# Children Of Men (2006)



## Princess Ivy (Aug 19, 2006)

*The Children of men*

*
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
*

I'm not only a fantasy/scifi person, i will read jsut about anything well writen and one of my other authors is PD James. I was thrilled when she did The children of men, being a break into science ficiton on her part. The book itself wasn't that wonderful, but the concept was fascinating. Basically there are no children in the world. The novelisation is about the consquences of this, how it has affected society and they never really figure out why. 
Now there is a film! staring Clive Owen, Julian Moore and Michael Cain. I saw the trailer last night. it looks like they've decided to show the main part of the book in graphic imagery and concentrate instead on the small plot device of the only pregnant woman in the world and getting her to safety where she can have her baby. 
i've big hopes for this and was wondering if anyone else has seen the film? read the book? has any idea's?


----------



## Nesacat (Oct 6, 2006)

*Children Of Men*

*Children of Men* is a 2006 dystopian thriller film directed by Alfonso Cuaron. _Children of Men_ is based on P.D. Jame's novel The Children of Men and stars Clive Owen, Julianne Moore and Michael Caine.

Set in 2027 where no human child has been born for 18  years and science is at a loss to explain why, _Children of Men _envisages  a world that's fallen into anarchy and chaos as humankind faces the threat of  its own extinction.

The trailer looks good and the film received a standing ovation at Cannes. Am quite looking forward to it.


----------



## j d worthington (Oct 6, 2006)

It sounds intriguing... and I like P. D. James' work, so, with the response it got at Cannes, this may well be something to keep an eye out for... Thanks for the head's up, Nesa!


----------



## williamjm (Oct 7, 2006)

I saw it a couple of weeks ago, it was a good film, probably the best science fiction film so far this year (although there hasn't really been much competition). The story was fairly plausible (although some character's actions were possibly a bit under-explained), the acting was excellent and the direction was good. The action scenes were particularly well done, they were gritty, violent and realistic which is refreshing compared to the nonsensical kung-fu and John Woo-style shootouts that blight so many modern Hollywood films.


----------



## Nesacat (Oct 7, 2006)

Am definitely looking forward to seeing it now. Thanks williamjm. I've always liked PD James' work as well.


----------



## j d worthington (Oct 7, 2006)

Yes, thanks for the extra information. It sounds more and more like my kind of film!


----------



## williamjm (Oct 10, 2006)

Nesacat said:
			
		

> Am definitely looking forward to seeing it now. Thanks williamjm. I've always liked PD James' work as well.



I've heard the film isn't much like the book (which I've not read), basically only taking parts of the premise. The people I've seen so far who've both read the book and seen the film seemed to prefer the film, mostly.


----------



## Harpo (Oct 11, 2006)

If I'd been here a year ago I could have told you about it then, as I knew someone who worked on the film (props & sets etc)


----------



## Dave (Oct 11, 2006)

williamjm said:
			
		

> ...probably the best science fiction film so far this year


I just saw this today and I would go further than that and say it was the best in many years.

I found it deeply disturbing, very convincing and much too close to home. The locations and sets were too real, it could easily be tomorrow as one walks around London or by Lunar House in Croydon. There are real characters with depth and different motives and for which you care about or dislike intensely.

It is not for the squeemish with the concentration camp scenes, or the battle scenes where blood splashes on the camera lens. When Theo is searching for Kee in the building in Bexhill, that camera work is extraordinary, I felt like I was really there. 

I was really moved by the film, but I felt the ending unfulfilling. I wasn't looking for a happy ending but _spoiler follows_


Spoiler



I did expect to find out the reason for the 18 years of infertility, and the organisation that was behind the ship 'Tomorrow'.


I had a private showing, just me and two guys working at the cinema. They hadn't seen it before either and were surprised that the director, Alfonso Cuarón, was the same as Harry Potter 3. There are two most completely different films.


----------



## Princess Ivy (Oct 23, 2006)

from what i've seen of the trailer they took a very small portion of the book, and used that as the basis of the film. i really want to see this one!


----------



## Gav (Oct 23, 2006)

I've read the book and seen the film.

I thoroughly enjoyed the film.  I didn't enjoy the book as much.  Both are flawed - but I found the flaws more forgiveable in the film (I imagine that missing scenes will be present in abundance in the super-DVD version as well).  The film doesn't make the attempt to explain the universe the characters are in, or the end, very well and I think this leads the film into uncertain ground.

If anyone is interested in a full critique of the James novel I'll post one up, however I will say that the book is hung up way too much on one theme to make it truely enjoyable.  In addition I don't think PD James is a very effective SF writer and her novel suffers as a result.


----------



## Sibeling (Nov 9, 2006)

I haven't read the book, but I really enjoyed the film. 

The whole idea about the infertility was quite original, and the open ending leaves space for your imagination. The immigration issues are quite topical nowadays, so the way the film dealt with the porblem was interesting. And the violence and action makes the film seem more lifelike, not like something that happens 'in a galaxy far far away'.

I liked the cast, as well. And the music was nice - Deep Purple and King Crimson are not the things one usually hears in the soundtrack of a sci-fi film.


----------



## Nesacat (Nov 9, 2006)

The movie is still not here yet and I'm keeping my tail crossed that it does make it to the cinemas here. Or at least that it finds its way to the pirates. All that I'm reading and hearing about it makes me want to see it but it's coming up to the the year end school holidays and the cinemas might go for films that appeal to teens and children and this one might not get a showing as a result. We shall see what happens.


