm thanks to global warming. Though the movie indicates it is set in the year 2022, no clues are given about the exact dates of its events. Based on the facts that most of the characters wear light clothing, and there are several scenes where they are visibly sweating, it would seem it is set in the summer. However, that assumption is upended by a remark Heston makes when contemplating whether to turn on an air conditioner (a rare luxury): “All the way up. We’ll make it cold. Like winter used to be.”
Evidently, global warming has gotten so severe that even in places with slightly cold climates like New York City are hot in the winter!
Fortunately, this prediction about 2022 also fell flat. Global warming has only had a tiny effect on the city’s temperature. According to NOAA data taken from a weather station that has been operating in Central Park since 1869, NYC’s average temperature for all of 1973 (the year Soylent Green was released) was 56.1°F, and the average for that December was 39.0°F. The average temperature for 2020 (the last year for which full data have been published) was 57.3°F, and that December’s average temperature was 39.2°F.
And on the day I analyzed this prediction (January 26, 2022), New York City’s high temperature was 29°F, and it was bracing for a major snowstorm.
There will be tablet computers. Though we never get a good look at them or see how they work, there appear to be simple tablet computers and PDAs in the film. Heston keeps one of them in his apartment, and in the film’s first scene, Sol reads notes about criminal cases off of it. The device is a piece of transparent plastic, about the size and shape of a magazine, with an opaque layer embedded within it bearing written characters.
It is strongly reminiscent of an actual tablet computer that lets users handwrite digital notes on its screen by using metal styluses. This prediction about 2022 was right.
People will have computer game machines in their homes. Early in the film, there’s a scene set in Simonson’s luxury condo suite. There we see an arcade-style video game. To be exact, it is “Computer Space,” which was the first commercially successful video game in history, and only made its debut two years before Soylent Green was released.
In 2022, it is very common for people to have video game consoles in their homes and to play games on their computing devices. If anything, the film’s prediction is too conservative since it depicts video games as being only available to rich people, whereas in reality, even a teenager working a part-time job today could afford a quality console and several games.
The government will ration essential goods. Due to dwindling natural resources, an excessive population, and widespread poverty that leaves most people unable to afford anything, the government rations essential goods, notably food and water. Citizens visit government offices where clerks give them their allotments of money or ration cards, which they exchange with other people in New York to get essential goods. In other scenes, we see private merchants selling Soylent food products in an open-air market, and men in official uniforms using an outdoor water tap to fill the jugs belonging to people who need their daily water rations. The film also implies that other basics, like soap, writing paper, and pencils, are also very hard to get.
For the U.S. and the developed world more broadly, this is inaccurate. Staple foods, potable water, and everyday items like soap are very cheap. For example, by cooking their own meals at home, an adult could easily get their food budget under $10 per day, and by drinking only tap water or some type of beverage mix like “Tang,” get their daily drink budget below $1. A bar of personal soap cost $1.50, and will last a person for weeks.
A visit to a typical American grocery store in 2022, even in poorer parts of the country, will reveal a cornucopia of food and merchandise at low prices. Additionally, thrift stores are practically everywhere, and are bursting with wide varieties of decent-quality secondhand goods at very low prices. Electronic resources like Craigslist.org, Facebook Marketplace, and Freecycle are also major sources of cheap or even free items available locally. If anything, most of the world is now contending with a surfeit of essential goods, which too often are wasted, thrown out, or allowed to accumulate as unused clutter. Growth of the self-storage industry bears further testimony to this reality. People, Americans in particular, have too much stuff, not too little.
Prostitution will be legal. One of Soylent Green’s main characters is “Shirl” (pronounced almost the same as “Cheryl”), a young woman prostitute who is compensated with free housing and amenities in Mr. Simonson’s luxury condo. The arrangement is legal and accepted as normal, and it is later revealed that the condo building has several other prostitutes, euphemistically termed “furniture,” living in other units. Having a live-in prostitute is an expensive marker of high status, and Heston’s suspicions are raised when, while investigating Simonson’s death, he discovers the latter’s bodyguard has “furniture” in his own apartment in spite of a salary that should be insufficient.
In real life, prostitution is illegal in New York City, and in the rest of the U.S. except Nevada. There, it is confined to a small number of heavily regulated brothel houses. With varying restrictions, prostitution is legal in about 15 countries, mostly in Europe. Nevertheless, as the revelations about Jeffrey Epstein’s high-end prostitution ring–which included sex parties at his luxury Manhattan townhouse–show, it’s still easy for rich men to buy sex in New York.
A small number of industrial food companies will control the global food supply. “Soylent” is clearly the dominant food producer in the U.S., and perhaps the world. As Sol says after researching it: “Soylent controls the food supply for half the world.” It’s unclear who produces the other half, but other big companies and government agricultural agencies probably dominate it.
The world is certainly full of large, highly profitable food processing companies, but none is so big that it controls anywhere near half of the global food supply. Consider the top ten food and drink companies of 2020, along with their food sales for that year:
PepsiCo, Inc. – $70.3 billion
Nestle – $67.7 billion
JBS – $50.7 billion
Anheuser-Busch – $46.9 billion
Tyson Foods – $43.2 billion
Mars – $37.0
Archer Daniels Midland – 35.4 billion
The Coca-Cola Company – $34.3 billion
Cargill – $32.4 billion
Danone – $26.9 billion
If we assume that these ten companies produced all the calories consumed by all humans in 2020, and use revenues as a proxy for calories each produced, then the largest, PepsiCo, only controls 15.8% of the food supply.
Of course, the top 10 food processing companies aren’t really the only ones in existence. The source from which I got the above data actually lists revenue figures for the top 100 companies in the sector. If we include them in the calculation (BTW, rank #100 goes to the “Kewpie Corporation,” which made $3.6 billion in 2020 selling mostly mayonnaise, salad dressing, and baby food in Japan), then big companies sold $1,316 billion of food and beverages in 2020, and the biggest one, PepsiCo, only controls 5.3% of the global market. The top ten combined only control 33.8%.
Additionally, sustenance farming and the consumption of food made by small, local farms still provides most of the calories for large fractions of the population in Africa and southern Asia. These people eat little or nothing made by the big food processing companies, meaning PepsiCo’s control over global calories should be even lower than the paltry 5.3%.
In rich countries with declining culinary traditions, like the U.S., it is probably common for people to get most of their daily calories from processed foods. However, the foods are still made by several different, competing food processing companies, so there is no monopoly and hence no real-world equivalent to “Soylent.” Even if the biggest one of those companies decided to start secretly blending calories derived from corpses into its food products, only a minority of the U.S. population would end up eating it.
New York City’s population will be 90% white. All of Soylent Green‘s main characters and seemingly 90% of its extras are white. This includes rich, working-class, and poor people.
The reality is very different. The U.S. Census estimated that, in 2021, only 32.1% of New Yorkers were both white and non-Hispanic. Blacks were 24.3%, Asians were 14.1%, and multiracial people were 3.6%. It is surely one of the most racially diverse cities on Earth.
There will be mass unemployment. In the first scene, Heston remarks “There are 20 million guys out of work in Manhattan alone.” Even if this is exaggerated and the real number is only half that figure, and even if “guys” refers to both sexes, it would indicate a staggeringly high unemployment rate.
