Benutzerrezensionen

I never saw it in 06, Only just watched it. I am not going to go on about it much. But its relevance to todays world is astounding.

The action is impeccably done. The battle scenes are mind numbingly realistic. I still can't believe it was made in 05/06. Characters are so real. The atmosphere the attention to detail in scenes are incredible. Things happening in the background out of focus etc is just another layer of a real world that's been created. A huge epic movie with a hero who doesn't ever shoot a gun.

I will give it a week or so and watch it again. The director should've one an academy award.

OK, I only got through the first 3 pages of comments but let me add my own.

1) Fantastic cinematography. Some like hand-held, some don't. It certainly worked very well here.

2) Related to (1), very long shots. There is one scene where the camera lens has blood splats on it for quite a few minutes. Hollywood would get rid of it, but for this movie it adds amazingly to the atmosphere that is being created.

3) Like "Code46" the technology is in the background. Just the way it should be, allowing us to focus on the story.

4) Theo as the central character NEVER picks up a gun, despite them being all over the place and easily available. As a viewer you are almost willing him to do so, to manage some of his challenges - but very deliberately the character does not.

5) I've read separately that yes this is a comment on current society. Being an Australian, with our controversial immigration laws and practices, that rings true.

6) Similar to (5), using the term "Homeland Security" in the movie is an obvious reference.

7) The revolutionaries/terrorists/fishes are shown to be just as political and militant as the government they oppose.

There are more, but that is enough. Overall a wonderful movie which leaves me thinking for a long time, which is all I ask.

Cheers!

Anton.

The apocalypse arrives on film once again in a plot so simple it's horrifyingly believable. It's 2027 and the world is close to annihilation because no child has been born in 18 years. London office worker Theo (Clive Owen) is offered cash by a radical ex-girlfriend to escort a refugee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) to safety. Their lives are soon at risk from both government and revolutionaries.

Although the camera work and cinematography is nothing short of stunning the focus always with our protagonist, ensuring we're kept in the middle of the action throughout. It is also undoubtedly one of Owen's finest performances to date. Theo is never far from danger yet he struggles on with convincing dignity. Occasionally baffled but far from stupid - Theo is essentially a reckless, underplayed action hero that doesn't jump at every opportunity to arm himself with a gun. This works well with the international ensemble of incredible talent: Michael Caine's charming pot dealing hippie, feisty Julianne Moore, key role Claire-Hope Ashitey, the wonderful Pam Ferris, the increasingly busy, excellent Chiwetel Ejiofor, Danny Huston and writer/director/producer Peter Cullen (gloriously sadistic Syd) to name a few... This is surely a casting coup to be jealous of.

The episodic nature of the story makes Children of Men difficult to place into one genre alone. Briefly glimpsed futuristic sci-fi technology is grounded in reality and looks entirely achievable while grey, graffiti ridden concrete locations provide an excellent backdrop for the near satirical look of our current social and political climate. There's poignant drama interspersed amongst exhilarating action and yet enough twists to call it a thriller.

This is not to say it's flawless. Some exposition is handled better in places than others for instance. However Alfonso Cuarón has achieved a completely remarkable experience. Arguably the film could have been longer given how strong most of it is. The only really hard pill to swallow is the comedy juxtaposed with some stark imagery that looks all too familiar to anyone who has ever seen the News from the past few decades. Nice to see a Pink Floyd reference though (pigs might fly!), and someone finally found a use for Battersea Power Station.

Ideally an audience should see this film with no preconceptions and know as little about the plot as possible. This will be unlikely though due to a staggered box-office release schedule, word of mouth and a plethora of reviews and trailers that are eager to give much of the game away. Ironic then perhaps that it must be said - Children of Men is a cinematic milestone. Great special effects and an effective soundtrack accompany this heartfelt, moving and thought-provoking film. Easily one of the best films in recent memory.

I first saw 'Children of Men' when it came out, 10 years ago, and while I liked it a lot, I kind of forgot about it soon. At the time, it failed to resonate with me on a deeper level - which in hindsight I find astounding.

Last month, a decade later almost to the day, I suddenly felt the urge to revisit the film (because it was mentioned in an article about "long takes"), and upon re-watching it, it just blew my mind. This film is so, so, good!

