The Soylent Green scenario is pretty dreary. All those shows about futuristic collapsed societies are pretty grim. The causes of collapse vary from story to story. I don't recall any society ever collapsing as a result of a morality committee. The grim stuff is a result of the collapse, not the cause of it. In the case of Soylent Green, it was the destruction of the environment.
My recollection of Edward G. Robinson's death was Beethoven's Sixth and the beatific look on his face as he was reminded of the lovely pre-collapse world. I recall vividly thinking that that was a pretty good way to go. I do not recall the extent to which early departure from life was encouraged by the powers that be, only that it was facilitated and uplifting, when requested. And that use was made of the byproducts.
As for the morality committee, if there's a shortage of food or an excess of population, any moral structure will struggle to adapt. I don't know what view the Catholic Church, for example, would take. Probably expect food to be shared without regard to ability to pay and when people died, they died. In Soylent Green they ate the remains, although the "morality committee" hid that fact from the people. I don't know that consuming the dead is such a horrible thing when there's nothing else to eat. Remember the story of the plane crash where the survivors survived on the dead. The thought is beyond offputting, but when there's a crisis, who knows what we would do. Even the Catholic Church might condone it. No, I don't think the scenario in the movie is totally ridiculous. What do you think would be moral given those circumstances? What would you do instead? What would Jesus do? Well, Jesus might create loaves and fishes out of whole cloth, but I don't think that's an option for us. |
