Movie News

Quint has seen Alfonso Cuaron's CHILDREN OF MEN!!!!

Published at: Sept. 25, 2006, 1:45 p.m. CST by quint

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here!

I've had a trip from hell. I type this as I fly back to Austin from Washington Dulles where United Airlines decided that my incredible victory over the 2 1/2 hours of getting through US customs and still being able to make my connection was not to be commended. They cancelled my flight because Chicago hates me and grounded the Austin plane because it was raining there. I spent another 3 or 4 hours spent telling the United Customer Service people that it was not acceptable to stay in Washington, at my own expense, for 2 days before they could put me on another flight. That got all squared away (and while I'm still pissed at United, the Customer Service people were very much involved in getting us all helped... they just took forever). So, I missed the big Fantastic Fest APOCALYPTO screening because of the delay and got about 4 hours of sleep before catching this morning flight (on American).

So, now I'm on my way, the flight is pretty empty and very comfortable. I figured I'd write up my thoughts on Alfonso Cuaron's CHILDREN OF MEN, which was released in the UK last Frida and happily coincided with my trip. I saw it opening night at the Odeon in Leicester Sq., a good 2-3 months before it hits the States.

Anyway, in short: it was fuckin' great.

We haven't seen this sort of science fiction in a while, and we haven't seen it pulled off in an entertaining film in a longer while. The premise is simple. The year is 2027 and we don't have flying cars, hoverboards, androids... this is a completely believable future, which is why it can be viewed as horror/sci-fi. The tech is believable and so is, unfortunately, the level of government restriction. They've had to step in to keep the peace when women started miscarrying and stopped conceiving all together. In nearly 2 decades scientists haven't figured out what is going on. Without a new generation in place humanity seems to be on the brink. People are going crazy. This is the end times.

Here we have riots, terrorist gangs, frightened people everywhere, a focus on closing the boarders, with a 1984-like hunt for any illegals trying to get to the last vestige of civilization, preserved in big cities. This takes place in London. Everywhere else seems to have devolved into a third world country. The images we get in the film will strike all of you as being incredibly familiar. They all look like CNN today, except we're looking at the insurgency war in Iraq and the characters in this movie are looking at their own country.

If you've seen the trailer you know that the thrust of the film is Clive Owen's character escorting a woman that has miraculously grown pregnant, the first pregnancy in over 18 years. What I love about this movie is that in anybody else's hands this story would have focused on the investigation of why she was pregnant, undoubtedly with an evil government or big business plot to kill the child or cover up their big secret that led to the mass sterilization of the world's population.

We never find out why Kee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) is pregnant, nor do we care. This becomes a chase film really quickly and the pacing is rocketing. It's like a bullet. You have enough character development with Owen and the girl, as well as those around these two, that you are immediately sympathetic. You want the best for these guys, but in this world people are getting picked off left and right. You know no one is safe.

Cuaron shoots the action in the film masterfully. It's wildly inventive, but not retarded. It's very real in every aspect. We are shown it exactly how I would believe I would see it if I was there. We're in the middle of gunfights, riots, etc. Some big action happens off camera that we just catch the beginning of or stumble across the results. Cuaron chooses a few sequences to have extremely long takes as you're running right behind Owen and Ashitey. I'm sure he must have cut, because there were set pieces too big that happen in these 4 or 5 minute long takes... explosions, tanks, weapons fire, dialogue, location changes. If he did cut, he hid them very well.

The supporting cast is great. Chiwetel Ejiofor, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine (whom the London Phantom Zoners kept raving about after the movie because it's the first time he hasn't been playing Michael Caine in a long while), Charlie Hunnam, who was great in HOOLIGANS and is totally unrecognizable in this film, and some completely unfamiliar faces are all fantastic. The extras are even good, for god's sake, There's a scene in the third act I won't spoil, but there's so much power to it and it's 3 or 4 dozen extras actually acting for camera and acting well.

The effects work is also top notch. Everything is realistic, including a completely CG character. The only reason I could tell that effect was an effect is because I knew there was no other way to capture what Cuaron did unless he used that tool. I'm trying to be vague throughout this review. The less you know about it the better... hell, if the trailer and promotional campaign hadn't told you there was a pregnant woman in it I would haven't brought it up.