It not only manages in many aspects to be the most prophetic - and most shockingly realistic - sci-fi film I have ever seen: it achieves that feat with a level of style and through such an abundance of fantastic creative choices and innovative camera techniques that I was simply left in awe.

I was forced to conclude that this film was a visionary piece of art (and how that fact had eluded me the first time around I couldn't - and still can't - explain). It's a cinéphile's dream come true; it's a masterpiece in the true sense of the word.

'Children of Men' is a gut-wrenching look at an all too possible future, but it also works as a heart-stopping, adrenaline-rush-inducing piece of entertainment featuring some of the most breathtaking camera work you'll ever see.

The performances are flawless. The artwork, the production design, the music; I could go on and on: this is one of those few real masterworks where everything just comes together right. And I believe the final 30 minutes of the film rank among the finest achievements in the history of Cinema. Period.

10 Stars out of 10.

Favorite films: IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-Known Masterpieces: imdb.com/list/ls070242495/

Favorite Low-Budget and B-Movies: imdb.com/list/ls054808375/

Favorite TV-Shows reviewed: imdb.com/list/ls075552387/

I went to see this movie without catching any reviews, expecting something rather depressing and underfunded.

Let me stop there and start again.

This movie is a revelation from start to finish. A convincing future world, deftly conveyed with so many subtle signals that I'm sure it will benefit from further viewings. A completely "other" England which I was amazed to see realised in such detail. Clive Owen FINALLY has the heroic role we have been waiting for and is brilliant in it. Julianne Moore simply glows and I've never enjoyed Sir Michael Caine so much before. The soundtrack is beautifully eclectic. Aside from some excellent classical choices, there's an evocative and alternative Spanish take on "Ruby Tuesday" which is a signature on the film. Wait during the end titles to enjoy an excremental song from Jarvis Cocker.

The movie grabbed my attention right from the start, and never let go. Initially, it's the differences of this future world that intrigue. Then, when the action starts, what I found really surprising was the freshness of direction that made me react to bullets and violence as if I'd never seen them in a movie before. If the script wasn't so wonderfully leavened with wit, it would be a grim and scary movie at times.

Finally, the whole thing is lit brilliantly, from the authentic dim English days to the atmospheric ending.

One to watch alongside "The Handmaid's Tale" some time....

I've had a particularly bad film year, especially after having seen one particular over-hyped vacuous mess earlier in the year which all but killed my desire to see any films, no matter how interesting they looked or what the critics said about them. So, it was with a little trepidation that I went to see this, especially given that it starred Clive Owen (IMHO, the George Lazenby of British acting).

Well, I loved it and I'm not ashamed. It's unremittingly bleak and violent, but so beautifully filmed and realised that, at one point, I damn nearly burst into tears that someone could have created something so fresh and so moving, so provocative, so disturbing and so grimly beautiful. I thought it brought a real sense of imagination to the screen and that it was possessed of a fantastic visual flair. I felt that it ended on a note of hope, however uncertain and unclear, and certainly a note of redemption for the hero. I'll admit that Owen, while he still hasn't convinced me that he's a great actor, pulls off this role with a hangdog...um, doggedness that I found believable and often even moving.

I left the cinema strangely elated, relieved that cinema still has the power to move.

I've seen this film and let me tell everyone that it was one of the most pleasurable surprises I've ever had with a film. I hadn't heard about it before and it totally took me by surprise. It blew me away and left me speechless. The acting is excellent by most of the actors, but Michael Caine deserves to receive a special mention for his amazing portrait of the old hippie Jasper. His performance is fantastic and he totally stole the show in the scenes he was in. Claire Hope is also fantastic in the role of Kee. Her performance is quite impressive, especially considering this is one of her first films. Clive Owen is also great as the reluctant hero who sees his life turned upside down and is given a huge responsibility. I've seen him in some other films and he's at his best here. A very good performance, you could feel what he was going through. In the technical aspects the film was brilliant, particularly Alfonso Cuarón's strong and consistent direction that is one of the best things in the film, and contributes a lot to its quality. Also director of photography Emmanuel Lubezki does wonders with images and there are some extremely beautiful shots all done in a naturalistic way, natural lighting, etc. It's an extremely well crafted film that makes you go through the emotional struggle the characters go through and makes you feel that you're in the middle of it all. Besides, it's also an extremely touching story that certainly touched my heart. One of the best films I've ever seen without any doubt.

