Directed by:
Alfonso CuarónCinematography:
Emmanuel LubezkiComposer:
John TavenerCast:
Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine, Danny Huston, Charlie Hunnam, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Pam Ferris, Peter Mullan, Clare-Hope Ashitey, Oana Pellea (more)VOD (1)
Plots(1)
Set in 2027, scientists are at a loss to explain why humans can no longer procreate, but the discovery of a lone pregnant woman leads to a desperate journey to protect her and save the future of mankind. (official distributor synopsis)
Videos (2)
Reviews (13)
If Children of Men didn’t have such a simple plot, there wouldn’t be anything to reproach it for. The plot wouldn’t even be a problem, but the end result is merely a patchwork of a bunch of incredibly intense scenes that don't seem particularly consistent as a whole. Even without the long takes, Children of Men would be worth seeing. However, the scenes are there, and they constitute the proverbial icing on the cake, which elevates Children to a clear "must see" affair that we haven’t been treated to in our movie theaters for a long time. And probably won't for a long time to come.
()
An absolute victory of form over content and story. Even though, in its almost metaphorical conception of a human society unable to reproduce, it can put a few bees in the viewer's bonnet, it's a pity that it doesn't develop the central idea that much, it doesn't provide a cohesive resolution, and instead serves as a blank canvas for the camera and editing. But oh, what camera and editing! The expression "raw" has never applied to any other film as much as it does to The Children of Men. The attack on the car, and especially Thea's journey through the battle tumult were resonating in me long after the closing credits started rolling, and I am afraid that some extraneous plagiarists, doomed in advance, will try to shoot a scene that's better or longer and will fatally fail. Definitely not the film of the year, but perfect for contemplation and amazement from a visual standpoint.
()
This film’s technical brilliance and orgiastic creativity in its visuals will cause film connoisseurs’ jaws to drop and the plot with a powerful theme and even more powerful scenes will melt the hearts of children and adults of all ages. Even though Alfonso Cuarón and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki show off a bit in the manner of “Look what we can do!” in places, their film will leave absolutely no one cold. In a packed cinema, Children of Men is an excellent collective experience, with people clutching their heads, laughing and groaning as if they themselves had been hit in the mouth with a car battery. I believe that just as Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, Francis Coppola and co. got a dying Hollywood back on its feet in the 1970s, Cuarón, Alejandro Iñárritu, Paul Greengrass and co. will now take it to another level in this age of calculated digital confections. *** FILM OF THE YEAR ***
()
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.
()
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.
()
Ads