| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 05/21/2007 : 10:36:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
But you don't think he can do comedy?
I'm not sure. He might well be able to, but I don't know whether I'd want him to. It would undermine his brooding credentials. |
 |
|
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 20:20:39
|
I finally saw this the other day and I thought it was great, although I have to agree that as a technical achievement it was much stronger than as a piece of storytelling.
The visuals were masterful, and certainly gave the feeling of a world without hope. This was done with small details - cheap vehicles spewing out a visible layer of pollution at street level because "who cares about the environment if there's no next generation to pass the world onto?" - and more in-your-face stuff like graffiti with messages such as "Last One To Die, Turn Out The Light." I thought the burning cattle was interesting, I suppose theoretically it could have been hoof-and-mouth disease but I assumed there was simply nobody to look after the animals.
I had an issue with Luke...certainly he wasn't the first "revolutionary" to lose sight of the cause he supposedly believed in, but he and his followers just seemed so quick to kill and hurt people, including the refugees they were supposedly fighting for, that I couldn't really figure out what he was risking his own life for in the first place. What do they believe in, exactly? Or is the point that he and his "uprising" are no different than those savages in the woods?
So what happened next? Interesting question. Maybe she was just the first of many anyway. |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 06/15/2007 : 23:55:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
Or is the point that he and his "uprising" are no different than those savages in the woods?
That's the way I took it. Newsclips at the beginning showed that the rest of the world's societies had disintegrated totally; I took it that most people had accepted the inevitably of the extinction of the human race and lost any kind of respect for life, resulting in major social breakdown and general reversion to savagery. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 02:12:33
|
| Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those savages in the woods made up of the uprising? |
|
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 14:59:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Newsclips at the beginning showed that the rest of the world's societies had disintegrated totally; I took it that most people had accepted the inevitably of the extinction of the human race and lost any kind of respect for life, resulting in major social breakdown and general reversion to savagery.
Not newsclips...government propaganda. And since all we saw was London and the English countryside, we have no idea how much of it was true.
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't those savages in the woods made up of the uprising?
I don't think so...Luke could have been killed in all that, and the baby, too. They were shooting at the car. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 15:12:36
|
| No, you're wrong. Those savages are, in fact, part of the uprising, and the attack was entirely to kill Julianne Moore. That's what that whole scene where the motorcycler shows up in the middle of the night is all about. |
|
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 15:19:53
|
| That's a pretty dumb way to do it, then. So yeah...still confused about what they wanted. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 15:27:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
That's a pretty dumb way to do it, then. So yeah...still confused about what they wanted.
Revolution, man. *passes joint* |
|
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 06/16/2007 : 17:30:01
|
| Cool. Fight the power, or something. |
|
|
|
Montgomery
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 18:06:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by silly
See, we're both infertile  so it's a bit of a sore subject.
I'm sorry to learn that.
EM |
|
|
|
Montgomery
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 18:16:47
|
SPOILERS
I liked this movie quite a bit. I thought it had some cool futuristic details. And, I liked the idea of the world mourning the death of the youngest person, who Clive, or someone said, was really an "asshole". And that they still called him "baby" when he was over 20, or something like that. (Sorry. I saw it awhile ago, so my memory's soft.)
I did find it weird that the "uprising" would turn against themselves. But, there were some really great parts. And I bought it, throughout.
I love looks into our possible future, even if it is dismal and depressing.
I love Clive. And, although I was in the camp of having him be the next Bond, I think Craig is very good, too. And, you're right, Clive is now more open to continue playing all kinds of different parts.
More Clive, please!
EM :) |
Edited by - Montgomery on 06/19/2007 18:18:02 |
|
|
|
Yukon
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
Posted - 06/19/2007 : 22:16:31
|
Amazing film. I gave it 6/5.
To me, the technical work is what makes the film so good - the stunning no-cut, one shot scenes.
It's one thing to have the camera rolling for five minutes without a cut as two people walk and talk in a restaurant or mall, but Children of Men has five-minute action scenes with car chases, explosions and hundreds of people with out a single cut!
In a movie with hardly any special effects, I spent most of the film thinking "How the heck did they do this?"
|
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 10/16/2007 : 10:56:01
|
Finally got to see this last night and was basically blown away. Yes, there are some spots that lagged a bit, but on the whole, I think it was a very powerful movie. What got me was the attention to details and matching that they used. The artistry was masterful, and the feel of the film, perfectly dark and foreboding.
As for things being confusing, I think that was the whole point of the movie. Chaos insues and everyone is fighting everyone else and no one seems to really know who they are fighting or why, except that this is all they can be passionate about. In essence, the anger, fighting and passionate hatred has become a replacement for the type of uncontrollable, instinctual love that is reserved for children. This makes sense given that when the youngest person on the planet is killed, people are overwhelmed by their feelings of loss, as if it had been their own flesh and blood - despite the fact that the "baby" was an asshole. Plus, this sparks more insurgency since no one knows who killed him or why. Rather than find out the truth (since it is apparent that no one is telling anyone the truth about anything anymore), the reaction is 'we might as well kill some more of the people who stand for what we hate'. Oh, and forget about transferring our affections to the girl who is a couple of days older than the "baby" and is now the youngest person on the planet (although I'm not sure why about that either).
What bothered me about this film most was that we don't actually understand why the world is so filled with all these refugees - that is, until close to the end of the film. And even then, it is never said out loud, and feeds on the post-9/11 generalized prejudice "all immigrants are potential terrorists". Yes, cracking down on immigrants is put forward from the start of the film, but who is to blame for all these immigrants is left mostly to our immagination for most of the film, and then gets a bit of direction only near the end. And the direction they give us wasn't where I was going towards, which made it a far more sinister film for me. This is probably because that direction they give us is totally disconnected with the theme of world infertility, and we never find out what caused this.
Of course, others have already praised the acting in this movie, so I won't repeat it here. The biggest surprise for me was finding out that this was a P.D. James novel. In all my Dalgliesh viewing years I would never have believed she could come up with such a complex psychological dystopia. I had her pegged as a better than average murder mystery writer, and never bothered reading any of her books. I guess I was wrong and now I've got some hunting to do - bookwise, that is.
Fascinating! |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 10/16/2007 : 11:20:09
|
| Interesting point - I had only thought of the problems as coming from the lack of younger generations coming along to continue the species/look after the old/take over etc. However, we know how frustrated individuals can be who are unable to have children - that frustration multiplied by billions would indeed be devastating. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 10/16/2007 : 12:54:36
|
It also occurs to me that this is a very anti-religion movie. On the one hand, there are hints that religious fanatacism is what caused the wars, ruin and destruction. But the various cults that they refer to that are popping up are made to look like desparate people clutching at straws. Those same cults seem to be blaming the world's infertility on a lack of faith and that this medical situation is basically God's wrath. Yet, if a lack of religion caused the procreation to end, but zealots are destroying civilization, and a middle ground will not appease anyone, then what is left?
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Children of Men