I really liked this movie when I left the theater and the more it's gestated, the more I've really fallen in love with it. There's a message that's not beaten over our heads, it's multi-layered, the character and drama all have important things to say, but it's hidden in a viscerally thrilling and entertaining film. It's movies like CHILDREN OF MEN that make me love what cinema can be.

I really hope PAN'S LABYRINTH and CHILDREN OF MEN are Cuaron and Guillerm Del Toro engaging in friendly competition. If they keep egging each other on like this, we can expect more absolutely brilliant films from them in the coming years. As it is, CHILDREN OF MEN and PAN'S LABYRINTH are two of the best films I've seen in 2006.

I'm also really looking forward to seeing what David Yates does with the new HARRY POTTER film, but seeing a new Cuaron film just makes me want to see him back at Hogwarts. Maybe for 6 or 7, eh?

And here's hoping my connecting flight in Dallas doesn't fuck me over. At least it's driving distance to Austin, that's something...

-Quint quint@aintitcool.com

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:12 p.m. CST

    First AGAIN

    by clintrockremix1969

    and Alfonso Cuaron ROCKS TOO!!!! I can't WAIT to see this...

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:14 p.m. CST

    Sounds good, I love some intelligent Sci-Fi.

    by brycemonkey

    And stop complaining about your travel. Boo-hoo, I travelled to Europe. Boo-hoo, I visited movie sets. Man up!

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Sorry to spoil your fantasy clintrock...

    by brycemonkey

    but you did get this one if it makes you feel better (and stop me from getting 3 in arow)

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:25 p.m. CST

    "the last vestige of civilization; big city America"???

    by raw_bean

    Did you see the right film, Quint? Great review overall (and the film is indeed top notch), but surely you meant Britain? ------ The film was largely about an extrapolation foward of the issues with asylum seekers and illegal immigration that the UK is currently facing, within the story of a world falling apart with the UK one of the few countries (sort of) holding together. Apart from a propaganda montage about how Britain stands alone in resisting the world-wide collapse of civilisation, there's very little mention of the rest of the world, and none that I remember of America.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:26 p.m. CST

    Cuaron and Harry Potter

    by EddieBlake

    Okay...I know I'm not the only person to think this, and not taking anything away from "Children of Men" because I think it looks great and am very much looking forward to it, but Cuaron on Harry Potter was an incredibly mixed bag. Sure, he brought a great visual style to the film and it certainly looked better than any other entry in the series up to that point, but as far as an adaptation of the book, it was a waste of time and effort. There were far too many crucial plot points left out and far too many things glossed over. It worked well as a movie, but it sucked horribly as an adaptation.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:48 p.m. CST

    America and Adaptions

    by evacuee

    raw_bean: Your point is true overall, but New York was mentioned and is where the Julianne Moore character hails from. EddieBlake: If a film succeeds as a film, what does it matter if it is flawed as an adaption? surely we watch films as films and read books as books? regarding one as an adaption of the other is totally futile, surely?

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 1:59 p.m. CST

    I Was excited to see this

    by Shivv

    Until Quint dropped the fact that we never find out why this girl is pregnant. Sorry, but this falls into the category of The Night Listener for me, which I avoided because I was told you never find out whether or not the kid actually exists. Maybe its just me, but I don't feel like seeing a movie where they never pay off the central plot point.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 2:19 p.m. CST

    Great review

    by BannedOnTheRun

    of your flight. Ann Coulter's flight reviews suck.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 2:23 p.m. CST

    Oh, I also find it humorous

    by Shivv

    that anyone thinks that Britain could ever be the last bastion of civilization. Click the following link and tell me they're not committing cultural suicide. http://tinyurl.com/p6qr3

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Um, maybe I'll rent it

    by decypher44

    I was interested in seeing this when it releases, but now I know that we don't find out how she was able to become pregnant? That sucks.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 2:33 p.m. CST

    Shivv

    by Quint

    Trust me, when you watch the movie you don't care about why she's pregnant. They bring it up, but none of them have the magical answer to it all. The central plot element isn't why she's pregnant, it's getting her the fuck out of England before people (or the government) find out. The people she's running to are supposed to figure out that mystery, but that's not our story. Trust me, I'm usually a stickler about plot points being left open, but it didn't bother me in the least.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 2:41 p.m. CST

    Shivv: What?

    by brycemonkey

    So police communicating with muslim leaders so as not to incite religious anger isn't being civilized? What would you prefer they do? Burn mosques to the ground?

