“I decided to come up with 12 Theories For Demolition Man. These are theories that could easily be true regarding the film Demolition Man, are not terribly interesting, and were created out of spite for my chosen life path. They prove that A) It’s really easy to come up with theories about shit and B) A piece of media can have theories laid on top of it without actually being a high-quality thing.
You’re probably wondering why the hell I’m doing this in a review for The Outsiders. Skip to the end if you’re curious, but not the kind of curious where you want to read Demolition Man theories. Y’know, if you’re the boring kind of curious, I guess skip the fun part here.
Theory 1: The Spartan Dream Theory
The opening of the movie happens as depicted, however the remainder is a dream, as experienced by John Spartan (Sylvester Stallone) while in cryo-prison. This theory’s strength is in the depiction of the future as being basically like the present with a few small differences, which would make sense if the “future” is all the product of Spartan’s mind. It would also lend strength to some of the peripheral events, such as the believability of a young Sandra Bullock (Huxley) falling in love with a middle-aged Stallone. If it’s Spartan’s dream, anything can happen, which also explains why there’s a gratuitous boob shot when a woman accidentally calls Spartan’s video phone.
Theory 2: The Phoenix Dream Theory
Similar to Theory 1 except that the dream is happening in the mind of antagonist Simon Phoenix. The strength of this theory is in the vision of a utopia that is too soft for its own good, which is probably how someone like Simon Phoenix views the world.
Theory 3: The Phoenix Nightmare Theory
Similar to Theories 1 and 2, however the dream is a creation of the technicians in the cryo-prison, who are punishing Simon Phoenix by forcing him to live in this dream scenario wherein he is the villain and is soundly defeated by John Spartan. The strength of this theory is that it explains why Simon Phoenix would be given so many nonsensical advantages, physical and mental, by his secret benefactor. If it’s Phoenix’s nightmare, then what we’re seeing is a can’t-lose scenario where Phoenix somehow still loses.
Theory 4: The Spartan Fantasy Theory
This theory is similar to theory 3, however it postulates that the events of Demolition Man, post opening scene, are a dream manufactured by the technicians in the cryo-prison for the enjoyment of John Spartan. The strength of this theory is in the conviction of Spartan for killing people, which any idiot can tell didn’t happen. The theory then goes that Spartan is sentenced to the cryo-prison, however the technicians, seeing Spartan as one of their own and that he got screwed, set him up so that while he’s in cryo-prison he can live out a fantasy life. The strengths of this theory are very similar to the ones of Theory 1.
Theory 5: The Huxley Total Recall Theory
In the film Total Recall (Yes, FILM) Arnold is put into a machine that’s supposedly going to allow him to live out his fantasies of being a hero, saving Mars, so on and so forth. In this theory, Huxley is living out something similar. The strengths of this theory are numerous, including the fact that the future presented in Demolition Man is likely to have this technology, and that the quirks presented in the larger society make more sense when they’re attributed to a single individual. It also explains why the tone of the late-20th century is so different from the rest of the movie. This background portion is outside Huxley’s experience. This theory also has legs in that if Huxley is sexually inexperienced, it would follow that the sex in the movie is presented as a bizarre, technologically-aided, non-touching experience. It also explains the gratuitous boob shot as this is an opportunity for Huxley to see Spartan react to a half-naked woman in a way that she finds endearing. The weakest part of this theory is that Huxley is taken out of commission before the end battle, which would not be the fantasy of many, however it may be a shameful, secret fantasy for her to play a version of the damsel in distress, a fantasy that is frowned upon today and would likely be less welcome as time moves on. This is the only safe way for her to act out these fantasies.
Theory 6: The Matrix Theory
Essentially, a theory that follows like the Matrix. John Spartan is in some sort of constructed world, created by machines or possibly aliens, and is set into this world like a rat in a maze to see where the holes are, what works and what doesn’t. The strengths of this theory include the 3 Seashells. It’s entirely possible that aliens would not understand human defecation. Also, in The Matrix, Agent Smith claims that there was an earlier form of the matrix that was a paradise, but the human mind rejected it. If these universes are connected, it’s entirely possible to theorize that the future presented in Demolition Man is the utopic future Agent Smith was talking about, and John Spartan’s placement into this future was, in fact, the proof that the idea would be rejected by humankind.