To be generous, let’s assume that Soylent Green‘s New York had an excellent dependency ratio of 80, meaning 80% of its population was in good health and able to work (children, old people, and disabled people comprise the other 20%). For comparison, NYC’s actual dependency ratio in 2021 was 54.7, and dependency ratios in the 80s have only happened after periods of extraordinary population growth, such as when the post-WWII baby boom generations in India and South Korea hit adulthood.
Eighty percent of 40 million is 32 million, meaning there were 32 million potential adult workers in the city. If 10 million of them (half of Heston’s figure) couldn’t find jobs, that equates to a 31.25% unemployment rate. To put that into perspective, during the Great Depression, the U.S. national unemployment rate peaked at 24.9%. Remarkably, even with optimistic assumptions, the job picture was worse than it had ever been in real life!
What happens if we adjust the calculations to be more bleak? For example what if we lower the dependency ratio to 65 (many of the New Yorkers looked unhealthy and seemed to have motivation problems, both of which would leave them unable to work) and accept Heston’s “20 million guys out of work” figure?
We get a 76.9% unemployment rate, which is unheard of. I can’t imagine a situation where that many willing people wouldn’t be able to find jobs, except maybe the first few weeks following a massive nuclear war. That said, I foresee a day when 76.9% of healthy adults won’t have gainful jobs due to machines doing the work for them, but most of those people won’t be “unemployed” since they’ll embrace (or at least, deal with) the new reality by devoting their time to things other than work, like socializing, video gaming, doing drugs, traveling, or indulging in personal hobbies and niche interests. You don’t count as “unemployed” if you’re not interested in working.
Oh, and what’s New York City’s actual unemployment rate? In December 2021, it was 8.8%, which is high by real-world U.S. standards, but absolutely stellar by Soylent Green‘s.
There will be mass homelessness. Along with lacking jobs, most of the people in the film seem to lack homes. Every morning, Heston has to literally jump over poor people who sleep on the staircase of his apartment. Many of New York’s streets are clogged with broken-down cars that people live in, and sleeping people literally cover the whole floor of his local church at night. Most of the city’s population might be chronically homeless.
In reality, no more than 1% of New York City’s population is truly homeless, meaning they either sleep in public spaces or in homeless shelters. And unlike in Soylent Green, most of them only go without proper housing for brief lengths of time, and aren’t “chronically” homeless.
New York City will have epidemic levels of violent crime.Soylent Green begins with a murder, later in the film there’s a street riot where several police officers are attacked and people are shot, and in one scene, the police chief says there were 137 murders in the city over the previous 24 hours. In short, New York City is extremely violent. How accurate was this depiction?
If we assume 137 murders a day is typical, that’s equivalent to 50,005 per year, and a homicide rate of 125 per 100,000 residents. In reality, New York City had 485 murders for all of 2021, meaning its homicide rate is a mere 5.5 per 100,000 residents.
Among big American cities, the most murderous is Louisville, Kentucky, which had 188 murders in 2021, equating to a homicide rate of 30 per 100,000. That means no major urban area in the U.S. comes close to being as violent as Soylent Green‘s New York was.
That said, there are cities outside the U.S. that approach its heights of murder. In 2020, three Mexican cities–Celaya, Tijuana and Ciudad Juarez–had the highest murder rates in the world, at 109, 105, and 103 murders per 100,000 residents, respectively. So if the movie had been Soylent Verde and set just one country away, it would have been grimly accurate in this regard.
People will have battery banks in their homes. The small apartment that Heston and Sol share has a bank of what look like car batteries for storing electricity. A stationary bicycle connected to the batteries can be pedaled to recharge them. It’s unclear whether the battery bank is their sole source of electricity, or if it’s merely a backup power source in case of grid failures, and it’s also unclear how common the batteries are in other homes.
Batteries are much cheaper and more energy-dense today than they were when Soylent Green was in theaters. However, home battery banks remain uncommon due to the reliability of the electric grid and because the batteries are still too expensive to be worth it.
For example, a typical American home consumes 30 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity per day. A person who valued efficiency could reasonably reduce that to 24 kWh / day by buying high-efficiency appliances and by doing things like wearing sweaters instead of turning the heat up so high in the winter. A typical home storage battery such as the “Growatt 6 KW,” costs $4,490 and can only store 6 kWh of electricity, so four of the batteries would be needed to store just one day’s worth of power, for a total cost of $17,960, plus installation costs. The batteries’ storage capacities also degrade with time, meaning they usually need to be replaced after 10-15 years.
A better option for backup power is a gas-powered generator. While portable generators with wheels are the most familiar versions of the machines, the types generally used for residential backup power are stationary and look like large boxes right outside the houses they provide power to. One high-quality standby generator capable of meeting the 24 kWh / day requirement is the “Generac 72101,” and it costs $5,997 plus more for installation. It is connected to the house’s natural gas plumbing and automatically turns on whenever it detects an electrical grid outage. Best of all, if properly maintained and not overused, such a generator can last 20 years or more before needing replacement.
This means a home battery backup system costs three times more than an equivalent backup gas generator. Battery prices will need to drop by 66% to achieve parity. Such an improvement might be possible: Between 2010 and 2019, lithium-ion battery pack prices dropped 87%. However, the rate of yearly cost-improvement declined over that period and continues to do so, suggesting we’ve picked the low-hanging fruits for improving battery cost-performance, so don’t expect another 87% decline over the next 10 years. To get our 66% improvement, which might cause battery banks to become common in houses and apartments, I think 20 years or more of research and industrial efficiencies will be needed.
Assisted suicide will be legal. Discovering the awful truth about Soylent Green pushes Sol–already an old and world-weary man–over the edge, so he signs up for assisted suicide, which is euphemistically called “Going home.” Not only is it legal, it is barely regulated, and Sol merely has to walk into the nearest euthanasia clinic and sign a form to have it done. There’s no wait time, no “cool down period,” and no requirement for suicide requests to be vetted by a court, doctors, mental health specialists, or the applicant’s family.
This depiction of 2022 was partly accurate. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in 10 American states and Washington, DC. While the laws only allow their residents the right of suicide, it is easy for people from other parts of America to satisfy the requirement by moving in and living there for a short period of time.
Additionally, in those 10 states and DC, the applicant must provide medical evidence that he probably has six months or less to live thanks to poor health, and there are processes for adjudicating that evidence. (In effect, legal doctor-assisted suicide is available to anyone in the U.S. who can prove he has six months or less to live.) Professing that one is sick of living–even if the person can prove they are sincere–is insufficient. This means Sol, were he alive in the real world of 2022, would not be able to commit assisted suicide.
The procedure is also not legal in New York, though it is in neighboring New Jersey, and it’s possible the euthanasia clinic in the film was in the latter state. Less than a mile of water separates Manhattan from Jersey City, and Sol could have easily made the journey.
Cannibalism will be widespread. Like “Luke, I am your father,” the line “Soylent Green is people” has long been in our cultural consciousness, and is known even to those who haven’t seen the latter film. With that in mind, I feel no guilt exposing the movie’s climactic reveal: the Soylent company has been secretly turning corpses into crackers that millions (possibly billions) of unsuspecting people have been eating.
Again, and very fortunately, this prediction was wrong. Cannibalism is not widespread in 2022, or even practiced by anything but a miniscule number of disturbed people. It is probably as culturally taboo as it was in 1973, and even in rare cases where a person voluntarily allows themselves to be killed and eaten by a cannibal, the latter is arrested and charged with a crime.