This futuristic thriller disposes of much of the sci-fi jargon we've come to expect from Hollywood films. There are no outlandish gadgets or chases through CGI-created landscapes; CHILDREN OF MEN, based on a novel by P. D. James, is a realistic thriller through and through. It's set in a recognisable dystopia (full of violence, poverty, disease, segregation and warfare) and the story follows a strict 'journey' template, following a group of characters as they travel through myriad locales, suffering death, defeat and adventure along the way. So far, so predictable. However, this film works because it's literate, it's intelligent and the focus is on storytelling over flashy special effects or action nonsense.

Mexican director Alfonso Cuaron (HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN) is a force to watch out for on the strength of his work here: this is the best direction I've seen in a long while and the film is chock-full of great tracking shots which really emphasise the excitement and danger around every corner. The view of a future UK is nightmarish and believable and the backgrounds and locations are as much a character as the protagonists themselves.

I also enjoyed the fact that the film remains as unconventional as possible as it moves along. Clive Owen, the heroic protagonist, never fires a gun and is definitely an everyman character rather than a hero: he's utterly believable and this is the best role I've seen the actor in yet. Supporting actors are good, but it's the older heavyweights who give the best turns: Julianne Moore, as likable as she's ever been, as a terrorist leader; Pam Ferris as an ally; Michael Caine as an aged John Lennon-type. Chiwetel Ejiofor is also very strong in a minor role. The film does have action, including a ferocious fire fight at the climax, but it's never an action film per se. It's just a great movie that avoids pigeon-holing and never left me bored or underwhelmed once.

After reading various reviews and seeing the previews, I was quite excited to see "Children of Men". Upon viewing the movie, however, I was unable to see why users were rating it so highly. I believe there is a predilection to highly rate any Futuristic Dystopia, as they graphically transport us to a time that we are ever so interested in -- our not-too-distant future. "Children of Men" does this better than most, since -- with the exception of the infertility theme -- it does not highly disconnect us from what our future is likely to be.

Other than that, however, the movie lacks what it was claimed to be; it is not "Bladerunner" Redux -- not even close. The movie does not operate on multiple philosophical levels, and those attempting to dissect it are having difficulty not because it is especially deep, but because it lacks much beyond its initial layer. As a futuristic thriller (and very graphically violent, at that) it works marginally well, as there were a couple of moments when I felt my heart pitter-patter in that movie-theater way. Outside of that, there is not much going on here, besides the obvious: the world is going to hell and there are too many guns. Get on with it.

What a movie!!! Brilliant performances of the actors, especially Clive Owen, great photography, excellent storyline... One of the best apocalyptic movies of all time. Bloody and with wonderful message! A must watch!

The year is 2027 and no one has had a kid since 2009. Consequently, the human race is doomed. Emotions are running high and everywhere the world is falling apart. Conflict, despair, chaos and decay are everywhere. The premise is introduced very well as everywhere people are mourning the death of the world's youngest person - watching the future disappear before their eyes.

This film does convey the look and feel of the above quite well through credible character exchanges and technical work. However, the film's potential is hampered by the story - Theo (Clive Owen) trying to secretly transport a miraculously pregnant woman to the shadowy 'The Human Project,' who they have to trust have her best interests at heart as opposed to the openly brutal and corrupt government. Because all of this has to be hidden from the public's eye, the film's potential to explore this extraordinary development is limited to speculation by the small band of people who come to know that the girl is pregnant. So while the decaying world is continually depicted credibly, the film can't really grow and thematically build on its premise.

So the film mainly becomes a chase film - trying to transport the girl somewhere while avoiding detection from all sides. This takes away from the uniqueness of the premise and makes the film seem more routine than it should have been. I have to say, though, that the last 30 minutes is quite thrilling as the stakes have been raised so much. The camera following the progress of Theo through the torn-up streets as bullets fly everywhere is a gripping. But for those who want to see this film with the purpose of having grand philosophical discussions afterwards, you'll probably come out disappointed. The film does have things to say, but could have been more.