Theory 7: The Death of Humanity Theory
The theory here is that the singularity has occurred, machines are self-replicating and self-aware. Machines are curious about humans, and they occasionally unfreeze frozen specimens and allow them to run amok, sort of like a live-action version of a zoo. This explains why so many of the characters, in acting future-y, seem more robotic than anything else. It explains why the foodstuffs appear to be small plates and pills as opposed to typical fare. If the machines are consuming fuel as opposed to food, they may be more efficient and not require the quantity of consumption we do.
Theory 8: The John Spartan Death Theory
John Spartan died in that explosion, and the remainder of the movie is him in purgatory. A test has been set up for him to determine which strata of the afterlife should be his permanent resting place. This explains the mixture of wholesomeness on the upper, surface layer, and the hellish, but hedonistic, lower layer, and how Spartan is tempted by aspects of both.
Theory 9: The Corporate Decision Tree Theory
This theory says that what we’re witnessing is the depiction of a sophisticated decision tree. For example, a boardroom is discussing whether it’s better to proceed with Plan A, which is rough around the edges, somewhat risky, but ultimately good-natured, or Plan B, which is more ruthless, direct, and has less concern for the effects on those peripheral to the action. Because this is a near-future, these two plans are put into Sims-like characters, John Spartan and Simon Phoenix, who then act out narrative versions of these two business plans and show which will ultimately triumph.
Theory 10: The Abraxas Theory
If you haven’t seen Abraxas, this one sounds even more insane than it is. Jesse Ventura makes an appearance in Demolition Man, and the theory here is that he is, in fact, Abraxas, who is on Earth to protect the baby that would be able to solve the anti-life equation. That baby may be John Spartan or Simon Phoenix. This explains a connected universe of Jesse Ventura appearances (the Ventura-verse) in films such as Predator, Batman and Robin, and The Running Man. In these films, he is ALWAYS Abraxas.
Theory 11: The ACTUAL Abraxas Theory
This is similar to the above, except the theory is that Abraxas is real, Jesse Ventura is actually a space cop, and his appearance in Demolition Man came about because he was protecting Arnold Schwarzenegger (who is the fabled anti-life-equation-solving human), and he made a mistake, finding that Schwarzenegger was in the script (the famed “Schwarzenegger Presidential Library” bit) but not in the movie. However, he remained in the movie so as not to arouse suspicion, the existence of Abraxas already hitting too close to reality and requiring Ventura to distance himself from it.
Theory 12: The Miss Congeniality Theory
In Miss Congeniality we see the re-uniting of Sandra Bullock and Benjamin Bratt. Perhaps, in the future of Demolition Man, they invent time travel, and Bullock/Bratt are sent back to prevent the bombing of a beauty pageant, which they can now see would initiate a butterfly effect of cascading events. The time travel process does confuse travelers, especially because new lives have to be created for them to fulfill in the past, which is what allows them to travel without suspicion.
And that’s that!
Why did I waste my/your time with this?
Apparently there’s a discussion making the rounds regarding the gay subtext of The Outsiders. Which resulted in a whole hullabaloo in which both the author and fans were probably not helping themselves out a lot.
The two important SE Hinton tweets:
1. “No, they are not gay. I wrote them, I ought to know.”
2. “Anyone can read anything they want into a book. But insisting I go along with it is crazy. Leave me out of it.”
And the important point being made by some was that seeing these characters as gay was important to them and their personal development, so why would Hinton take that away?
This is kind of an interesting case of literary criticism and shipping and all that stuff. Because, the thing is, when we look at Shakespeare, hey, anything goes! It’s not like we can just ASK him what he meant by such and such, whether these characters were in love or just good buddies.
SE Hinton is alive. She’s 69 (Siren! Bell! 69!). And so, she is available for the asking. And I have to say, I think it’s pretty bogus to ask (as someone did) whether two characters were romantically linked and then not accept the answer. If you want to read that into the text, that’s cool, but if you’re thinking of asking an author directly what their intent was, I don’t think you get to be mad when the author answers honestly. People are welcome to read whatever they want into a text, but you wanting something to be true or enjoying the possibility doesn’t make it factually correct.
To the point: I played with a lot of action figures as a kid. Youth. Adolescent. Way too long into teenhood, okay!?