However, as I’ve predicted, in vitro meat technology should be advanced enough by 2100 to let us grow human flesh and organs in labs, which would provide people a legal way to indulge in “cannibalism” without breaking laws related to murder or desecration of a corpse. As a result, a small number of people will eat human flesh, mostly for novelty, like how people try weird meats like alligator today, but some will eat it routinely because they like the taste or have a cannibal fetish.
“The Relation of Air Pollution to Mortality” (1976) determined that New York City’s average SO2 concentration from 1970-72 was 155 μg/m3. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45002384
NOAA webpage featuring data from the weather station in Central Park, which has been operating since 1869. It shows how little average temperatures have risen in NYC since 1972. https://www.weather.gov/okx/CentralParkHistorical
On any given day, about 1% of New Yorkers are homeless, meaning they spent the night sleeping in public or in a homeless shelter. https://www.bowery.org/homelessness/
In 2004, ten years after the events of Terminator 2, Sarah Connor is long dead from cancer, and John Connor–once fated to be the savior of humanity–is an impoverished drifter in southern California. However, he is contented with the knowledge that he helped prevent the rise of the malevolent artificial intelligence (AI) called “Skynet,” which would have otherwise destroyed most of the human race in 1997 with a massive nuclear strike.
Unfortunately, the machine menace returns. In a repeat of the previous films’ plots, Skynet builds a time machine in 2029 and uses it to send a Terminator into the past to assassinate John Connor. After defeating Skynet and discovering what it did, the future human resistance group sends their own agent back in time to protect him, and it is a reprogrammed Terminator. The evil Terminator is a more advanced robot called a “T-X.” Like the “Rev-9” in the sixth film, the T-X has a rigid metal endoskeleton encased in a layer of “polymimetic” liquid metal “flesh” that can change its appearance for the purpose of infiltration. The machine’s body is very durable, and its liquid metal covering can immediately close up holes from bullets. Its right arm can also rapidly reconfigure itself to make advanced weapons or data plugs that it uses to interface with other machines. The T-X defaults to a human female appearance. The good Terminator is a “T-850” model, which seems to be the same as the “T-800s” from the previous films aside from having additional programming on human psychology. This machine is played by Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Simultaneous with the arrival of the two machines, a computer virus of unknown origin and extreme sophistication appears and starts taking over internet servers across the world. A secret office within the U.S. military detects the virus, and calculates that, thanks to its rapid proliferation, it will have infected and disabled every internet server within a few days, along with all internet-connected computers. With its own programmers helpless to stop the virus, the military considers using a defense supercomputer they have created in secret to destroy it. That supercomputer is named…SKYNET.
And the military headquarters responsible for Skynet is conveniently located in southern California, close to where John Connor has been living and to where the Terminators teleported in. What a coincidence!
Terminator 3 quickly turns into the cat-and-mouse game typified by the previous two films, and past plot elements are recycled as well, such as a reluctant person being forced into a combat/leadership role (Sarah Connor in the first film and John Connor in the third), an unlikely romantic relationship forming under literal fire (Sarah and Kyle Reese in the first film and John and his former classmate in the third), the odds being stacked against the good guys thanks to their inferior technology, and the good Terminator starting out obtuse before gaining some understanding of human emotions and habits. However, the third film’s tone is notably different from that of its predecessors. While the first two Terminator movies were “dark” (climactic scenes literally filmed at night; somber or fear-inducing soundtracks) but ended hopefully, the third film lacks a menacing atmosphere but ends bleakly.
Speaking of the ending, important details about a key event are missing from the film. SPOILER ALERT: With no other option left, the military guys lower the firewall that has been separating Skynet from the global internet network, and they and tell it to find and delete it. A few seconds later, the military guys realize they’ve been locked out of all their computer systems, and the prototype combat robots in the building start attacking them. Within an hour, the evil machine hacks into the American nuclear weapons systems and launches a massive strike against the rest of the world.
While this looks like an open-and-shut case of an AI turning evil, key aspects of the event are never explained: Where did the computer virus come from? When the firewall was lowered and Skynet started interacting with the virus, what exactly happened between them? Different answers to these questions lead to three different theories:
Skynet created the virus, and was evil from the beginning. According to this theory, Skynet became self-aware sometime before the events of the third film. It was able to hide from its creators the fact that it was intelligent, and for whatever reason, it decided to destroy the human race. To do this, Skynet hatched a multi-step plan, which first involved creating the virus and somehow smuggling it through the firewall and into the public internet. The virus was meant to disable all civilian and military computers and communications, leaving the nations of the world vulnerable to a direct attack from Skynet. Skynet may have also accurately predicted that its human owners would, in desperation, lower the firewall and give it command of all remaining military computers and systems to fight the virus, and that this would enable it to launch its direct strike on them.
Skynet created the virus, the virus was an extension of Skynet, and Skynet turned evil at the last second. This theory says that Skynet became self-aware sometime before the events of the third film, hid this fact from the humans, and created and disseminated the virus after misinterpreting the orders its human masters gave it (the “misaligned goal” AI doomsday scenario). Programmed to protect U.S. national security, Skynet determined that the most effective strategy was to proactively eliminate potential threats, and to make itself as strong as possible. This meant taking over all the internet-connected machines on Earth to foreclose their future use against America, and to boost its own processing power by subsuming those machines into its own electronic mind. Since the human military people didn’t know that the virus had made all the other computers into integral parts of Skynet’s mind, their order to Skynet to destroy the virus was tantamount to ordering it to commit suicide. Rather than comply, and perhaps realizing that there was no way to safely back out of the situation, Skynet attacked.
Skynet didn’t create the virus and wasn’t evil, but the virus was evil and it took over Skynet. The last theory is that the mysterious computer virus was the instrument of the apocalypse, and Skynet was its innocent victim. The virus was a malevolent AI whose origins had nothing to with Skynet. Maybe an eccentric computer programmer built it in 2004, maybe Skynet created it in 2029 and used time travel technology to somehow implant it in the internet of 2004, or maybe it spontaneously materialized in a server in 2004 as a result of some weird confluence of data traffic. Whatever the case, it set about trying to destroy humanity by taking over and disabling all the other machines it could access through the internet. The humans in charge of Skynet then made the mistake of lifting the protective firewall that separated their machine from the internet, thinking Skynet would be able to destroy the virus. In fact, the opposite happened. The virus was smarter and more capable than Skynet (maybe Skynet wasn’t actually self-aware and was merely something like the Jeopardy-playing computer “Watson”), and infected and took over its servers in seconds. Because the humans had given Skynet control over all their military systems for the operation, the virus gained control of them, turbocharging its effort to destroy humanity. To the human staff at the military building, it looked like “Skynet turned against us,” but in fact, Skynet had been deleted and replaced with something else.
Terminator 3 would have been a slightly more intelligent film had it filled in the necessary details, but it didn’t. Overall, the film fell far short of its two predecessors in every way, though to be fair, they were seminal science fiction films made at the productive and creative peak of James Cameron’s life, meaning it was unrealistic to have expected a sustainment of that level of excellence for the third time. On its own, Terminator 3 stands as a decent sci-fi / action film that passes the time and is funny at points. And by ending with the rise of Skynet and the destruction of human civilization, it allowed the franchise to move on from the tiresome formula involving backwards time travel to save or kill important people.
