Trivia: Soylent Green ending
Branko Radosavljevic
Trivia item: The ending to the movie 'Soylent Green', where
Charlton Heston finds out something truly remarkable (don't
want to spoil it!), was actually stolen/inspired by the Anthony
Burgess book, _The Wanting Seed_. (Anthony Burgess also wrote
_A Clockwork Orange_, which was made into a movie of the same name---
just to place him for you.)
'Soylent Green' was based on the
book _Make Room! Make Room!_ by Harry Harrison, who also wrote
the screenplay to 'Soylent Green'. However, _Make Room_ didn't have
the remarkable ending that was present in 'Soylent Green.'
Burgess claims Harrison revealed the 'theft' to him over a bottle of scotch.
By the way, read _The Wanting Seed_ by Burgess if you get a chance---
it's good, and pretty wild. Especially if you liked 'Soylent Green'
or _A Clockwork Orange_.
[Source: _You've Had Your Time_, by Anthony Burgess]
--Branko Radosavljevic
P.S.: Apologies if this was already discussed.
Paul Callahan
>'Soylent Green' was based on the
>book _Make Room! Make Room!_ by Harry Harrison, who also wrote
>the screenplay to 'Soylent Green'. However, _Make Room_ didn't have
>the remarkable ending that was present in 'Soylent Green.'
>Burgess claims Harrison revealed the 'theft' to him over a bottle of scotch.
Well, if Harrison admitted it... But it's not as if the idea is all
that hard to come up with independently.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu
Daniel Read
>>'Soylent Green' was based on the
>>book _Make Room! Make Room!_ by Harry Harrison, who also wrote
>>the screenplay to 'Soylent Green'. However, _Make Room_ didn't have
>>the remarkable ending that was present in 'Soylent Green.'
>>Burgess claims Harrison revealed the 'theft' to him over a bottle of scotch.
>Well, if Harrison admitted it... But it's not as if the idea is all
>that hard to come up with independently.
This is a fascinating statement. How hard is it to come up with the
ending of Soylent Green independently, and how do we find out?
Empiricists want to know.
daniel
Paul Callahan
> I wrote:
>>Well, if Harrison admitted it... But it's not as if the idea is all
>>that hard to come up with independently.
>This is a fascinating statement. How hard is it to come up with the
>ending of Soylent Green independently, and how do we find out?
>Empiricists want to know.
Since I'm a theorist, I can't help you. However, let me elaborate on
what I said. I didn't want to, since it's a "spoiler" for the movie,
but it's an old movie, so who cares. I would have had no qualms in the
first place, but the original poster seemed to.
My point is that in a lot of cultures, people find cannibalism very
icky (to use the technical term). I am among them, in fact, but I
want to be very general about this, so as not to insult. Hence, an
*obvious* nightmarish set-up in a story is for someone to be eating
something and then discover human flesh is one of the ingredients.
Burgess cannot claim credit for this idea, nor do I suspect that he
would. It's appeared in mythology, if nothing else. If Harrison had
to "steal" this plot device from _The Wanting Seed_ (where the
cannibalism is a little more open throughout most of the book; the
only subterfuge I can think of offhand are the cans of "bully")
then he need not have admitted it, because it's not such an amazing
idea in itself.
If you want to do an *empirical* study, try the following. Gather
together a large group of children who have not seen _Soylent Green_
or read _The Wanting Seed_. Set up the following scene in their
minds. A bunch people are sitting around eating. They're enjoying
the food. Suddenly, one of them screams out in horror. He has
realized some awful secret about the food. Ask the children what they
think the secret is. My conservative hypothesis is that if you
gathered 1000 children, at least one of them would suggest cannibalism
as the answer.
This is not empirical evidence, but it is at least a suggestion for an
experiment. There's not much point in arguing without data, but this
is what I was trying to get at. Feel free to disagree with my assessment.
--
Paul Callahan
call...@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu
Branko Radosavljevic
>Burgess cannot claim credit for this idea, nor do I suspect that he
>would. It's appeared in mythology, if nothing else.
Your comments are pretty close to what Burgess was thinking.
He thought it was obvious. But he went on to say he was
surprised to find no other works at that time (I believe
Wanting Seed was published in 1962) dealing with this issue
(namely, near-term future with overcrowding and widespread
cannabalism). After all, Harrison's book didn't have it.
Also, the near-term-apocalyptic-future novel hadn't been done
to death at that time, which it has been since then.