To my knowledge, Egon Spangler of the Ghostbusters and Wolverine of the X-Men never actually fought. Outside of my mind and basement. These events were “real” to me because I made them happen, and they can never be completely unreal because all of it is in the bubble of fiction. I thought it would be interesting to see what happened, plastic slapped against plastic, and Egon was eviscerated. The End.
Now, this was fun for me, it worked in my brain, and I don’t want to stifle anyone’s creativity or take away the ability to fantasize. But if I were to write to any of the writers of Ghostbusters, and if I were to insist that Egon died at the hands of Wolverine, I could certainly do that. But it’d be pretty weird of me to expect that whoever I wrote to would play along.
We engage in this sort of thing all the time. For example, I have dabbled in fantasies that attractive people would like to do sex stuff with me. Despite the fact that I played with action figures. These fantasies were important to me, in a way, and were…effective. But their level of import to me and their effectiveness doesn’t make them any more true.
SE Hinton created characters, and if you ask her about things related to these characters, she can probably answer. She’s stated that she’s a character-oriented writer, needing to start story with characters, what they’re like and what they have in the fridge.
And so, I wrote the above 12 Theories because what I want to say is that theories are fun, they can be helpful, and theorizing is a good thing. You have every right to theorize. However, there is a limit, and that limit is forcing someone to accept your theory as fact. I do think Hinton is an authority in this case, and if she’s asked the question, she has every right to answer honestly.
There is another angle to this. Damn, how long will this review box let me type?
The Outsiders depicts something rare in fiction but abundant in reality. Which is platonic, male, affectionate relationships. These characters love each other. Live for each other. But they don’t kiss. They don’t fuck. And that’s a rarer thing depicted in fiction: sensitive, vulnerable, yet tough men who genuinely love people they aren’t interested in banging.
I think setting up the relationships in The Outsiders as sexual is less interesting than the actual, depicted relationships. I think putting Dally and Johnny in a box, saying they must be banging or experiencing unrequited love, is less exciting and a less dangerous statement than the one made in the book. It suggests, in a way, that men are incapable of having affectionate relationships that aren’t based in romantic love.
To the point, in the newer special edition, it’s stated that one of the scenes cut from the movie was Ponyboy and Soda getting in bed together. In the book they sleep in the same bed. They filmed this sequence, and it was cut out of the original release because they were worried it’d come off as “too gay.” It was later reintroduced, but I think the excising of this says a lot about how people see male relationships. Two men, who are brothers, can’t sleep in the same bed without people thinking there’s something romantic going on.
I experienced this in real life. When my family of 3 went on vacation, my mom slept in one motel bed, me and my brother in the other. At some point my brother refused to share a bed with me. Because it was “too gay.” We alternated nights. I slept in many a bathtub. Until I got sick of that shit and said, “Listen, I’m sleeping in the bed every night. You’re welcome to join me.”
So afraid are men and boys to have that physical proximity that brothers, in a motel with only their mother, don’t share beds. So afraid are men to show that sort of affection that they won’t even share a bed in that circumstance. What were we, afraid Nelson was going to look in the window, point, and say Haw Haw?
(Quick disclaimer: my brother doesn’t feel like that today. He was like 13 in the 90’s. This probably doesn’t need to be said, but whatever)
As I grew up, I found out it wasn’t super uncommon for girls to sleep in the same bed when they had sleepovers, or for a mom and grown daughter to sleep in the same hotel bed.
Which is where this all wraps up.
Do I think shipping two male characters is damaging? Of course not. I think it’s totally fine, cool, maybe even sexy to imagine a young Johnny and Dally and their forbidden love. If The Outsiders awakened something in you, that’s awesome, and I wouldn’t seek to take that away from you.
But, in some ways, I think shipping can sometimes reinforce the false idea that two men can’t be close without having a physical relationship. Or, a man and a woman, for that matter.
Wait, no. It’s not the shipping. It’s not the idea. It’s the idea that SE Hinton has to agree with you. When we get into that territory, we’re getting into territory where it seems that the only way two men could love each other the way Johnny and Dally do is for them to be in a romantic relationship, which is antithetical to the idea Hinton was putting forward, if you ask me.
I think The Outsiders really is about the hidden closeness of the relationships between men, or the desire some men have to make these bonds, a desire which is socially unacceptable. And a young woman nailed it. Go figure.”