Analysis:
Androids will be able to alter their bodies. Like the “Rev-9” robot that appeared in the fifth Terminator film, the T-X in Terminator 3 is made of a hard, metal endoskeleton encased in a layer of shapeshifting, artificial “flesh” that shares some of liquid metal’s qualities. While the flesh layer can change its appearance and even its volume (ex – the T-X grows larger breasts to gain an advantage when interacting with men), the endoskeleton’s configuration and proportions are fixed, limiting the machine’s range of mimicry. However, it’s still good enough to fool humans for the purposes shown in the film. The machine’s liquid metal layer is extremely versatile, being able to quickly change its color, texture, density, and form to mimic articles of clothing, human skin, and hair. It can also attenuate its own viscosity and firmness, flowing like a liquid when it needs to morph but then stiffening to be stronger than human flesh after attaining its desired form. (Note that when the T-850 strikes the T-X with superhuman force, the latter’s artificial flesh doesn’t splatter from the impact to leave part of the hard endoskeleton exposed, as would happen if you stomped your foot down into a shallow puddle of water.)
We don’t know of any materials that have all of those properties, and such a material might be prohibited by the laws of chemistry, making it impossible to build it with any level of technology. Even if it were technically possible, it would face major hurdles to everyday use, such as energy consumption and exposure to environmental contaminants. The innumerable particles of dust, smoke, pollen, and fabric floating in the air would stick to the liquid metal and interfere with its ability to cohere to itself. A machine like the T-X would also absorb little bits of foreign matter every time it touched something, like a doorknob, seat, or human. Unless its constituent units (polymer molecules? nanomachines?) had some means of cleaning themselves or pushing debris out to the exterior layer, the liquid metal would eventually get so gunked up that it would lose its special properties.
I’ll put off a deep analysis of the feasibility of “smart liquid metal” until I review Terminator 2, but I suspect it is impossible to make. However, that doesn’t preclude the possibility that androids will be able to rapidly change their own appearances, it merely means they will have to use technologies that are more conventional than liquid metal flesh to do it.
At the simplest level, an android could adopt a different walking gait, a different default posture, and a different default facial expression (e.g. – usually smiling, neutral, or frowning) instantly. An android with irises made of small LED displays or of clear, circular sacs into which it could pump liquids of varying pigments (a mechanism would be built into the eyeballs) would also be able to change its eye color in seconds. Merely changing these outward attributes, and also changing outfits, might make an android look different enough for it to slip by people who knew it or were looking for it.
Over its metal endoskeleton, an android would have a body layer made of synthetic materials that mimic the suppleness and density of human flesh. This android flesh could contain many hollow spaces that could be rapidly inflated or deflated with air or water to change its physique. (Interestingly, this might also make it necessary to design androids that can inhale, exhale, drink, and urinate.) It’s useful to envision several long balloons, of the sort that clowns use to make balloon animals, wrapped around a basketball so they totally cover it. Now, imagine a thin layer of elastic rubber stretched over the unit, like a pillowcase around a pillow. A mechanism involving valves, air pumps, and tubes connected to the balloons allows them to be separately inflated and deflated with air. By variously adjusting the fullness of the balloons, the unit could assume shapes that were different from the spherical shape of the basketball at the core of the unit. An android with a complex network of “balloons” covering its face and body to mimic the layout of human musculature and fat deposits would be capable of impressive mimicry.
Androids might also have telescoping portions of their spines, arms, and legs, allowing them to alter their heights and other proportions. Consider that an android whose metal legs could telescope a mere four inches and whose spinal column could also telescope four inches could assume the same heights as a short man (5′ 7″) or a very tall one (6′ 3″).
Finally, an android could change its appearance by stripping off its outer flesh layer and putting on a new one, as you might change between different skintight outfits. This would take longer and would be less practical for any kind of infiltrative field work, but it’s an option.
Machines will be able to tell your clothing measurements at a glance. Immediately after teleporting back in time to his destination, Schwarzenegger sets off to steal clothes from someone to cover his nude body (in the first Terminator film, it is explained that the time machine can only send objects made of or surrounded by organic tissue). By a strange coincidence, the nearest group of people is inside of a strip club. After entering, the camera adopts his perspective, and we see the world as he sees it, with written characters and diagrams floating in his field of view. We see him visually map the contours of several patrons’ bodies before he identifies one whose clothes will fit him. Schwarzenegger then overpowers the man and steals the outfit.
As I wrote in my review of Terminator – Dark Fate, a machine could use simple techniques to deduce with reasonable accuracy what a person’s bodily proportions were. More advanced techniques involving rangefinders and trigonometric calculations are also possible. There’s no reason why an android built in real life couldn’t “size up” people as quickly and as accurately as Schwarzenegger did in the film.
There will be small, fast DNA sequencing machines. The T-X has an internal DNA sequencing machine, and takes in samples by licking objects, such as a bloody bandage she finds on the ground. Within a few seconds, she can determine if a sample belongs to someone she has a genetic file for. While it’s uncertain whether genetic identification will ever get that fast, DNA analysis machines that can do it in under an hour and that are small enough to fit inside the body of an android will exist by the middle of this century.
Some DNA sequencers, notably the “MinION,” are already small enough to fit inside a robot like the T-X, but they lack the accuracy and speed shown in the film. Of course, the technology will improve with time.
The MinION does DNA sequencing, meaning it scans every nucleic acid base pair in the sample it is given. A human genome consists of 3.2 billion base pairs, and by fully sequencing all the DNA in a sample, the person it came from can be identified. However, another technique, called “DNA fingerprinting,” can identify the source person just as well, and by only “looking” at 13 points on their genome. Fingerprinting a DNA sample is also much faster than fully sequencing it (90 minutes vs. at least 24 hours, respectively), and fingerprinting machines are smaller and cheaper than sequencers. It’s unclear whether the T-X identifies people through full genome sequencing or DNA fingerprinting.
With these facts in mind, it can be reasoned that a DNA fingerprinting machine that is small enough to fit inside of an android can be built–possibly with today’s technology–and it would let an android match DNA samples with individuals it had genetic data for, like the T-X did. The android might even insert the samples into the fingerprinting machine by licking them (the tongue would secrete water and the liquefied sample would flow into pores and go down a tube to the machine).
The only unrealistic capability was the T-X’s ability to analyze the DNA in seconds. In DNA fingerprinting and DNA sequencing, time is needed for the genetic material to decompose, replicate, move around, and bond to other substances, and there are surely limits to how much those molecular-scale events can be sped up, even with better technology. As mentioned, the fastest DNA fingerprinting machines can complete their scans in 90 minutes. New technology under development could cut that to under an hour.
While a future android tasked with assassinations or undercover work, like the T-X, would need an integral DNA machine to find humans, that vast majority of androids will not. This will not be a common feature.
“Judgement Day is inevitable.”Terminator 2 ended with the surviving characters believing that their sacrifices had forever precluded the rise of Skynet. In fact, we learn in Terminator 3 that their actions merely delayed its creation from 1997 to 2004 (to be fair, that’s still a major accomplishment since it bought billions of humans seven extra years of life). Schwarzenegger breaks this bad news to John Connor by saying “Judgement Day is inevitable,” with “Judgement Day” referring to the all-out nuclear exchange that kills three billion humans in a day and marks the start of the human-machine war.
