'Children of Men', the new Alfonso Cuaron sci-fi flick

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1517 of them)
once I'd realized one shot had been going on for five, six minutes without my knowing it.

yeah, i don't think this was a showoffy film at all, by contemporary standards.

Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 8 January 2007 05:06 (nineteen years ago)

one of my favorite things about the movie was the way the mid-40s characters--julianne moore and the midwife specifically--had like dreadlocks and tattoos and nose-rings, which is so appropriate, considering that they're all 80s babies

max (maxreax), Monday, 8 January 2007 05:10 (nineteen years ago)

i liked the king crimson song

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 8 January 2007 05:37 (nineteen years ago)

max True

earinfections (Nick Twisp), Monday, 8 January 2007 07:29 (nineteen years ago)

I liked it fine, but based on all the rave reviews I was expecting something a little "smarter"/science fictionier. I wish there had been more focus on the infertility plot line, instead it was just a red herring to set up the one pregnant woman as the Macguffin, the treasure/secret code/whatever that has to be protected. Basically it was a fairly well-made action movie, and not much more. And that's ok.

Why was Julianne Moore so clean while everyone else was so grubby?

n/a (Nick A.), Monday, 8 January 2007 11:14 (nineteen years ago)

Because she's Julianne Moore. I think it's in all her contracts.

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 8 January 2007 11:29 (nineteen years ago)

Can I just state again that I've never been happier to see Julianne Moore in a role than I was in this movie?

The Android Cat (Dan Perry), Monday, 8 January 2007 14:41 (nineteen years ago)

Admit it: you thought she was never sexier than when trying to whisper through a hole in her throat.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 8 January 2007 14:44 (nineteen years ago)

I really enjoyed this but as it was several months ago I totally cannot recall the "pingpongball" incident? Can someone jog my memory?

Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 8 January 2007 14:45 (nineteen years ago)

julianne moore projecting a ping pong ball into clive owen's mouth which he catches and returns

cutty (mcutt), Monday, 8 January 2007 14:47 (nineteen years ago)

which musta been CGI?

the "Ruby Tuesday" cover was nowhere as cloddish as TOMORROW, tho.

I'm eager to see it again.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

bittorrent is your friend during oscar time

cutty (mcutt), Monday, 8 January 2007 14:59 (nineteen years ago)

not mine.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 15:02 (nineteen years ago)

Just think of how awesome "The Hours" would have been if someone had shot Julianne Moore in the throat! Or "Magnolia"!

The Android Cat (Dan Perry), Monday, 8 January 2007 15:18 (nineteen years ago)

Oh man...imagine a Warren Commission-approved magic bullet that would have taken out Nicole Kidman too!

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 8 January 2007 15:20 (nineteen years ago)

There was a 60ish couple next to me who asked before the film who was in it. The man was very excited about JM; during the end credits, he said it "certainly wasn't a very good use" of her.

As for glamour, her teeth weren't capped.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 15:24 (nineteen years ago)

Saw it this past weekend. Spectacular movie. No, it ain't a "brilliant" movie, intellectually or philosophically speaking. In fact, on those levels, it's an unapologetically and even proudly middlebrow action-metaphor. But given that playing field, it's rich, brave, smart, staggeringly well-constructed, and it delivers surprisingly rich emotional payoff. I felt grief-stricken through most of the second half of the film (not at Breaking the Waves levels, but still), and more than a little bombed-out the next day. It haunted me.

I mean, it's a (mostly) non-cheeseball metaphor about the endurance/function of hope in a seemingly hopeless world. And that's an incredible feat in itself. And I don't know that I've ever seen a movie that depicted the horrors of war as being so emotionally horrible. So desperately sad and gut-wrenchingly brutal at the same time. The movie basically seems to argue that modern life is a collective failure of imagination, compassion and humanity.

And I think that's why it's being "dumped" in the U.S. It's a withering indictment of American foreign policy (check the Abu Ghraib/Guantanamo scene at the entrance to the 'fugee camp), and it ultimately asks you to sympathize with terrorists. Or terrorists-by-association, at least. It's everything V for Vendetta promised and failed to deliver. Subversive, brave, smart and furiously engaged.

