Tru to Life: Five years after release, ‘The Truman Show’ proves prophetic

Kirk Baird

Monday, June 9, 2003 | 8:11 a.m.

Maybe five years isn't long enough to explore the legacy of a film.

Then again, few could have predicted how eerily accurate "The Truman Show" would become.

Released in the summer of 1998, against blockbusters such as "Armageddon" and "Saving Private Ryan," the comedy-drama fared well at the box office $125 million.

The film also earned raves for its star, funnyman Jim Carrey in his first dramatic turn.

Perhaps most telling, in hindsight, the movie's fantastic premise of the ultimate reality TV show proved to be a harbinger of today's TV craze: "Survivor," "Big Brother" and "Joe Millionaire," among countless others.

The plot was simple:

Truman Burbank (Carrey) was the cinematic everyman who lived in the fictional town of Seahaven. Truman had a great job as an insurance salesman, a picture-perfect home, a beautiful wife and a best friend for life.

His life was perfect "Leave it to Beaver" come to life.

And just like the Cleavers, none of it was real.

Burbank lived in a domed world of 5,000 hidden cameras and computer-controlled weather. Every family member, friend, neighbor, co-worker or stranger he encountered was an actor.

And all of it was captured on live TV.

As a result, Truman unwittingly was the focus of a national obsession, as millions of fans tuned in round-the-clock to watch his every motion, his every decision, his every triumph and his every heartbreak.

Critics were generally universal in praise of the film as a combination cautionary tale and scathing judgment of pop culture run amok.

TV Guide called it "a cool indictment of television's near-irresistible pandering to the inner peeping tom."

Film critic Roger Ebert wrote: "If you think 'The Truman Show' is an exaggeration, reflect that Princess Diana lived under similar circumstances from the day she became engaged to Charles."

While the idea of building an artificial world, imprisoning someone and documenting their every move may seem unrealistic even today -- consider this:

Twelve men and women are quarantined in a home for three months, cameras recording their every move 24 hours a day. Each week a member of the household is voted out by the cast.

The show is "Big Brother," which returns for a fourth go-round on CBS next month.

Even beyond the plot of "The Truman Show," there are some striking similarities between the movie and much of today's reality TV fare.

In "Truman," the show's fictional creator and producer, Christof (Ed Harris), maintained a godlike power over Truman and his fictional world, creating traffic jams on a whim or cueing a rainstorm on command.

There have been rumors of similar omnipotent control on CBS's "Survivor." As alleged by a few of the former cast members, the show's creator, Mark Burnett, has on more than one occasion told participants who to vote off the show.

As Peter Lance, author of the behind-the-scenes book, "Stingray: The Lethal Tactics of the Sole Survivor," said in a recent phone interview from his home in California: "There is a tremendous amount of manipulation that goes on. There's no question."

More recently there have been allegations that producers of Fox's hit talent show, "American Idol," skewed the final tally numbers so that Ruben Studdard, the heavy-set soul singer, would win out over Clay Aiken, the nerdy-looking, budding Broadway star.

Studdard won by 134,400 votes out of a total of 24 million calls.

Fox has denied allegations of vote tampering.

There are also the on-screen promotions.

In "The Truman Show" actors sometimes stopped in the middle of conversation, looked directly at the camera and gave a spiel about a revolutionary lawn mower or the great taste of a new beer.

In shows such as "Survivor," advertisers offer rewards to contestants (as well as congratulating whoever won immunity that particular week), or in the case of "American Idol," advertisers are part of the show -- the "Coca-Cola Behind-the-Scenes" or the "AT&T Wireless voting," for example.

And what about the deception? The entire basis of "The Truman Show" is built on a lie.

It was the same for "Joe Millionaire," as the women were openly deceived into believing Evan Marriott, aka Joe Millionaire, had inherited a small fortune.

And in the newest reality show, "For Love or Money," a man is led to believe the women on the show really want to win his heart -- when, in fact, they are vying for a $1 million prize.

"The Truman Show" isn't the only time Hollywood has explored the reality-TV craze.

Ron Howard's 1999 comedy, "EDtv," was a spot-on parody of celebrity as created by the success of a reality TV show.

And two decades earlier Albert Brooks parodied the 1973 PBS documentary, "An American Family," with a film of his own, "Real Life," in which a documentary crew wore cameras on their heads and hounded a fictional family.

In a recent interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Brooks commented on today's reality-TV craze:

"Of course this started with everybody watching 'Survivor,' " the writer-actor-director said. "What happened, I knew would happen. Hollywood cannibalizes everything. You know, if an idea is clever, you might watch it. I don't think this thing was meant to watch a guy get up and shave. 'Elimidate' is better than any of 'The Bachelor.' You'd watch 'Elimidate: The Movie,' wouldn't you?"

So is a real-life "Truman Show" possible?

Considering the desperation of some of the networks, it can't be entirely ruled out.

ABC was so in need of a ratings hit, it devoted much of its spring lineup to reality TV, including such shows as "Are You Hot?" and "I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!"

Most of those shows flopped. As a result, the networks seem to be reversing course on reality-TV overkill, limiting the number of reality shows on the fall schedule substantially.

Too much of a good thing is bad, they've since concluded.

But reality TV isn't going completely away, said Robert Thompson, director of the Center for the Study of Popular Television at New York's Syracuse University.

"They're cheap to make and they're infinitely adaptable," he said. "I think the good ones will have an audience."

And just as in the movies, we'll undoubtedly be watching.