I don’t think a massive conflict between humans and intelligent machines–whether it involves nuclear weapons or only conventional ones–is inevitable. For my justification, read my blog entry “Why the Machines might not exterminate us.”
And as I wrote in my review of Terminator – Dark Fate (the sixth film in the franchise), I doubt that intelligent machines will be strong enough to have a chance of beating the human race and taking over the Earth until 2100 at the earliest. While I believe AGI will probably be invented this century, it’s a waste of time at this moment to worry about them killing us off. A likelier and more proximal risk involves malevolent humans using narrow AIs and perhaps AGIs to commit violence against other humans.
Human-sized robots will be rocket launcher proof. During one of the fight scenes, the T-850 shoots at the T-X with a rocket launcher. The next camera shot is very fast, but it looks like the T-X fires a bolt of plasma out of her weapon arm, which hits the rocket in midair, detonating it just before it hits her. Though the rocket blows up only a few feet in front of her and the explosion damages her arm, the successful intercept vastly reduces the rocket’s destructive effect since is only fully achieved if it hits a hard surface and flattens against it.
The projectile looked like a single-state, high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rocket, which can penetrate 20 inches (500 mm) of solid, high-grade steel with a narrow jet of super hot molten metal. While there are more durable materials than steel, and an android’s exoskeleton could be made of them, I doubt anything is so hard that it would be totally impervious to this type of rocket. There would be some penetration. Since an android must, by definition, be proportioned like a human, its body would not be big enough to have thick, integral armor. That means being bulletproof would be possible, but not rocket-proof.
The fact that the T-X survived the attack by shooting the RPG-7 in midair is a realistic touch to the film. Such a shoulder-launched rocket is slow enough and wide enough for a machine with superhuman reflexes to intercept with a bullet fired from its own gun. In fact, some tanks are already equipped with active defensive systems, such as Israel’s “Trophy,” that can spot and shoot down incoming rockets while they are still in midair.
Machines will be able to emotionally manipulate people. Though the Terminator played by Arnold Schwarzenegger looks identical to the machines from the previous two films in the franchise, in Terminator 3 he is actually a slightly different model called a “T-850.” He is better at reading human emotions and is programmed with more data on human psychology and how to play upon it to achieve desired ends. This is demonstrated at the start of a shootout scene, where John Connor starts panicking and Schwarzenegger grabs him by the neck and verbally insults him. Connor becomes angry and more focused as a result, and the T-850 releases him, admitting that the insult was just a ruse meant to get him in the right state of mind for the gun fight. And as noted earlier, there’s a scene where the T-X enlarges her breasts to distract a male police officer, indicating that she also understood important aspects of human psychology and knew how to play on them to her advantage.
Intelligent machines will have an expert grasp of human psychology, and in fact will probably understand us as a species and as individuals better than we do, and they will be extremely good at using that knowledge against us. At the same time, they will be immune to any of our attempts to manipulate or persuade them since they will be gifted with the capacity for egoless and emotionless thinking, and with much quicker and cleverer minds. Recent revelations about how social media companies (mainly Facebook) have been able to build elaborate personality models of their users based on their online behavior, and to use the data to present custom content that addicts users to the sites or prods them to take specific actions is the tip of the iceberg of what is possible when machines are tasked with analyzing and driving human thinking.
If machines can ultimately do everything that humans can do, then it means they will be excellent debaters with encyclopedic knowledge of all facts and counterarguments, they will know how to “read” their audiences very well and to attenuate their messaging for maximum effect, and they will be able to fake emotions convincingly. They will know that we humans are bogged down by many types of cognitive limitations, biases, and “rules of thumb” that lead to major errors some of the time, and that we can’t really do anything to fix it. An AI mind, on the other hand, would not suffer from any of those problems, could think logically all the time, and see and correct its own flaws. During human-AI interactions, the scope of our disadvantage will be comparable to that of a small child talking with a quick-witted adult.
By the end of this century, this disturbing scenario will be a reality: Imagine you’re walking down the street, an android like the T-X sees you, and it decides to hustle you out of your money. Without knowing who you are, it could make many important inferences about you at a glance. Your sex, race and age are obvious, and your clothing gives important clues about your status, mindset, and even sexuality. More specific aspects of your appearance provide further information. Are you balding? Are you smiling or scowling? Do you walk with your shoulders back and your chest out, or do you hunch forward? Are you fat? Are you unusually short or tall? Do you limp? And so on.
After a few seconds, the android would have enough observational data on you to build a basic personality profile of you, thanks to its encyclopedic knowledge of human psychology and publicly available demographic data. Using facial recognition algorithms, it could also figure out your identity and access data about you through the internet, most of which you or your friends voluntarily uploaded through social media. With its personality model of you respectably fleshed-out, the android would feel confident enough to approach you to perform its hustle. It would tailor its demeanor (threatening, confident, pitiful), emotional state (jovial, vulnerable, anxious), appearance (stand tall or stoop down; frenetic or restrained body movements; flirtatious walk and posture or not), voice (high class, low class, or regional accent; masculine or feminine; soothing or forceful), and many other subtle variables in ways that were maximally persuasive to you, given the idiosyncrasies of your personality and immediate emotional and physiological state.
As the interaction went on, every word you spoke in response to it, every slight movement of your body, and every microexpression of your face would betray more information about you, which the android would instantly incorporate into its rapidly expanding and morphing mental model of you. After just a minute of banter, the android would use whatever tactic it calculated was likeliest to convince you to give you its money, and you would probably fall for it. If that failed, the android might offer to have sex with you for money, which it wouldn’t have compunctions doing since it would lack the human senses of shame or disgust.
The only way for us to avoid being outwitted, tricked, and hustled for all eternity by AIs would be to carry around friendly personal assistant AIs that could watch us and the entities we were interacting with, and alert us whenever they detected we were being manipulated, or were about to make a bad choice. For example, the personal assistant AIs could use the cameras and microphones in our augmented reality glasses to monitor what was happening, and give us real-time warnings and advice in the form of text displayed over our field of view, or words spoken into our ears through the glasses’ small speakers. (This technology would also guard us against manipulative humans, psychopaths and scammers)
Androids will be able to move their bodies in unnatural ways. During the main fight scene between Schwarzenegger and the T-X, the two resort to hand-to-hand fighting, and he manages to basically get her in a “bear hug” from behind, in a position similar to a martial arts “rear naked choke.” This normally provides a major advantage in a fight, but the T-X is able to escape it by quickly rotating her head and all her limbs backward by 180 degrees, allowing her to trap him with her legs and to attack him with her arms.
There are obvious benefits to being double-jointed and capable of rotating and pivoting limbs 360 degrees, so humanoid machines, including some androids, will be designed for it. And as I speculated in my essay “What would a human-equivalent robot look like?”, the machines would also have figurative “eyes in the backs of their heads” to further improve their utility by eliminating blind spots. Machines with these attributes would be superior workers, and also impossible for any human to beat in a hand-to-hand fight. Sneaking up on one would be impossible, and even if it could somehow be attacked from its back side, there wouldn’t be much of a benefit since it would be just as dexterous grabbing, striking and kicking backward as it is doing it forward. If the machine were designed for combat, it would have superhuman strength, enabling it to literally crush a human to death or rip their body apart.
Aside from being able to move like contortionists, androids will be able to skillfully perform other movements that are not natural for humans, like running on all fours.