Finally, a couple of things deserve a special mention. The cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki is just outstanding as he throws everything in the book at you - constantly inventive camera work, smoke, light, shade, saturation - so that many of the scenes you just want to frame on your wall. Also, a recurring musical theme from John Tavener's 'Fragments of a Prayer' is also very memorable and fits well.

Children of Men starts off looking like it'll be a rarity, a good Clive Owen film. It's not that he's suddenly learned to act, just that he's cast as a lifeless drone and that's about within his range. The premise is a bit been there, done that, with another future Britain that's sunk into the twin evils of repressive right wing xenophobia and terrorism, with infertility added into the mix as the raison d'etre. The lack of originality doesn't matter so much since like all "serious" sci-fi it's meant to be a mirror into our own times. What does matter is that the film becomes so predictable around the halfway point. Yes, it's another journey through a not-quite-post-apocalyptic landscape hitting every cliché from the Lazy Screenwriter's Book of Plot Points. Look, here's the ex-girlfriend to remind us of the hero's old idealism. Look, here's the aging hippy to show us how much things have changed. Look, here's the mad army officer to provide some threat. It feels too much like it's ordered from a menu and relies too much on the production design and fake documentary camera-work to sell a TV dinner as a fresh steak.

The film really falls apart in the end because no matter how right Owen is at the start of the film he's every bit as lifeless by the end because displaying emotions or growth just isn't what he does. You don't care about his character, the few amusing star turns get killed off early and you're just left with a big series of explosions and riots and shootings to wake up the audience who've switched off their emotions by then. And that end looks weirdly like a setup for Owen's next movie where he once again plays bodyguard to a baby people want to kill. At least that one looks like it knows what it wants to be, which Children of Men never quite does. Okay, but you've already seen it.

Alfonso Cuaron has given us a very clever rendering of a very English dystopian novel. P D James, the "Baroness of Bad" is famous for her well-written and absorbing police procedural novels ("Inspector Dalgliesh") but in the early 90s she produced a vision of a world only 20 years into the future in which for unspecified reasons all the women on earth have become infertile and no babies have been born for the last 18 years.

The rest of the world has lapsed into chaos but the British, stoically, have put the remainder of their civil liberties into the fire and have settled down under an oppressive dictatorship to ward off foreign boarders and await inevitable extinction, though there are some violent dissidents called the fish.

Theo (Clive Owen), a journalist with connections to the top, is "persuaded" by his ex-wife and fish member Julian (Julianne Moore) to obtain some exit papers for Kee (Claire Hope Ashity) a young black woman, who, it turns out, is pregnant. Theo is swept up in Kee's escape across a grim decaying landscape. Not only are there the security forces to contend with, but some equally ruthless insurgents. Cuaron builds the tension exquisitely, interspersing the adrenaline fueled bits with quieter bits.

Kee' projected saviors are a mysterious group called the Human Project who conveniently sail their well-maintained Greenpeace style ex-North Sea fishing trawler past offshore light buoys in the hope of rescuing the human race. But the improbability of this doesn't matter much because by the end of the movie Cuaron has effectively demonstrated what the world would be like if humankind suddenly stopped reproducing. Having children is our way of cheating death, without them there is nothing but death, and in this future there are none about but the living dead.

The casting is pretty well perfect. Clive Owen as Theo puts his haunted good looks to good use as he turns from cynical reporter to a hunted enemy of the state. The motley characters he meets along the way – his ex-wife, the fish rebels, the refugees who help him, the "fascist pig" border guard and above all Michael Caine's aging hippie are all wonderfully realized.

It has been suggested that Cuaron has really made a film about today, not 20 years into the future. The rampaging security forces we see might as well be in Bosnia or Iraq, or even Northern Ireland. In an age of terrorism, order without law very quickly becomes tyranny, which has never been the answer to terrorism. What he and PD James do demonstrate is just how fragile our civil society is.

As a film this is a very fine piece of work. The sets exude grimy Britain, the battles are hair-raising, the quieter moments intense. Cuaron would do a great James Bond movie. He has turned a rather rarefied novel into an exiting and engrossing thriller without obscuring the original message. He is a very versatile and enterprising film-maker and I'm sure he's going to do lots more good stuff.