Best movie I've seen in the theater in ages.

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Monday, 8 January 2007 16:26 (nineteen years ago)

It totally blew my mind when it ended.

The Android Cat (Dan Perry), Monday, 8 January 2007 16:32 (nineteen years ago)

I think that's why it's being "dumped" in the U.S.

This may be changing -- full page ads running in NY papers, and it was #3 ($10.3 million) this weekend in going wide. The critics may have rescued this one, but we'll see if it has legs.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 16:43 (nineteen years ago)

it's certainly not being dumped in the US, there are television ads for it all the time

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 8 January 2007 16:50 (nineteen years ago)

"This may be changing -- full page ads running in NY papers, and it was #3 ($10.3 million) this weekend in going wide. The critics may have rescued this one, but we'll see if it has legs."

That's nice to hear.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 8 January 2007 16:53 (nineteen years ago)

J Hoberman took opening such a 'tough' film in a few cities on Christmas week as a sign that the studio had little confidence, but the reviews were great and the seats filled.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

At the screening I attended on Friday night the theater was three-quarters full. The crowd was comprised of twentysomethings and seniors, most of whom gasped and groaned aloud during the expected moments. Scattered applause at the end.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 8 January 2007 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

If it's getting the big push, I stand (humbly, gratefully) corrected. I don't have a TV, so I dunno how it's being promoted, but the lobby poster looks like a deliberate attempt to sink it commercially.

That said, there wasn't a single empty seat in the house when I saw it on Friday night.

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Monday, 8 January 2007 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

Don't studios routinely open "thinky" yet good movies small at the very end of the year, so that they can be eligible for Oscars? As far as getting a push now goes, any movie that does better in weekend 2 than weekend 1 will surely get more screens?

Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 8 January 2007 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

yes, but the ads were scarce when it opened here, presumably cuz it didn't get any critic prizes. Hoberman:


this superbly crafted action thriller is being treated like a communicable disease.

Ever sensitive to buzz, critics have gotten the message and are steering clear. When the New York Film Critics Circle met last week, Children of Men got only a handful of votes, mainly for Emmanuel Lubezki's sensational cinematography. Earlier this month, The New York Times imagined Academy members in surgical scrubs, with a "news analysis" noting the unusual goriness of the year's Oscar contenders: The Departed, Flags of Our Fathers, Blood Diamond, Apocalypto, and The Last King of Scotland. A more resonant and gripping movie than any of these, Children of Men wasn't even mentioned.

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 17:15 (nineteen years ago)

blood diamond is an oscar contender? didn't it get terrible reviews across the board and sink commercially?

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:16 (nineteen years ago)

and I'm assuming dreamgirls is the biggest oscar contender and I don't think there's any gore in that.

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:18 (nineteen years ago)

Admit it: you thought she was never sexier than when trying to whisper through a hole in her throat.

I did think that she'd never looked better than in the scene in the newspaper hut. Moore should walk around with a big halogen light next to her all the time.

milo z (mlp), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:23 (nineteen years ago)


Not "terrible across the board," but the NYT article he refers to was from early Dec, when BD was a perceived contender. Things come and go so quickly, as we know.

Dreamgirls is not part of the particular equation being addressed there (melisma is the musical equivalent of gore).

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:23 (nineteen years ago)

I am kinda confused that critics thought it was being buried. How do you tell the difference between something being "dumped on Xmas Day" and all the artsy / big Oscar buzz movies that open small right before the calendar turns, just to be eligible?

saw this on Friday, if it counts as a 2006 movie it was my favorite movie of 2006

dmr (Renard), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:51 (nineteen years ago)

I just chalked it up to Rosenbaum-y whining on Hoberman's part. There's a difference in pushing something back and opening it on Christmas Day vs. just dumping it on a normal Friday.

milo z (mlp), Monday, 8 January 2007 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

opening on Xmas actually kinda works with the themes of the movie! A CHILD IS BORN

dmr (Renard), Monday, 8 January 2007 19:13 (nineteen years ago)

To speak for a moment to the discussion way upthread about the Fugee(go 'head, Clef)/soldier reaction to the baby and the overt religious overtones inherent in its presentation:

At various times in the first third of the movie, mention is made of a upsurgence of people joining radical end-of-the-world Christian organizations in response to mankind's infertility; I think it is safe to extrapolate that there would be a coincedent upsurgence of people joining other religions, Christian or otherwise. The two soldiers who drop to their knees and cross themselves strike me as a confirmation of this assumption.