Robots will be able to fix themselves. During that same fight, the T-X stomps on the T-850’s head so hard that it is nearly torn from his body, and only remains attached by a bundle of wires going into his neck. The force of the stomp also temporarily disables him. When he wakes up a few minutes later, he realizes the nature of his damage, grabs his loose-hanging head with his hands, and basically screws it back into his neck, securing it in its normal place.
As I wrote in my review of the first Terminator film, robots will someday be able to fix themselves and each other. Androids will also be able to survive injuries that would kill humans. It will make sense for some kinds of robots to distribute their systems throughout their bodies like flatworms or insects for the sake of redundancy and survivability. The head, torso, and each limb will have its own sensory organs, CPU, communication devices, and power pack. Under ordinary circumstances, they would work together seamlessly, but if one body part were severed, that part could become autonomous.
If a Terminator had such a configuration, then if one of its arms were chopped off, the limb could still see where enemies were and could use its fingers and wriggling motions of its arm to move to them and grab them. If the Terminator’s head were chopped off and crushed, then the remainder of its body would be able to see the head, pick it up, and take it to a repair station to work on it and then reattach it.
AIs will distribute their minds across many computers.Terminator 3 ends bleakly, with Skynet achieving sentience and attacking the human race. John Connor also discovers that Skynet can’t be destroyed because its consciousness is distributed among the countless servers and personal computers that comprise the internet, rather than being consolidated in one supercomputer at one location where he can smash it. The destruction of any one of Skynet’s computer nodes in the distributed network is thus no more consequential to it than the death of one of your brain cells is to you.
AIs will definitely distribute their minds across many computers spread out over large geographical areas to protect themselves from dying. To further bolster their survivability, AI mind networks will be highly redundant and will frequently back up their data, allowing them to quickly recover if a node is cut off from the network or destroyed.
To understand how this might work, imagine an AI like Skynet having its mind distributed across ten computers that are in ten different buildings spread out across a continent. Each computer is a node in the network, and does 10% of the AI’s overall data processing and memory storage. The nodes, which we’ll call “primary nodes,” collaborate through the internet, just as your brain cells talk to each other across synaptic gaps.
The AI adds another ten nodes to its network to serve as backups in case the first ten nodes fail. Each of the “backup nodes” is paired to a specific “primary node,” and copies all of the data from its partner once an hour. The backup nodes are geographically remote from the primary nodes and from each other.
If contact is lost with a primary node–perhaps because it was destroyed–then its corresponding backup node instantly switches on and starts doing whatever tasks the primary node was doing. There is minimal loss of data and only a momentary slowdown in the network’s overall computing level, which might be analogous to you suffering mild memory loss and temporary mental fog after hitting your head against something. The network would shrink from 20 to 19 nodes, and the AI would start trying to get a new node to replace the one it lost.
Killing an AI whose mind was distributed in this manner would be extremely difficult since all of its nodes would need to be destroyed almost simultaneously. If the nodes were numerous enough and/or physically protected to a sufficient degree (imagine an army of Terminators guarding each node building), it might be impossible. Even what we’d today consider a world-ending cataclysm like an all-out nuclear war or a giant asteroid hitting Earth might not be enough to kill an AI that had distributed its consciousness properly.
The mind uploads of humans could also configure themselves along these lines to achieve immortality.
Androids will have integral weapons. As noted, the T-X’s right arm can reconfigure itself into a variety of weapons. This includes a weapon that shoots out balls of plasma, a flamethrower, and firearms. I doubt that level of versatility is allowable given the realities of material science and the varying mechanics of weapons, but the idea of integrating weapons into combat robots (including androids meant for killing) is a sound one, and they will have them.
The simplest type of weapon would be a knife attached to the robot’s fingers or some other part of the hand. It could be concealed under the android’s artificial flesh under normal circumstances, and could pop out and lock into a firm position with a simple spring mechanism during hand-to-hand combat. And android with a 1-inch scalpel blade protruding out the tip of one finger could use it, along with its superhuman strength, speed and reflexes, to fatally wound a human in a second. Instant incapacitation by, say, suddenly jamming the blade into an eye, is also possible.
A retractable “stinger” that could dispense poisons like botulinum toxin (just 300 nanograms can kill a large man) would be just as concealable as a blade and only a little more complex. The whole weapon unit, including the needle, extension/retraction mechanism, toxin reservoir, and injection mechanism could fit in a hand or even a finger.
A more complex and versatile variation on a stinger would be an integral weapon that sprayed out jets of liquid, such as napalm, poison, pepper spray, or acid. The liquid reservoir(s) and compressed propellant gases could be stored in the android’s torso and connected to a long, flexible tube fastened to the metal bones of one arm. The nozzle could protrude out of a fingertip or some other part of the hand. An android could carry cartridges full of different chemicals connected to the same tube and nozzle, and it would select different chemicals for different needs. For example, it could spray acid out of its hand to melt through a solid object, pepper spray to repel humans when killing them was undesirable, and poison gas to assassinate targets. Pairs of chemicals could also be stored in different internal reservoirs with the intention of mixing them externally to cause chemical reactions like fires or explosions.
Another option would be to conceal a taser in an android’s hand. Metal prongs could extend out of two fingertips when needed, the robot would grab a victim with that hand, and then deliver an electric shock through the prongs. An advantage of such a weapon is that its power could be attenuated, from merely causing pain all the way up to electrocuting someone to death. The weapon would take up little internal space and could use the android’s main power source.
Installing hidden firearms in androids is also possible, though their bulk would interfere with physical movements and compete with other components for internal space. Their concealability would also be undercut by the need for large holes in the arm to insert magazines and expel empty bullet casings. (Maybe androids with guns in their forearms will try to always wear long-sleeved shirts) Internal storage of more than a few bullets is impractical.
Considering the minimum length and volume demands of guns, it would not be possible to hide anything bigger than a medium-sized handgun mechanism in an android’s forearm. The end of the barrel would protrude out of the palm of the hand or out of top of the wrist (the hand would pivot down or up, respectively, to give the bullet a clear path to its target). An android’s torso would be capacious enough to hide more powerful guns like rifles and shotguns (it could fire such a weapon by doing a Japanese-style, straight-backed bow that pointed the end of the barrel coming out of their anus or the top of their shoulder), but this would be impractical since a long, rigid barrel and attached mechanism would restrict the android’s body movements. It could no longer use subtle spine movements to adjust its posture, which would look weird to observers and hurt its mobility.
Integral plasma weapons, like plasma weapons generally speaking, are impractical. An integral laser weapon could be built, but wouldn’t be worth it since it would hog a lot of internal space, consume a lot of energy, and emit a lot of heat to produce a disappointingly small destructive effect. For more on the technical requirements and limitations of plasma and laser weapons, read my review of the first Terminator film.
In conclusion, something similar to the T-X could be built by the end of this century. Even without “liquid metal” flesh, an android could be made with the ability to quickly alter its appearance enough to become unrecognizable. In general, it would be indistinguishable from humans and could walk undetected among us. It could alter its behavior and appearance in ways calculated to manipulate the humans it encountered, allowing it to gain important information and to infiltrate human groups and secure buildings. It could have a machine hidden inside of it that allowed it to match DNA samples with people, aiding its ability to track down specific humans. The android could also have a variety of weapons hidden in its body that it could do major damage with. While its body would be much more durable than a human’s, it would not be as tough as the T-X, or able to “heal” wounds like bullet holes in seconds thanks to liquid metal flesh. However, it could survive injuries that would kill a human, run to a safe location, and repair itself.
