Geophyrd
22-Oct-2007, 12:58 PM
I first heard about Children of Men through the film magazines. At first, it would get mentioned in a list of upcoming films, then the lists of upcoming films with interesting premises. Finally, there were whole articles about it, about how the filmmaker was doing something unique and interesting and that the plot (people can't have babies, man has to escort the first pregnant woman to safety) was where the film took off into a superlative experience.
I can attest to this. Children of Men is amazing. The best parts are the details of this dystopian future where despair has permeated everything. Britain is the last bastion of civilization, a place where everyone knows there will be no one left alive in a century and that everything anyone does is doomed not only to failure but to be forgotten and buried.
The cinematography was unreal. In one place, there is a single scene shot inside a car. It is done in 1 take and it is breathtaking. How is it possible for so much to happen in a single take would be amazing. I'd have thought the filmmaker got unbelieveably lucky, except he does it AGAIN later in the movie and does it even better in the middle of a full blown battle scene. I wish I could italicize the last sentence. This movie may represent the best example of telling a story using the full filmmaking palette that I've ever seen, a directorial command unseen since Orson Welles' Citzen Kane. That sounds pretty high faluting, except that I think I liked Children of Men better.
The actors do a terrific job. Michael Caine pops up, as does Julianne Moore. Both are more than competent but the movie belongs to Clive Owen. There was some noise a while back about Clive being the new James Bond, the role that ultimately went to Daniel Craig. It was a great movie...which may have been greater with Clive in the part.
Last, the marketing campaign for Children of Men was really not well done. I read movie magazines all the time. I don't think this movie should have been this hard to spot...it was one of the best movies I've seen in years.
Oh, and before I forget...ROSEBUD.
I can attest to this. Children of Men is amazing. The best parts are the details of this dystopian future where despair has permeated everything. Britain is the last bastion of civilization, a place where everyone knows there will be no one left alive in a century and that everything anyone does is doomed not only to failure but to be forgotten and buried.
The cinematography was unreal. In one place, there is a single scene shot inside a car. It is done in 1 take and it is breathtaking. How is it possible for so much to happen in a single take would be amazing. I'd have thought the filmmaker got unbelieveably lucky, except he does it AGAIN later in the movie and does it even better in the middle of a full blown battle scene. I wish I could italicize the last sentence. This movie may represent the best example of telling a story using the full filmmaking palette that I've ever seen, a directorial command unseen since Orson Welles' Citzen Kane. That sounds pretty high faluting, except that I think I liked Children of Men better.
The actors do a terrific job. Michael Caine pops up, as does Julianne Moore. Both are more than competent but the movie belongs to Clive Owen. There was some noise a while back about Clive being the new James Bond, the role that ultimately went to Daniel Craig. It was a great movie...which may have been greater with Clive in the part.
Last, the marketing campaign for Children of Men was really not well done. I read movie magazines all the time. I don't think this movie should have been this hard to spot...it was one of the best movies I've seen in years.
Oh, and before I forget...ROSEBUD.