1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Children of Men. See it.

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Billy Monday, Jan 6, 2007.

  1. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    Huh. That would bother me, too, especially since we're currently in the midst of a worldwide twin epidemic.
  2. Alma

    Alma Well-Known Member

    A lot to chew on, like The Fountain, which also has a lot of questions.

    It is not the best movie of the year. Babel is.
  3. I told Dog that the movie was a heaping pile of shit. I'm standing by that.

    I gotta say, though, there are some truly amazing sequences in that movie. Dare I say the "war" sequence was better than anything in Saving Private Ryan. One shot. One take. Breathtaking cinematography.

    Just too ambiguous. The characters don't interact in a reasonable manner, relationships aren't explained/explored ... and there are a few plot "twists" that suck suck suck.
  4. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    No need to explain that stuff.
    The movie was quite good, although not as good as our critic thought it was.
  5. Billy Monday

    Billy Monday Member


    It's explained in the movie that it's not really known why all women became intertile. The theories on it ranged from religious to environmental.
  6. Crimson Tide

    Crimson Tide Member

    How did it depress me? Much in the same way "War of the Worlds" depressed me.

    Because so much of this world is populated with people who have dogshit for souls that if the world really crumbled, there'd be no point in saving it.

    Or, fuck it, maybe I should put Dye on my ignore list, who knows?
  7. dog428

    dog428 Active Member

    Probably a few light spoilers here.

    It's fine to leave things to the imagination. But you can't have the overall premise of the film be that they have to get this pregnant girl to the Human Project to save mankind and then never tell the audience why.

    The infertility alone, I'm fine with someone saying, "Shit, no idea what's going on there, but it's bad." However, you can't base the film on the idea that this girl holds some sort of key to the future -- and stated or not, that's exactly what this film wants you to believe -- and not go into some sort of detail as to how she might change the course of fate. Even if the explanation is as simple as, We're not sure, you still have to attempt an explanation. Whenever a plot of a film revolves around characters trying desperately to achieve a goal of some sort, there has to be an explanation of why that goal is important to them.

    In addition to that, the relationships between characters who obviously had long and twisting backgrounds together were never dealt with in any form. Take Julian and Theo, for example. It's obvious they were together at one time. Married? Don't know. Their child died, we know that. But did that lead to the split and to her way of life? How did she become so powerful in that particular orginization, when every other small trek back in time seems to indicate she was a normal mother and wife/girlfriend? And Theo and Jasper -- what's the story there? (Here's one I'm not sure about -- was it ever explained why Jasper's wife was tortured to the point of a vegetative state? I know that the torture was mentioned, but I don't recall an explanation.)

    Basically, they lumped a group of people together, never explained who they were or how they were related to one another and focused on a couple of days in which they were trying to accomplish something for reasons that weren't clear.
  8. Billy Monday

    Billy Monday Member

    Light spoilers.....

    Totally disagree. You think they need to go into detail about how she might change the course of mankind's fate?
    It was the first baby on Earth in 18 years!!!
    What more explanation is necessary about how that could change mankind's future?
    A movie that dumbs itself down to explain everything too much ruins the movie. This movie seemed realistic because the characters weren't constantly explaining backstory in their dialogue (which people don't do in normal real-life conversations). It let you pick up the clues and enjoy the realistic ride.
  9. dog428

    dog428 Active Member

    Realistic is fine. But you tell me, after the initial shock of seeing this pregnant woman, if you're Theo, isn't the first question out of your mouth, "What does this mean?"

    But hey, you liked it and that's cool. I think we're getting into an area where personal preference is playing a pretty big role in our arguments and it's just a waste of time to argue that. You liked it, so good for you, glad you didn't waste $10. But I'm just as glad I didn't have to pay to see it.
  10. Billy Monday

    Billy Monday Member

    It's the first baby on Earth in 18 years, and you need somebody in the movie to ask what that means?
    What do you think that means?
    Hope, maybe?
    Hope for the future survival of mankind, perhaps?
    Yeah, that's real complicated and puzzling. Mankind is facing extinction because of female infertility lasting 18 years. Up pops a pregnant woman. But you need somebody in the movie to explain why that's important news?
    Sorry, not trying to be mean, but to me that seems just so very obvious and self-explanatory. It is the entire premise of the movie.
  11. dog428

    dog428 Active Member

    Son of a bitch, were you an investor or something?

    If the premise of this movie is that this is the first pregnancy on Earth in 18 years and oh, how happy we are, they did a piss poor job of portraying that.

    That wasn't the premise of the film. The entire plot was attempting to get this pregnant woman to this mysterious Human Project because it was good for all mankind to do so. It wasn't enough to just let her have the baby, everyone see it and celebrate. This man walked through a war zone, allowed himself to be arrested and ultimately died to get this girl on that boat.

    There has to be an explanation of why. Why does she need to be on the boat? Why is that more benneficial than just allowing her to have the kid and show it off?

    Now, I'm done. I said in the last post that it's obvious you're gonna like it no matter what, and that's fine. I don't care that you enjoy it or that you disagree with me. Good for you. I don't think you're an idiot and I don't think you're wrong just for liking it. You like what you like. That's life. Let's let it go.
  12. Maple Sugar

    Maple Sugar Member

    I went in with high expectations based on what I had heard from others. I was disappointed -- the movie was good, but not the masterpiece it was made out to be.

    The cinematography was outstanding and the overall look is what I would expect from an Alfonso Cuaron movie. The ambush scene was brilliantly done -- all in one shot -- and little things like movement of the handheld camera and blood on the lense gave you a sense of panic and immediacy.

    I also loved that Cuaron's vision of 2027 was more about regression than progression. What I didn't like was the character development because it took away from the story for me.

    *********SPOILER ALERT***************

    I'm with Dog, in that I wish that the characters were slightly better developed. I mean I didn't give a shit when any of them died, save Jasper -- who Michael Caine played very well. Maybe I missed these things, but why does Theo trust Jasper with his life and vice versa?

    Why does Kei put her life and the life of her baby in the hands of Theo -- whom she has known for a whole day or two? Just because Julianne Moore said so?

    I also wondered Theo would buy into the whole Human Project plan when he's on the run with Kei, since his first instinct was just to go to the press with it and let people know?

    Chiwetel Ejiofor -- who is a fantastic actor -- his character is just a mess. I had no idea what his ultimate goal for the baby was. It reminded me of the "underpants gnomes" episode of South Park where Underpants = Profit... but they aren't sure how.
    In this case it was baby = revolution.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page