Children of Men

Of all the film premieres of 2006, Children of Men left the biggest impression on me, and because I didn't hesitate to go to the movie theater to watch it, I was rewarded with an experience on the big screen. It is a film that is brilliantly directed, a masterpiece by Alfonso Cuarón, where you can feel the touch of an extraordinarily talented filmmaker in every shot. However, I have one problem with Children of Men: Yes, is brilliantly filmed, but I am concerned with what it is about. The literary source by P. D. James is just an average story from the science fiction genre, and in my library, there are hundreds of novels and stories that deserve such precise adaptation far more than this. The basic motif, namely the fact that children have stopped being born, is essentially nonsensical and can only be seen as a metaphor. But I have a slight issue with the divine punishment in the sci-fi movie. Furthermore, the world of the author is not very functional. Why should the planet fall into chaos and only Great Britain survive as an island of stability? In moments of crisis, old proven dictatorships usually take over, regardless of their nature, and in a world where older people prevail, the desire for stability prevails as well. Nevertheless, my overall impression is a reliable 90%. It combines three basic prerequisites for the creation of a good film - an original story, a strong theme, and unique execution. Practically every scene is captured with remarkable invention and persuasiveness. The strongest impression a viewer takes away is from the depiction of battle scenes in a ravaged refugee camp. Cuarón has an extraordinary ability to tell a dramatic story and doesn't need frantic and shaky camera shots like notorious B-movie directors. At the same time, it's not overly sentimental or just cheap entertainment. It is a directorially alarming and exceptionally emotional film. It is already part of the golden fund of science fiction works today. (01/24/2008)

Absolute victory of form over content and story. Even though, in its almost metaphorical conception of human incapacity to reproduce, it can drive a few bugs into the viewer's mind. It's a pity that it doesn't develop the central idea too much, it doesn't provide a cohesive resolution and rather serves as a screen for the camera and editing. But oh, for what purpose! The expression "raw" has never applied to any other film as much as it does to The Descendants. The attack on the car and especially Thea's journey through the battle tumult resonate in me longer than after the closing credits start rolling, and I am afraid that some unnecessary and mainly pre-condemned plagiarists will try to shoot a scene that will be better or longer and fatally fail. Definitely not the film of the year, but perfect for contemplation and amazement from a visual standpoint. (12/22/2006)

This film’s technical brilliance and orgiastic creativity in its visuals will cause film connoisseurs’ jaws to drop and the plot with a powerful theme and even more powerful scenes will melt the hearts of children and adults of all ages. Even though Alfonso Cuarón and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki show off a bit in the manner of “Look what we can do!” in places, their film will leave absolutely no one cold. In a packed cinema, Children of Men is an excellent collective experience, with people clutching their heads, laughing and groaning as if they themselves had been hit in the mouth with a car battery. I believe that just as Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, Francis Coppola and co. got a dying Hollywood back on its feet in the 1970s, Cuarón, Alejandro Iñárritu, Paul Greengrass and co. will now take it to another level in this age of calculated digital confections. *** FILM OF THE YEAR *** (11/14/2006)

It's not appropriate to write "a technically brilliant, all-round brilliant thing" about most films seen in the movie theater. However, that does apply to Children of Men. Add together brilliant cinematography, direction that knows what to do with its mega-long shots, great acting performances... There you have it. I'll probably never get Michael Caine combined with Ruby Tuesday out of my head. (08/24/2009)

This is no milestone in the history of cinema, for that Cuarón would have to be as good a screenwriter as he is a director, but it’s definitely a film that can only be recommended. At least 2 scenes – the carjacking and the wartime turmoil in the refugee zone – are worthy of inclusion in the proverbial "hall of fame" of memorable scenes; the only thing I missed while watching them was an involuntary "Holy shit!". Another thing worth praise is the interestingly portrayed atmosphere of the near future: bleak and troubled, free from exaggerated technological trappings, but with an emphasis on one of the expected future problems of Western civilization, which is already beginning to rear its ugly head (see this year's events in France), namely the problem of illegal immigrants and the related rise of xenophobia. Clive Owen is a very charismatic guy and a good actor, I'm rooting for his current status as a major leading man, just a shame that in his case it didn't come sooner. (12/28/2006)