The Android Cat (Dan Perry), Monday, 8 January 2007 19:18 (nineteen years ago)

This film is incredible.

One of the things I loved was how unobtrosive the long uncut scenes were. They weren't showy so they managed to bring a sense of immediacy and naturalness to the film. I was increasingly drawn into this film. It was so physical and the narrative was a simple alegory, but the details were beautiful.

Fleischhutliebe! like a warm, furry meatloaf (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rainbows), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:20 (nineteen years ago)

amazing, amazing film. between this and pan's labyrinth, mexico totally owns lately.

2 things:

1. anyone care to speculate on cuaron's preoccupation w/ feet?
2. "marichka" (pronounced, best i can remember, as "marika") = america? or is that a stretch?

m@p (plosive), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:31 (nineteen years ago)

feet and dogs. there were a loty of dogs in this movie. when i go see irt again i'm going to pay more attention to the dogs from start to finish.

mahalo 4 ur kokua (grady), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:35 (nineteen years ago)

1. anyone care to speculate on cuaron's preoccupation w/ feet?

I wonder how Bunuel would have answered this.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:40 (nineteen years ago)

Mahalo:

Pay attention to the animals from start to finish. Cows, dogs, cats, chickens, sheep, etc. The movie is so full of domestic animals it might as well be Ukranian.

They humanize the film, keeping your attention focused on the small, the fragile, the protectable and unprotected. Like the baby, they draw the line between ... not good and evil, really, but between life and anti-life.

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:42 (nineteen years ago)

A friend who saw it 2x says it's clear that America is gone.

I guess a pet explosion is inevitable in an infertile world (why the FDA just approved a weight-loss drug for dogs in our world, I'm not sure).

Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:46 (nineteen years ago)

I'll look if I see it again, but I thought it was just New York that was gone. Doesn't Owen ask Moore in a significant way if (someone) was in New York?

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:53 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, i suspect a nuclear explosion (but it's unclear).

Fleischhutliebe! like a warm, furry meatloaf (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rainbows), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:54 (nineteen years ago)

There's an almost subliminal shot of a mushroom cloud over Manhattan in one of the 'England endures' propaganda bits.

chap (chap), Monday, 8 January 2007 22:56 (nineteen years ago)

Got the impression that America is not gone, but that it's been decimated, fallen into barbarism or suchlike. Chap and Andrew are right: there is a shot of a mushroom cloud over Manhattan in one of those propaganda bumpers and a later implication that anyone who was in New York was killed.

The three-years-ongoing war of Seattle is also mentioned at some point. The idea isn't that America is "gone", but rather that it's no longer a functioning semi-first-world nation.

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:11 (nineteen years ago)

adam:

i have drawn the line between reading your posts and ignoring them.

xp

mahalo 4 ur kokua (grady), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:16 (nineteen years ago)

anyone care to speculate on cuaron's preoccupation w/ feet?

Is there more than the shot of Clive Owen trying on the flip-flops?

jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:18 (nineteen years ago)

(I do remember thinking that he lingered on them for a long time, though.)

jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:18 (nineteen years ago)

Mahalo:

I think yr. not alone in that. Not sure why you felt compelled to point the fact out to me. Thanks anyway.

Adam Beales (Pye Poudre), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

Doesn't Owen ask Moore in a significant way if (someone) was in New York?

Yes and it's killing me trying to remember who it was.

Also, I completely forget, but was the issue of the baby in the picture of Theo & whatever JM's character's name was ever adressed again? Was that picture more than 18 years old/was that baby born AFTER "baby Diego"?

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:21 (nineteen years ago)

I officially HAVE to see this movie again.

stoked for the madness (nickalicious), Monday, 8 January 2007 23:22 (nineteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.