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:01 p.m. CST

    Ever since I saw Azkaban...

    by random dude

    ...I knew Cuaron's would be next big thing. Even not big, but gargantuan. This guy is fuckin' genius.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:07 p.m. CST

    well brycemonkey...

    by clintrockremix1969

    at least I got 2... not in a row tho... damn that was a first tho eh! hah we're a different breed us firstians!

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST

    Bryce

    by Shivv

    You miss the bigger point. The fact that arresting criminals within the Muslim community incites "religious anger" is a big indication that something is very very wrong.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Shivv- You're totally missing something

    by Lovecraftfan

    How she got pregnant is not the main plot point in the slightest. Its sad you're going to skip a great film just becuase they don't answer one question that's not even a central concern to the story.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:34 p.m. CST

    Jesus Quint, I know you're narky from travel but...

    by half vader

    The opinion about the reason for her pregnancy is (judging by the reactions already) subjective and one that you made WHILE/AFTER seeing it, so maybe a spoiler warning on the link would have helped? Harry fucked up (and finally rectified it) with apocalypto, and you should do it here. Surely the AUDIENCE needs to come to that decision which was intended by the filmmakers. You even said "When you watch the movie" we won't care. But you've taken that away from us, haven't you? It's the whole thing of a film telling an audience vs. letting the audience decide for themselves. Anyway, sorry for the harsh-looking caps. If we could get some italics (or God forbid an edit function) on this joke of a talkback format I wouldn't have sounded quite so incensed. By all means though ignore that comment like every other AICNer for the last few years! ;)

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:56 p.m. CST

    United fucking suck

    by Mickey The Idiot

    Always have - Always will.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:58 p.m. CST

    Saw this today

    by King_Knut

    Great film, slightly frustrating ending.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Also

    by King_Knut

    didn't partilcularly buy Michael Caine as a pot-smoking old hippy into ardcore death/thrash/f*cked-up metal house Drum'n'bass

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Come on, Quint!

    by ElDobermann

    Can´t Believe you Quint!, you have been watching movies for all yer fkn life and you think the long sequences in this film were "edited"... We´re talking about master cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, you jackass... The extended shots were not tricked, some of them were up to 10 minutes long,this was revealed by Lubezki, and he also said that (surprise, surprise), the producers were against this idea, because "it was technically impossible", and "the audiences want flashy editing"... You ignorant fool.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 5 p.m. CST

    They were clearly tricked

    by Blueberry

    The blood spots disappearing from the camera at a certain point are a big giveaway. But you can tell even from the car sequence that a lot is digitally altered. On the Starbuck terrorist attack the cut is on the door.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 5:46 p.m. CST

    It's really good

    by Babyshamble

    I noticed the cgi character but it's done so well I'm sure others didn't. Michael Caine's wonderful in it and as for the pregnancy, Kee doesn't know why she's pregnant. She's an ordinary girl not a scientist, she has never even seen a pregnant women before. Her surprise at how painful her contractions are is really well acted.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 7:45 p.m. CST

    No hoverboards? FUCK!

    by darthferris

    *NT*

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 8:15 p.m. CST

    Viva Mexico Cabrones!!!

    by pelos_locos

    For all the bunch of you ignorants that still believe that Mexico produces only lazy bum illegals, here is proof that Mexicans are as good, and many times better, as any American, French or Italian director out there. This message is not to put anybody down. This is just to show how proud I am of my Paisanos.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 8:20 p.m. CST

    Pissed off at Mexico

    by pelos_locos

    I feel really sad that Mexican directors receive more support in other countries than in their own. These directors are probably better recognized in the US than in Mexico, and that makes me feel sad....just a thought.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 8:54 p.m. CST

    Anyone remember The Handmaid's Tale?

    by Zeke25:17

    Terrific, underrated picture starring Natasha Richardson, Aidan Quinn and Robert Duvall. Children of Men will be great, I'm sure; but I can't help thinking Handmaid was more than a passing inspiration.