Of all the visions of the future movie audiences have been treated to over the past few years, the world of Children of Men may be the most frightening and allegorically effective yet.

Directed by Alfonso Cauron (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban), and set in 2027 London, the film takes place at a time when the planet is in the grip of an infertility crisis. Societies worldwide have collapsed after no children have been born in almost two decades, and the survivors of the ensuing wars, atrocities and civil breakdowns flee to Britain, which still functions under a harsh regime.

Clive Owen (Closer, Sin City) plays Theo, a former activist now working as a paper-pusher in the Ministry of Energy and downing a large amount of Scotch to get him through the day. He walks to work past terrorist bombings, cages filled with illegal immigrants rounded up by riot police, and piles of garbage littering the London streets. When an old flame and revolutionary, played by Julianne Moore, appears with a request that he use his governmental connections to help her move a refugee girl across the country, he agrees on the basis he be compensated. When he discovers that the girl (Kee, played by Claire-Hope Ashitey) is pregnant, his mission takes on new dimensions.

Cauron and his team of production designers have created what is, perhaps, the most believable vision of the future seen in quite some time. Advanced technology exists side by side with squalor, and is never allowed to steal the audiences attention away from the proceedings for too long. As far as being a realistic portrayal of Britain in twenty years time, the film is light years ahead of last year's disappointing V for Vendetta, which stripped away British iconography and culture and essentially kept London as a rather two-dimensional metaphor for the United States.

As a thriller, the film is blisteringly intense and incredibly effective. From the bomb blast that caps off the opening credits to the frenzied urban warfare sequences that dominate the film's closing thirty minutes, Cauron never lets the film lag. Though it slows down enough to deal with character development and exposition, the film maintains a running intensity as Theo and Kee try to stay one step ahead of terrorists, the police, the army and random opportunists. Several action scenes are shot in continuous takes, and make for compelling and electrifying viewing.

However, the film works as a socio-political drama as well. Though Cauron's two central messages (that immigrants enrich, rather than threaten, Western society, and that the outlook for human survival is dim when operatives on all sides let ideology displace compassion and good judgment) are strongly put, he is never so heavy-handed that they dominate or displace the actual storyline. Similarly, while the film makes numerous metaphorical references to present-day events, they are never so contrived as to derail the narrative.

The film features solid performances from Clive Owen, who is at his rugged, rumpled best, and Julianne Moore. Supporting players also do well: Michael Caine is terrific as Theo's pot-growing hippie friend, the versatile Chiwitel Ejiofor is again in fine form as a revolutionary cell leader, and Pam Ferris is also good as another of Kee's protectors. It is, however, Claire-Hope Ashitey who stands out as the illegal immigrant who may well be humanity's hope for the future.

Children of Men is packed with explosive action, incendiary social commentary and some white-hot performances. As a result, it may well be the best film of the year.

This year I attended for the first time the Venice Film Festival in Italy. I was of course quite excited and bought tickets to some screenings of a few different films I found interesting. Initially Children of Men wasn't in my plans but I was convinced by a friend who was very enthusiastic about it. Now I say I'm glad I bought the tickets! What an amazing film this is. The science fiction genre is just a coat to project into the future the horrors and problems of our current days and many films attempt that ending up, in most cases, failing. This one however succeeds. Succeeds indeed but not only in this... The film blew away nearly everyone in the audience as one of the best action movies we have seen lately, with extremely exciting and brutal chases, gun fights, etc. Don't be put off by this though, the film is as good as it is not because of the action sequences but its amazingly emotional and touching story. The performances of the cast is impressive especially Clive Owen and the newcomer Claire Hope Ashitey who throughout the film develop the relationship between their characters and it's such a joy to see the development. I'm not very good at writing reviews so I think I'll stop know, but I had at least to transmit something to everyone who might be interested in watching this film. Don't pass this one, you won't regret it. In my view one of the few excellent films released this year.