Anyway, Burgess wasn't that 'proud' of the accomplishment;
he brought it up mainly, I believe, because of Harrison's
conversation with him.
Branko Radosavljevic
Vijay Samtani
>>>book _Make Room! Make Room!_ by Harry Harrison, who also wrote
>>>the screenplay to 'Soylent Green'. However, _Make Room_ didn't have
>>>the remarkable ending that was present in 'Soylent Green.'
>>>Burgess claims Harrison revealed the 'theft' to him over a bottle of scotch.
>
>>that hard to come up with independently.
>
>
>This is a fascinating statement. How hard is it to come up with the
>ending of Soylent Green independently, and how do we find out?
>Empiricists want to know.
I guessed the ending about 20 minutes before it occurred, while watching
the movie. That makes it about 10 minutes easier than coming up with the ending
to 'Thelma & Louise', and about 19 minutes harder than 'Robin Hood - Prince of
Thieves' (though I didn't guess that Sean Connery would appear as the King).
More measurements can be supplied (or performed) as necessary....
Vijay Samtani
vk...@phx.cam.ac.uk
Paul Callahan
>But he went on to say he was
>surprised to find no other works at that time (I believe
>Wanting Seed was published in 1962) dealing with this issue
>(namely, near-term future with overcrowding and widespread
>cannabalism). After all, Harrison's book didn't have it.
>Also, the near-term-apocalyptic-future novel hadn't been done
>to death at that time, which it has been since then.
I don't remember _Soylent Green_ all that well, but it seems to me
that Burgess's treatment is at least a lot wittier. One of the
few times I watched TV this year, Saturday Night Live had a parody
of the melodramatic ending to SG (as with most SNL skits it was too
long, but it had one or two amusing parts).
--
'It would seem,' said Tristram, 'that we're all cannibals.'
'Yes, but, damn it all, we in Aylesbury are at least civilized
cannibals. It makes all the difference if you get it out of a tin.'
Anthony Burgess, _The Wanting Seed_
Paul Callahan
call...@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu
Dave Garner
Homer J Simpson.
Francis Muir
Soylent GREEN......MMMmmmmmm
Phannie Pflagg's *FRIED GREEN TOMATOES* has a deliciously wicked
bipedal bar-b-q scene...
Goofy
jesse fuchs
Andronicus (one of his "other" plays) is when some of the characters end up
eating a stew that is actually made from human flesh.
-jesse
--
"Where imagination is sucked out of children by a cathode ray nipple
T.V. is the only wet nurse that would create a cripple
On television, the drug of a nation
Breeding ignorance and feeding radiation."
-Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy
Keith Miyake
Andrew Solovay
>
>If you want to do an *empirical* study, try the following. Gather
>together a large group of children who have not seen _Soylent Green_
>or read _The Wanting Seed_. Set up the following scene in their
>minds. A bunch people are sitting around eating. They're enjoying
>the food. Suddenly, one of them screams out in horror. He has
>realized some awful secret about the food. Ask the children what they
>think the secret is. My conservative hypothesis is that if you
>gathered 1000 children, at least one of them would suggest cannibalism
>as the answer.
"We came here to talk about Eddie."
"That's rather a tender subject... another slice?"
--
Andrew Solovay
"I require three things in a man:
he must be handsome, ruthless, and stupid." --Dorothy Parker
Brook Conner
Andrew> In article <C6Kxq...@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>
call...@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu (Paul Callahan) writes:
[excuse for an experiment]
>the food. Suddenly, one of them screams out in horror. He has
>realized some awful secret about the food. Ask the children what they
>think the secret is. My conservative hypothesis is that if you
>gathered 1000 children, at least one of them would suggest cannibalism
>as the answer.
Andrew> "We came here to talk about Eddie."
Andrew> "That's rather a tender subject... another slice?"
"Any way you slice it, it's still Meat Loaf!"
Brook
--
Klacktoveedsedstene
Nichael Cramer
Trivial note: One of the key plot twists in Shakespeare's Titus
Andronicus (one of his "other" plays) is when some of the characters end up
eating a stew that is actually made from human flesh.
Not just any flesh, but the flesh of his sons.
This is lifted straight out of the classics. Feeding the children of
ones enemy to that enemy as a way of revenge is a common theme. If I
remember correctly this is (in part) how the whole feud in the house
Atreus got started (that ended with Oedipus and all that).
Nichael
; (and (funcall (get 'smurfy-heart-icon 'like-predicate) 'lisp) (sys::honk))