  • Sept. 25, 2006, 9:42 p.m. CST

    Chicago hates everyone

    by grosshair

    Or at least the airport does. The city is great.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 2:41 a.m. CST

    Awesome!!

    by erby_88

    Sounds, though you were vague, like it should be an entertaining film. Can't wait until hit finally makes its way over here.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 4:01 a.m. CST

    The Hadmaid's tale

    by Babyshamble

    is a fantastic book, but a shit film with a tacked on hollywood ending. There really aren't many similarities between the two films other than they are both set in the not too distant future.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 5:19 a.m. CST

    Saw it on Sunday !

    by barnaby jones

    Its good, but a little to simplistic for my tastes. Quint's right when he says it descends into (just) a chase movie real quickly.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 7:45 a.m. CST

    I couldn't disagree more

    by fanaticalaboutfilm

    I also saw Children of Men this pas weekend, however I'd have to respectfully disagree with Quint's assessment. I thought Children of Men was terrible. To me, the movie played out like an allegorical college essay describing how we will somehow be punished (by not being able to have children) for all the terrible things the human race has done. The other main problem as I saw it was that this was anchored entirely too firmly in the current day. This isn't set in 2027, its set now. The technology in portrayed in the movie was often more backward than what we have now, it displays a world with absolutely no technological advancement at all. It references contemporary events constantly (and often for no reason), which don't really relate in any way to the movie. Furthermore, the vast majority of characters are completely stereotyped. The only high point of the movie was Michael Caine, who put in fantastic performance. Clive Owen looked like he was just killing time most of the movie and the "chase" seen was more of a non-sensical ramble. It was a profound and utter disappointment.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 8:09 a.m. CST

    Shivv: I think youy are turned around on the subject...

    by brycemonkey

    The police have mishandled so many muslim arrests (remember when they arrested all those people in Scotland? And then, let them go because they had done nothing wrong.). It's stuff like that that incites religious hatred of 'authority'. If you keep on your present track people might mistake you for a racist...

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 8:22 a.m. CST

    Shivv:

    by raw_bean

    Firstly, as Quint says, the lack of explanation regarding the pregnancy is not a problem the way the films plays out. In fact it adds to the feeling of reality that there isn't some magic dingus explanation or convenient Professor of Exposition to figure it out and explain it to the characters. Really, the film's better off the way it is, which is great. ------ Secondly, the 'Britain as last bastion of civilisation' thing is easily mis-understood out of context. As I said, the film barely deals with the rest of the world at all, everyone's focused on the problems in front of them, and it's open to some serious interpretation. On the one hand, the assertion that the rest of the world is in chaos while Britain holds firm is made in some VERY blatant propaganda from the rather fascist-seeming Government (think V For Vendetta for a lot of the feel of the film, but more gritty and less stylised, not being a graphic novel), and on the other hand, throughout the film it's clear that the UK isn't doing anywhere near as well as they'd like you to believe. ---------- Finally, on your point regarding the police seeking advice from select Muslims on terror intelligence before raids, what you're missing is the background on this. Since the July 7th bombings last year, there have been several high profile mistakes and bungles by the police in this country (starting with an innocent Brazillian electrician being shot seven times in the head on a tube train, and most recently featuring an innocent Muslim being non-fatally shot in his home during a raid looking for a bomb that didn't exist), attracting lots of negative press and stirring up resentment and feelings of unfair scapegoating and persecution in Muslim communities. In this context, perhaps you can see the reasoning a bit more clearly behind this decision, even if it amounts to no more than a reassuring PR measure.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 8:32 a.m. CST

    fanaticalaboutfilm...

    by raw_bean

    ...while it's true the film set in 2027 didn't feature androids and flying cars, the last film I saw set in 1987 didn't feature the invention of steam-power and people firing muskets. Perhaps you overestimate the rate of change? I thought the level of believable technology was spot on, especially considering the dystopian descent of civilisation depicted in the film. I also disagree regarding the acting (except for Michael Caine, who WAS brilliant), but then I think Chewitel Ejiofor and Clive Owen are just generally excellent. I'd personally describe the 'chase' as a non-sensical SCramble, which is perfect for a grim and gritty film like this, as opposed to a slick Hollywood thriller.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 8:35 a.m. CST

    Zeke25:17

    by raw_bean

    Regarding inspiration, Children of Men is based on a book, according to the credits. Not having seen The Handmaid's Tale or read the Children of Men book (can't remember the name of the author, either), I couldn't say what influaenced the film. Anyway, enough hijacking the TB. :^)

