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)

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)

Movie of the year, without a doubt. Cuarón’s vision of the future is dreadful and plausible. People are depicted exactly as they are in reality. Some cowardly, sometimes brave, sometimes evil, sometimes good and so on, it’s a truly mixed bunch. He shows us the future of 2027 when we have lost hope and belief in good things. But this is a simply story, without dreadful twists and shocking revelations. This is a study of Us, people. But what stands out over everything else in Children of Men is its brilliant form. The ingeniously planned choreography, the long, really long takes with not cuts whatsoever take your breath away. The scene in the car and one of the final uprisings are incredibly well executed. I couldn’t believe that it’s even possible to film anything like that. Supported by an excellent performance from Clive Owen, whose Theo is no dumb hero, but a real person afraid for his life, we see the final disintegration of our civilization. This is just what world of film needs. Movies like this. Stories like this. (03/18/2007)

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)

A riveting film with a pretty realistic portrayal of our near future. The world in 2027: misery, filth, people living in unsustainable social conditions; not that different from our present. If you multiply today’s problems in Europe, you will get something unpleasantly similar to Children of Men. This socio-political insight gives the film an uncompromising undertone, while the main storyline provides a sufficiently solid base for the viewer to consider it real and factually important. The camera for the most part is a couple of paces behind the protagonist and in several scenes it pulls you directly into the events taking place on screen, making you go through a brutal shoot-out, a bus full of hiding wretches and a semi-demolished building. Everything feels incredibly alive but depressive at the same time, and the glimmer of hope in the form of a baby by the end works the way it should. (01/21/2008)