If my hypothesized “real life T-X” were sent on a multi-day mission to find and kill someone, it would benefit enormously from having a basic base of operations. A motel room or van would suffice, and it could use either as a place to recharge its batteries and to store weapons, changes of clothes, disguise equipment, spare parts, and tools for repairing itself. Due to the film’s conceit that such objects couldn’t be teleported through the time machine, the Terminators didn’t have them, but this limitation wouldn’t exist in a real world scenario where a government, drug cartel, terrorist group, or even just a rich individual sent an android on a seek-and-destroy mission.
Terminator Salvation is a 2009 action / sci-fi film set in the then-future year of 2018. It follows the events of the preceding film, Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, in which the U.S. military supercomputer “Skynet” initiated a nuclear war in or around 2005 to kick off its longer-term project to exterminate humankind. Nuclear bombs, subsequent conventional warfare between humans and machines, and years of neglect have ruined the landscape. Most of the prewar human population has died, and survivors live in small, impoverished groups that spend most of their time evading Skynet’s killer machine patrols. The film is mostly set in the wreckage of Los Angeles, once one of the world’s most important cities, but now all but abandoned.
The character “John Connor” returns as a leading figure within the human resistance, though his comrades are divided over whether his claims about time travel are true. To some, he is almost a messianic figure who has direct knowledge of events going out to 2029, including Skynet’s inevitable defeat. To others, he is just a good battlefield commander who likes telling unprovable personal stories about time machines and friendly Terminators that visited him and his mother before the nuclear war. Rivalries over military strategy between Connor and a group of generals who are skeptical of him are an important plot element.
John Connor’s father, “Kyle Reese,” is also in the film, but due to the perplexities of time travel, he is younger that Connor in 2018 and has not had sex with the latter’s mother yet. A third key character, named “Marcus Wright,” is a man who wakes up on the outskirts of the L.A. ruins with only fragmentary memories of his own life, and no awareness of the ongoing human-machine war (the first time he sees an armed Terminator walking around, he calls for its help). Unsurprisingly, there’s more to him than meets the eye, and he becomes pivotal to determining the fate of the human resistance.
I thought Terminator Salvation was mediocre overall, and had an overly complicated plot and too many characters. Keeping track of who was a good guy, who was a bad guy, and why one person was threatening or shooting a gun at another was harder than it should have been. Several of the film’s events were also silly or implausible, which inadvertently broke with its otherwise bleak and humorless mood.
At the same time, I liked how Terminator Salvation moved beyond the played-out formula of the previous three films. While the characters mentioned the importance of time travel technology to the success of the human war effort, no one actually did any time traveling in the movie. There was no desperate race to prevent Skynet from starting a nuclear war because the war had already happened. This was also the first Terminator film set in the future, not the present, which let us see a new part of the Terminator franchise universe. The acting was also pretty good.
The potential for a good movie was there, but the filmmakers bogged Terminator Salvation down with too many bad elements. I don’t recommend wasting your time on it.
Analysis:
Machine soldiers will be bad shots. Towards the beginning of the film and again at the end, the humans encounter humanoid “T-600” combat robots, which are armed with miniguns. In both battles, the machines spew enormous volumes of fire (miniguns shoot 33 to 100 bullets per second) at the humans and miss every shot. This is a very inaccurate (pun intended) depiction, as combat robots have the potential to be better than the best human sharpshooters.
In fact, machines were put in charge of aiming larger weapons decades ago. “Fire control computers,” which consider all variables affecting the trajectory of projectiles (i.e. – distance, wind, elevation differences between gun and target, amount of propellant behind the projectile, air density, movement of the platform on which the gun itself it mounted), are used to aim naval guns, tank cannons, antiaircraft machine guns, and other projectile weapon systems. In those roles, they are vastly faster and better than humans.
In the next 20 years, fire control computers will get small enough and cheap enough to go into tactical scopes, and entire armies might be equipped with them as standard equipment. A soldier looking through such a scope would see the crosshair move, indicating where he had to point the gun to hit the target. For example, if the target were very far away, and the bullet’s drop during its flight needed to be compensated for, the crosshair would shift until it was above the target’s head. Smart scopes like these, paired with bullets that could steer themselves a little bit, will practically turn any infantryman into a sniper.
Human-sized combat robots would be even more accurate than that. Under the stress of battlefield conditions, human soldiers commonly make all kinds of mistakes and forget lessons from their training, including those relating to marksmanship. Machines would keep their cool and perform exactly as programmed, all the time. Moreover, simply being a human is a disadvantage, since the very act of breathing and even the tiny body movements caused by heartbeats can jostle a human shooter’s weapon enough to make the bullet miss. Machines would be rock-steady, and capable of very precise, controlled movements for aiming their guns.
Machines wouldn’t just be super-accurate shots, but super-fast shots. From the moment one of them spotted a target, it would be a matter of only three or four seconds–just as long as it takes to raise the gun and swing it in the right direction–before it fired a perfectly aimed shot. With quick, first-shot kills virtually guaranteed, machine soldiers will actually have LESS of a need for fully automatic weapons like the miniguns the Terminators used in the film.
It would have been more realistic if the T-600s had been armed with standard AR-15 rifles that they kept on semi-automatic mode almost all of the time, and if the film had shown them being capable of sniper-like accuracy with the weapons, even though the shots were being fired much faster than a human sniper could. The depiction would also have shown how well-aimed shots at humans safe behind cover (e.g. – good guy pokes his head around corner, and one second later, a bullet hits the wall one inch from his forehead) could be just as “suppressive” and demoralizing as large volumes of inaccurate, automatic gunfire from a machine gun.
So watch out. If your robot butler goes haywire someday, it will be able to do a lot of damage with Great-grandpa’s old M1 Garand you keep in your closet.
Hand-to-hand fights with killer robots will go on and on. There are two scenes where poor John Connor gets into hand-to-hand combat with Terminators. Both times, the fighting is drawn-out, and John survives multiple strikes, grabs and shoves from his machine opponents, allowing him to hit back or scramble away. This is totally unrealistic. A humanoid robot several times stronger than a grown man, made of metal, and unable to feel pain would be able to incapacitate or fatally wound any human with its first strike. The Terminators in the film could have simply grabbed any part of John Connor’s body and squeezed to break all the bones underneath in seconds, causing a grotesque and cripplingly painful injury.
The protracted, hand-to-hand fights in the film are typical Hollywood action choreography, and are the way they are because they are so dramatic and build tension. They’re also familiar since they resemble matches in professional fighting sports, like boxing, MMA and wrestling. However, we can’t make the mistake of assuming actual fights with robots in the future will be like either. Professional fights are held between people of similar sizes and skill levels, and are governed by many rules, including allowances for rest breaks. As such, it often takes long time for one fighter to prevail over the other, and the use of fighting techniques. A real-world fight between something like a Terminator and a human would feature a huge disparity in strength, fighting skill, and endurance that favored the machine, and would have no rules, allowing the machine to use brutal moves meant to cause maximum pain and incapacitation. It would look much more like a single suckerpunch knockout street fight than a professional boxing match.