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 9:32 a.m. CST

    It really is

    by Fried Gold

    quite, quite brilliant.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 10:11 a.m. CST

    REGARDING CUARON'S POTTER EFFORT

    by Sepulchrave

    Please. It was a great adaptation of a book that, like all the Potter books, really REALLY need an editor with a fucking ax to go through them. I like reading HP on my hols, but man they are turgid and overlong.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 10:15 a.m. CST

    fanatical...

    by Sepulchrave

    'This isn't set in 2027, its set now. The technology in portrayed in the movie was often more backward than what we have now, it displays a world with absolutely no technological advancement at all. ' I thinkwe have a hover-car junkie who wants his fix of ridiculous Minority Report techno-garbage. Believe me; the chance that the consumerist world will be in a BETTER state in thirty years than it is now is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. This is the zenith; it's all down hill from here; sorry to let down all you guys who thought you'd live forever in virtual reality; you'll probably die buying water for $20 a quart in a bomb crater.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 12:13 p.m. CST

    Was looking forward to this...

    by Photoman

    But now it's just a chase movie? Sorry, when you said science fiction, I was hoping for science fiction and not a chance movie through a futuristic skyline or whatever. I've had my fill of chase movies to where I could live the rest of my life and never have to see another one. What ever happened to hard-core science fiction? What we get now is action movies with a SF backdrop. Yeah yeah, I know there's been a few hard-core SF movies in the past few years...but no way NEAR enough of them.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 12:16 p.m. CST

    Thank you for proving my long running point, Sepulchrve

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    As I've been saying around here for several years, the only people who liked Cuaron's adaptation of POA were people who didn't particularly like the Harry Potter books in the first place. Cuaron's crapfest of a movie served as some kind of artist coup d'etat for your type. You didn't enjoy Harry Potter, but at least you could relish watching the movie series crash and burn and morph into a terrible farce of itself.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Technology

    by fanaticalaboutfilm

    I'm not talking about hover cars, or robots or anything fancy. But if you look back to the difference in technology between the 1980 and now, the difference is huge. The difference between now and 2027 will also be huge. The buses in London in the film don't even run anymore. There is nothing futuristic about this film, its not set in 2027 it is set now, and they shouldn't have pretended otherwise. Futuristic is a misnomer. That wasn't even my main problem with the film, my problem was that it was rambling and non-sensical.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Thankyou for proving my longrunning suspicion Excalibur

    by half vader

    That fans of the books don'y actually understand what makes a film a film. They're not the same thing (the best differing mediums example being Kubrick's Shining and then the 'more faithful' tv movie) and storytelling in one doesn't necessarily translate to the other. The most insidious thing about the first two (well mainly the first) movies is that after the books actually managed the incredible feat of getting kids to read again or their parents to read to them, we had a 'movie' that was a slave to the book but took away the best thing about reading them - using your imagination! Which basically renders the film nothing more as an advertisement for the book and has no standalone value whatsoever. Worse still the book fans were generally HAPPY to be lazy (I've been on the net for years too)! "Hey it's the book on screen but this time all the work's done FOR me!" Not to even mention redundant sequences, awful pacing and shots that only worked because the part of the audience that had read the book were already enjoying and laughing at a scene when it had barely begun. THAT's why the first film (and to a lesser extent the second) is a lousy film. Stop being so bitter and superior about your painfully subjective opinion. I like the books AND I like the third film, and my points about adaptation aren't quite so personal. You talk about OTHER people having a vendetta! Actually, if you can't discuss the film on its own merit why don't you hop over to the Apocalypto thread. They'll readily agree with you over there. Sorry for this all sounding harsh with the caps but GEEZ, y'know? Don't tar us all with the same brush.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 7:32 p.m. CST

    don't

    by half vader

    Damn this stupid talkback and the lack of an edit function that others have had for years. Of course the one saving grace to all this ineptitude is that first posters now look like even bigger tools.

  • Sept. 26, 2006, 11:48 p.m. CST

    ZPG/Handmaids Tale

    by Wyrdy the Gerbil

    Children Of Men has much more in common with ZPG than Handmaids http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0069530/

  • Sept. 27, 2006, 12:38 a.m. CST

    So I'm a racist?

    by Shivv

    I must be, because I don't support clearing police raids with community leaders who have done next to nothing to root out extremism in their community.