I will be very honest, I wouldn't have said that about Children of Men four years ago. When I saw it for the very first time, I didn't like it very much, while I loved the cinematography, direction and soundtrack I found it rather dull and confusing. On rewatch some time ago, I was dumbfounded at how wrong I was initially, and since again it has very quickly become a favourite of mine.

I do agree that there is the occasional surfeit of plot exposition and that it is slow. However, the story with its wonderful concept left me transfixed throughout. As for it being slow, I got the impression it was meant to be slow to add to its haunting atmosphere. Also Children of Men is one of those movies I think that you need to see more than once to truly appreciate it.

The soundtrack is very well chosen and beautifully incorporated into the story. The two John Tavener songs were very beautiful and haunting, and brilliantly performed. Jarvis Cocker's Running the World was okay, while the Shostakovich was a real treat. Same with Ruby Tuesday. My favourite was Mahler's amazing Kindertotenleider, sublimely sung by the king of Leider(for me anyway) Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau.

The acting is very good. Clive Owen is really quite excellent in the lead, with a brooding and charismatic presence this is the best I have seen him act. Julianne Moore is lovely and very believable. Michael Caine is the real star of the cast though, his turn here is simply glorious.

The best assets of Children of Men are the visuals and direction. Children of Men is a triumph when it comes to visuals. The decision for the use of hand-held camera was a risk but it worked so well with the dark and affecting atmosphere. The scenery is also miraculous and the colours are wonderful. But for me, this is Alfonso Cuaron's movie, a very underrated film-maker Cuaron's direction is absolutely superb.

Overall, maybe not completely flawless but amazing. I also disagree with the naysayers that it is overrated, in my opinion it is the other way around. This film is very well made, has a great soundtrack, an interesting concept and story, exhilarating action sequences, fine acting and I seriously think Cuaron should have more credit for his direction here. Maybe not for everyone, but I loved it, something that I almost definitely wouldn't have said four years ago. 10/10 Bethany Cox

I finished the year is despair, because though I've seen many good films this year, I've seen very few actually released in 2006. What a surprise to discover some late in the game.

This is one, and it really surprised me. That's because though I generally regard Hispanic filmmakers as the vanguard, he hasn't really impressed — not as a major talent. My how he impresses now. This isn't just an effective film, its effective in ways that show he really understands some of the theoretical mechanics.

Here's what I mean. I was greatly impressed by the opening scene of "Casino Royale." But if you look at it closely, you'll see that someone could have produced it by mere extrapolation. All they have to do is look at examples of things that are exciting in current movies and do the same, except a little more intensively.

But what Cuaron has done is go back to first principles. He knows how Welles redefined space. He knows how Tarkovsky created a whole new sort of eye by making the camera drift. He knows how Kirosawa invented the notion of layered planes. He's synthesized these in a new way, it seems to me. It isn't radical enough to not be readily digestible to a modern film-goer. But it also isn't much like what we had before, which I may typify with Ridly Scott's "Blackhawk Down." There's a scene toward the end which I imagine was where he started to imagine this project. Our escaping couple are detailed on the street by those who have been chasing them. This group is ambiguously evil, perhaps even the good guys. They prepare to kill Owen's character and perhaps do. From that point until near the end that seems to be one continuous shot. It isn't, but it seems to be, "Rope" -like.

He runs down the street and around a corner, being shot at. He runs into a bus and out. Then across the street in the middle of heavy combat where a building is under attack. All this is hand-held using a partially-stabilized camera, halfway between a documentarian's camera (at this point blood is spattered on the lens), and the other way toward stylized distance that surveys the planes of the spaces while they are animated with bullet hits.

We then follow him into the building, up several flights and down hallways to retrieve his "family," then on out again. At this point he becomes "seen" by those around him. Before, he was more like us, there but disembodied, in a die hard sense. Now he becomes part of the texture and we later discover, wounded.

So on down and out of the building to be adored, as Joseph the partner of the Maddona and then a tank explodes and we are back into the space, leading to a tunnel, an expanse of water, and then something else.

Its so wonderfully choreographed, the camera, the narrator's stance, the dancing walls, the object that appear and vaporize, the shifting types of engagement among us, characters and place...