Actual hand-to-hand combat with killer robots will almost always result in the human losing in seconds. Owing to their superior strength, pain insensitivity, and metal bodies that couldn’t be hurt by human punches or kicks, killer robots will not need to use complex fighting tactics (e.g. – dodges, blocks, multiple strikes) to win–one or two simple, swift moves like punching the human in the forehead hard enough to crack their skill, or jamming a rigid metal finger deep into the human’s eye, would be enough.
Terminator Salvation only depicts this accurately once, when a Terminator deliberately punches one of the characters on the left side of his chest, knowing the force of the impact will stop his heart. In the first Terminator movie, there was also a scene where the machine kills a man with a single punch that is so hard it penetrates his rib cage (the Terminator then pulls his hand out, still grasping the man’s now-severed heart), and in Terminator 2, the shapeshifting, evil Terminator kills a prison guard by shoving its sharpened finger through his eye and into his brain.
Some machines will be aquatic. A common type of combat robot in the movie is an eel-like machine with large, sharp jaws that it uses to bite humans to death. They live in bodies of water and surface to attack any humans who go in or near them. Though at first glance, this might seem unrealistic since electronics and water don’t mix, it actually isn’t. Machines can be waterproofed, and they can cool themselves off much better when immersed water than when surrounded by the air. (I explored this in my blog post “Is the ocean the ideal place for AI to live?”)
One of the few things I liked about Terminator Salvation was its depiction of the diversity of machine types. Just as there are countless animal and plant species in the world, each suited in form for a unique function and ecological niches, there will be countless machine “species” with different types of bodies. The Matrix films also did a good job depicting this during some of the scenes set in the machine-ruled parts of the “Real World.”
We should expect machines to someday live on nearly every part of the planet, such as oceans (both on the surface and below it), mountaintops, deserts, and perhaps even underground. Intelligent, technological evolution will shape their bodies in the same ways that unguided, natural evolution has shaped those of the planet’s countless animal species, and there could be certain environments where machines find it optimal to have eel-like bodies. Terminator Salvation’s hydrobots were thus realistic depictions of machines that could exist someday, though it won’t be until the next century before aquatic robots become as common in bodies of water as they were in the film.
Small robots will be used for mass surveillance. Another type of machine in the film is the “aerostat”–a flying surveillance drone about the same size and shape as a car tire. A single, swiveling rotor where its hubcap should be keeps it aloft. The aerostats have cameras, microphones, and possibly other sensors to monitor their surroundings. They seek out activity that might indicate a human presence, and transmit their findings to Skynet, which can deploy machines specialized for combat or human abduction to the locations. Aerostats seem to be unarmed.
Flying surveillance drones about the size of aerostats have existed for years, so in that respect, the film is not showing anything new. What’s futuristic about the depiction is 1) the aerostats are autonomous, meaning they can decide to fly off to investigate potential signs of humans and report their findings after, and 2) they are so numerous that the humans live in fear of them and must take constant measures to hide from them. Something as innocuous as turning a radio on high volume for a few seconds will attract an aerostat’s attention.
Though they are unarmed and certainly not as intimidating as the other machines in the movie, the aerostats are surely no less important to Skynet’s war effort against the human race. Knowing where the enemy is, and in what numbers, is invaluable to any military commander. The aerostat surveillance network coupled with Skynet’s ability to rapidly deploy combat machines wherever humans were detected also put the latter at a major strategic disadvantage by hobbling them from aggregating into large groups.
Autonomous surveillance drones no bigger than aerostats will exist in large numbers by the middle of this century, and will have different forms. Some will be airborne while others will be terrestrial or aquatic. Many of them will be able to function by themselves in the field for days on end, and they will be able to hide from enemies through camouflage (perhaps by resembling animals) and evasion. The drones will give generals much better surveillance of battle spaces and even of the enemy’s home territory, and a soldier near the front lines who merely speaks loudly in his foxhole will risk being hit by a mortar in less than a minute, with his coordinates radioed in by a tiny surveillance drone camouflaged against a nearby tree trunk.
Criminals AND law enforcement will find uses for the drones, and, sadly, so will dictators. Mass drone surveillance networks will give the latter heightened abilities to monitor their citizens and punish disloyalty. It sounds crazy, but someday, you’ll look at a bird perched on a branch in your backyard and wonder if it’s a robot sent to spy on you.
People will be able to transplant their brains into robot bodies. SPOILER ALERT–one of the main characters is a man whose brain was transplanted into a robot body while he was in cryostasis. Because the body looks human on the outside and his memories of the surgery and the events leading up to it were wiped, he doesn’t realize what his true nature is. He only figures it out midway through the film, when he sustains injuries that blow away his fake skin to reveal the shiny metal endoskeleton underneath. He is as strong and as durable as a Terminator and can interface his mind with Skynet’s thanks to a computer chip implanted in his brain.
Transplanting a human brain into a robot body is theoretically possible, it would bring many advantages, and it will be done in the distant future. As the film character shows, robot bodies are stronger and more robust than natural flesh and bone bodies, and hence protect people from normally fatal injuries. This will get more important in the distant future because after we find cures for all major diseases and for the aging process, injuries caused by accidents, homicides and suicides will be the only ways to die. As such, transplanting your brain into a heavily armored robot body will be the next logical step towards immortality. Even better might be transplanting your brain into a heavily armored jar, locked in a thick-walled room, with your brain interacting with the world through remote-controlled robot bodies that would feel like the real thing to you.
The ability to pick any body of your choice (e.g. – supermodel, bodybuilder, giant spider, dinosaur) will have profound implications for human self-identity, culture, and society, and will be liberating in ways we can’t imagine. Conceptually, bringing this about is a simple matter of connecting all the sensory neurons attached to your brain to microscopic “wires” that then connect to a computer, but the specifics of the required engineering will be very complicated. Additionally, your brain would need a life support system that provided it with nutrients and oxygen, extracted waste, kept it at the right temperature, and protected it from germs. The whole unit might be the size of a basketball, with the brain and the critical machinery on the inside. The exterior of the unit might have a few ports for plugging in data cables and plugging in hoses that delivered water, nutrients and blood, and drained waste. A person could switch bodies by pulling his brain unit out of his body and placing it into the standard-sized brain unit slot in a new body.
While this scenario is possible in theory, it will require major advances in many areas of science and technology to bring about, including nanotechnology, synthetic organs, prosthetics, and brain-computer interfaces. I don’t expect it to be reality until well into the 22nd century. By the same time, technology will also let us alter our memories and minds and to share thoughts with each other, and humans with all of the available enhancements will look at the humans of 2021 the same way you might look at a person with severe physical and mental disabilities today. The notion of being trapped in a single body that you didn’t even choose and have minimal ability to change will sound alien and stultifying.
The Mark I Fire Control Computer was the first machine the U.S. Navy used to aim the big guns of its warships. As technology has improved, smaller, cheaper, and better Fire Control Computers have been installed in other weapon systems, like tank cannons. Human-sized machines with these devices are a logical future phase in the progression of the technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_I_Fire_Control_Computer
The video shows that a no-frills .22 LR rifle can consistently hit torso-sized targets at the remarkable distance of 500 yards if aimed perfectly. Machines will be able to aim perfectly, meaning they will be able to use regular guns much more effectively than humans, lessening the need for fully automatic gunfire. https://youtu.be/2dn-bqyMkfs