  • Sept. 27, 2006, 2 a.m. CST

    Uh Excalibut...you proved my point too

    by Sepulchrave

    that any fanboy who is still rampant;ly defensive of Rowling universe, which started out fitfully, with an inventive and lopsided first novel, then gew more competent, then started lasping into overstuffed whodunit-territory, is probably a bit undiscerning and immature. There are serious problems with the Potter books, not least that they have never really been well structured at all, which causes problem for the movies. They are nonetheless fine entertainments. How OLD are you? If you're over 20, you should be past your Potter stage, past Tolkien, past Orwell and Salinger, past Huxley, Burgess and Chuck Palaniuk. It's all very well to creep into your childhood space with a nice book. But you can't live there, and, though the child in me loves HP, the adult in me says that most of the books are lopsided and slapdash, thematically repetitive, derivcative of other rite-of-passage tales, and that PoA was the only stylistically adult film of the lot, rather than a filmed kiddie-pleaser.

  • Sept. 27, 2006, 2:07 a.m. CST

    Oh and this Thread is for Chgildren of Men

    by Sepulchrave

    a grown up film from a noevl by a grown up author; PD James. I believe that's telling. Does being a fanboy basically mean that you have a licence to engage only with children's art and entertainment for the rest of your life? And to be wide-eyed and undiscriminating? Man, no wonder Mc Donalds sell so mnay Happy Meals; you guys must be collecting the little toys.

  • Sept. 27, 2006, 7:46 a.m. CST

    Well at least you can admit it Shivv.

    by brycemonkey

    You would actually be a racist because you think it's OK for a minority to be treated very badly in the UK. I know it's difficult but you should try and put yourself in other people's shoes. And I didn't call you a racist, but if you stick to narrow minded and dogmatic viewpoints people might mistake you for one.

  • Sept. 27, 2006, 3:09 p.m. CST

    a world without children

    by TheBaxter

    sounds like a dream come true. i could finally go to a movie theater without suffering through a bunch of crying babies and loudmouth teenagers. and what's the deal with the CG character? does the chick give birth to jar-jar?

  • Sept. 27, 2006, 3:15 p.m. CST

    a world without children

    by TheBaxter

    sounds like a dream come true. i could finally go to the theater without having to suffer through a bunch of screaming babies and loudmouthed teenagers. and what's the deal with the cg character? does the chick give birth to jar-jar?

  • Sept. 28, 2006, 4:53 a.m. CST

    Fantastic - one of the films of 2006

    by Barney_Tabasco

    This is a GREAT film. One of the best of the year. Very gritty, thrilling yet daunting. It really does show a realistic future for the world and that is truly terrifying. photoman - don't give up on this film. It is NOT a chase movie in that very obvious and cliched sense of the word. I think you'll be very pleasantly surprised. True sci-fi fans (i.e. dystopian vision of the future types, not shiny spaceships and laser guns) will love this. It follows in the tradition of Blade Runner, Minority Report and Clockwork Orange.

  • Oct. 27, 2006, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Cuaron & potter..

    by MaulRat

    "There were far too many crucial plot points left out and far too many things glossed over" - you just described EVERY POTTER MOVIE IN THE SERIES.. you can't shovel that much detail into a 2 1/2 hour movie. The Azkaban movies story was engaging, the direction was superb, the acting was more or less spot on, the children grew in that film and it is still my favourite potter film to date, even though The first is the best adaptation, and Goblet of Fire is the better book. Right on about Del Toro's Pan's Labyrinth too it's one of the best fantasy movies ever made IMO, granted the Fantasy genre over the years has been more or less geared toward the more impressionable children to teens demographic, the ones more open to fantastic ideas, but this one is adult in nature. I think the last fantasy film for adults that I can recall was Ridley Scotts Legend and Pans Labyrinth beats that hands down.. The Latin Filmakers have a unique cinematic flavour to them and its something that American filmmakers cannot emulate (Cameron Crowe proved that when he tried to "Gus Van Sant" Alejandro Amenabar's Abre Los Ojos), I just hope that english speaking audiences can look past the language barriers and subtitles and embrace the films on thier merits and give these films the audience they deserve without resorting to remaking the film in English.