We know we are being set up. This is no Terry Gilliam who basically intuits. Before this scene we see all the bits from the other masters presented separately. The Tarkovsky bits were perhaps less meditative that I would have liked. One was a visit to an abandoned school where we see our mother outside through a hole in the window, and encounters happen that "break emotional walls." The other is the presence of a profoundly senile old woman, and how she is included.

You walk through other basic film vocabularies elsewhere until they all combine in this last sequence. A Kurosawa episode on a bus when the midwife is taken to meet her fate.

Quite apart from the visual vocabulary, he's done well with complementary notions of story. Its science fiction but without tedious explanations. The world just is. There's brutality as in the future of "Vendetta," but one can see it isn't religious wars or jingoism that fuels it, but a far deeper existential concern. Julianne's character is the grand motivator, though wonderfully (in terms of story mechanics) she disappears early, effectively launching the real story: our hero is a storymaker.

Noir. Regular readers know I define noir a bit different than ordinarily. It has to do with ordinary folks thrust into extraordinary situations as if the existence of the viewer motivates a capricious fate that weaves and frames a story for our eye. What we have here is ambiguous noir, and the first real action noir. Quite an achievement. Quite an experience.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

The story begins in 2027. The human race is completely screwed, as fertility has completely disappeared and the last child was born over 18 years ago. Why this is the case, no one seems to know. There also was a worldwide flu pandemic in 2008 that apparently killed millions. As a result of all this, people react as they often do...with panic, confusion and self-destruction. The planet is now a mess...with widespread terrorism, reactionary governments and fear. Nuclear detonations, terror bombings and depression are the norm. As for the UK where the film is set, it's better off than most of the world...and so there's been a huge influx of illegal aliens AND the government has responded with draconian measures.

The main character in this story is Theo (Clive Owen), a bureaucrat whose wife, Julian (Julianne Moore) left him long ago following the death of their son in the pandemic. She has taken up with a domestic terrorist organization and he hasn't seen her for many years. Out of the blue, she approaches him asking for his help sneaking someone out of the country. Who this is and why...you can learn this when you see the film. Just understand...what happens are some things you just won't expect!

Before I talk about whether or not I liked the movie, it's VERY important to talk about how depressing the story is. Considering the recent COVID outbreak, the panic and chaos in the story seem even more terrifying. If you are depressed or scared about COVID, this is probably a film you best see another time or not at all. Again, I am NOT saying it's a bad film...it's just one that might be tough now for some viewers. With all the death, suicide and the like, this is NOT an upbeat film despite there being some hope as the film progresses.

The story is depressing and interesting at the same time. The standout in this film, however, is the cinematography and the long composite shots. And, even if the story is off-putting to many, you can't deny it took a lot of skill to make the movie. Worth seeing and a one-of-a-kind story from start to finish, it's hard to rate this one as the film clearly is not for everyone. If you want to be entertained or left happy, this sure ain't a film for you! I certainly DON'T want to see more films like it! But if you can take the overall tone of the movie and want something original, then it's clearly a film to watch.

It's a paper napkin idea fleshed out just enough to make a decent action movie. Though the director makes little use of his actors' talents, he puts together some fantastic action sequences. The first 10-15 minutes are filled with painful explanatory dialog, just to make sure every moron and his jumbo Diet Pepsi gets what's going on. Yes, we get it, all women have become infertile and the world is f^cked.

After the oddly abrupt ending, I walked away disappointed that this movie was the same one that so many reviewers have raved about. The rendering of our potential future dystopia is deeply disturbing, and if you're inclined to get depressed about our world going down the toilet, you might want to stay away.

Worthy addition to a very British literary, televisual and cinematic tradition of dystopian and apocalyptic narratives. H.G Wells, John Wyndham, SURVIVORS, 28 DAYS LATER.

These texts are revealing of the times in which they were made. Rather than looking forwards,they re often, at heart, deeply conservative. They frequently express a desire for a world where the centralised, industrial society has broken down entirely, replaced by an agrarian based model comprising small, rural communities. These narratives coincided with the rise in 'alternative ' lifestyles, interest in self sufficiency, organic farming, low technology and a different relationship with the Earth. Nostalgia for a pre Industrial past is more prominent than hope and anticipation of a glorious new future when civilisations been destroyed for a new, better world to emerge.

The grand narratives which we once imagined were going to change and improve the world no longer seem credible. Following the collapse of communism, there's a distrust of ideologies, especially those of the left. Arguably, the left has collapsed in the Western World. Thats the context this film arrives in, one where there seems no meaningfully effective counterbalance to the continued dominance of global capitalism, media saturation and environmental meltdown.

Arguably this film offers some hope but my overall impression is of something a lot bleaker than other apocalypse narratives. Without children there is, literally, no future left. Although emerging from a different context, this film shares with its predecessors a thoroughly revealing indication of the concerns preoccupying the time in which it was made.

Two scenes haunted me. The man in Battersea, isolated with his art collection and the set pieces of the illegal immigrants, rounded up and caged.

The Battersea scene uses its location and choice of Picasso's Gernika painting in the background to make a searing comment on a civilisation which, despite its pretensions to Art and Culture, has managed to engineer its own extinction. A civilisation whose intellectual and cultural elites, instead of challenging the prevailing discourse, isolate themselves, collusive in a form of collective denial.

The illegals scene is composed in such a way as to recreate images from the War on Terror, images which are now iconic. Both scenes link together through use of the painting which is an inspired device. This is definitely a movie to watch and work at. I was also intrigued by the recurring animals, and reminded of Tarkovsky, whose work is consistently loaded with symbolism. The scene at the empty, abandoned school was very reminiscent of the Russian director. Also praiseworthy is the astonishing use of sound, particularly in one of the key scenes when dogs can be heard barking in the distance.

Another haunting image is that of the flowers and wreaths laid very early on, after the youngest person on earth has died. Reminiscent of the mawkishness, sentimentality and mass hysteria of those laying floral tributes to murder victims they never knew, the so called 'Diana effect'. Again, a clear reference to todays world.

This is an outstanding piece of film making, I agree totally with previous reviewers comments, especially regarding the battle scenes, which have an immediacy, bringing to mind COME AND SEE or APOCALYPSE NOW. I ll give the last word to Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian newspapers film critic who called this 'a thinking persons action movie.'

I've read so much hype and positive comments on this film before watching, and regretfully, it did not live up to the expectations.

The film starts with an interesting, original basic story point: a future where the human race has become sterile. This opening point has so much potential, but unfortunately doesn't take off anywhere from there.

The plot itself is pretty monotonic: Our 2 heroes running off together from one place to another. It's not always clear who they're running from or where they are going. The chase itself is not so action-packed, and directed rather slowly. The other characters in the movie are thin cardboard cutouts - no background, no reasonable motives. There's not much of a punchline or point to the story once it ends either.

The movie does present a convincing, depressing but realistic future reality, down to little details. It does have a strong political saying, warning and moral. But these are the only strongpoints. In all other aspects, the film is not bad - but just mediocre. From a storytelling perspective, the movie presents a thin story, loosely tied scenes, and not enough character development. It lacks momentum and is just not entertaining enough.

I have visited IMDb for many years and I have been so moved by the fuss about this film that I had to register and comment. What is a film without a real story? The cinematography is good but I have just come away from watching this film with a sense of nothing. It is 1984 without being sinister. It is the same as "28 Days". There are no explanations to anything in the plot. Characters are one dimensional and poorly developed, and has just been pointed out by my fiancé that the continuity in the scene with the ginger cat is awful !!! The person who chose the soundtrack deserves to be employed again as it was one of the few reasons to sit through the credits at the end of them film. Distinctly average !

There's not much wrong with this movie. Cinematography and the camera direction is on point making one of the best directed films ever made, being made up of a bunch of long one take scenes, some of them lasting even over 5 minutes, and some making me wonder how to it was possible to achieve them. Another thing that stands out is of course the story. It's a very interesting premise, being executed very well, with a potential being reached almost to the maximum, presenting a dark post-apocalyptic world, built very well, with an end that you can somewhat predict, but you can't know how the story will unfold until that moment, being surprised of some interesting twists, incredibly choreographed action and a very well crafted script. Children of Men is not only a modern classic, but also an almost perfect movie making it one of the best of the century, but arguably one of the best movies ever made and I would recommend anyone to watch it.