----------



## SpaceShip (Nov 9, 2006)

Be interesting to know when P D James wrote the novel.  Anyone know?  Am looking forward to seeing this film.


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 9, 2006)

SpaceShip said:


> Be interesting to know when P D James wrote the novel. Anyone know? Am looking forward to seeing this film.


 
Not sure of the date of writing, precisely, but it was first published in 1993.


----------



## Circus Cranium (Nov 9, 2006)

I read the novel years ago, and found it really intriguing, if not a bit slow to start. I only recently heard there was a film. I'm hoping it becomes available over here soon. I'm curious.


----------



## Dave (Nov 9, 2006)

I only realised last week that it isn't released in the US until December. I don't know why they are making you wait so long for it. Have you got a rash of similar films this Thanksgiving and Christmas?


----------



## j d worthington (Nov 10, 2006)

It may be that, if it's had critical and a certain amount of popular success, they hope it will be a "blockbuster" for the holidays. I'm a bit surprised, for instance, that they're releasing the new Bond film before closer to the Christmas holidays. But that is the most likely reasoning....


----------



## infinite (Nov 10, 2006)

This is a good movie - its worth the wait - There are a few cringe worthy moments in it though - But over all I though it was excellent. Michael Caine doing a good job for a change


----------



## Leandra (Nov 11, 2006)

I'm seeing the movie on Sunday - can't wait. I had started reading the book two years ago, but had laid it aside on page fifty. I'll make a second try, though.


----------



## Kanazaka (Feb 4, 2007)

I saw this a couple of weeks ago and liked it a lot, especially the cinematography and acting.  The story was also very strong, especially early on, and portrayed a believable and frightening vision of the future.


----------



## tangaloomababe (Mar 10, 2007)

I read the book before I saw the film and I have to say I enjoyed the book more.  I like the film and I think Clive Owen was good in the lead role.  Its a bleak, depressing movie, which it is meant to be, however I think that the book tells a better story, the movie deviates away from the book to much.  The are both good though in their own way.


----------



## Winters_Sorrow (Mar 12, 2007)

Well I find myself bucking the trend a little here as I found the movie to be ok but not much more than that.

I did like the idea behind it (how mankind would deal with the knowledge of it's gradual annihilation) and the beginning was good and motored along quite well. I liked the dismal, fatalistic feel to things and one of the most poignant moments in the movie for me was Theo wandering around the deserted & derelict kindergarten school.
I suppose what kept the movie at 'watchable' rather than 'great' for me was the lack of anyone to root for. I also found the script a little stilted and lacking in anything interesting to say.
I thought the ending was very much 'slapped on' and felt out of synch with the rest of the movie - spoilers:


Spoiler



Theo's death was unnecessary. The Human Project organisation were left completely unexplained and their links to a 'terrorist' organisation on mainland Britain would surely have resulted in some sort of punitive raid against their home base in the Azores, especially under the Police State mentality which seemed to prevail in the film. So it wouldn't exactly be any safer to keep the baby there although the facilities may be better equipped to discover how to 'cure' infertility. Also when Theo and Kee left the building in Bexhill surely at least 1 soldier in command would have made *damn sure* he took them into custody. It was the first time I've ever seen some escape by slowly walking away in plain sight  
For me ultimately, the more interesting movie would have been the sequel. You hold the key to humanity's survival on your 'secret base'. Do you share it? If so with who? Are there any strings attached? etc


----------



## Sibeling (Mar 13, 2007)

I thought the ending was good - the mood and atmosphere of the film is gloomy and hopeless, and such an ending shows that indeed, the good guys die and there are little possibilities of everyone living happily ever after.


----------



## Nikitta (Mar 13, 2007)

tangaloomababe said:


> I read the book before I saw the film and I have to say I enjoyed the book more. I like the film and I think Clive Owen was good in the lead role. Its a bleak, depressing movie, which it is meant to be, however I think that the book tells a better story, the movie deviates away from the book to much. The are both good though in their own way.


 
It has been such a long time since I've read the book, so I can't really compare the two, but I've considered reading it again after seeing the movie.

However, I've heard someone say that watching a movie right after reading the book is like eating oranges right after brushing your teeth. Not two things you want to do right after each other.


----------



## roddglenn (Mar 14, 2007)

I thought the film was very good and for the same reasons most people have already mentioned.  I thought the book was naff in comparison - boring and a very labourous read.  It's exceptionally rare for a film to be better than the book, but in my opinion this was the case with Children of Men.  I watched the film first, then off the back of that decided to read the book.  I'm really glad I did it that way round otherwise I'd probably never have bothered to go see the film.


----------



## Nesacat (Mar 15, 2007)

I've just watched a pirated copy. It's not going to make the cinemas here due to the Muslim fundamentalists. I'd read the book quite some ago but the movie is only very loosely based on the book so I think a comparison would be pretty unfair. I try to watch a movie for its own sake. It's not always easy to live up to the written word.

I liked the movie. It was bleak and sombre but managed to retain some hope for the future without ending in a mawkish overly sentimental fashion. I liked the fact that there were no clearly defined good guys and bad guys. Everyone was painted in shades of grey.


----------



## Tim Murray (Nov 2, 2015)

I just saw Children of Men, with Clive Owen, again. I forgot how good the movie is. The premise is our future without children in 2027.  A woman is pregnant for the first time on Earth in eighteen years. The hero is reluctant at first, and believably grows into his role to further humanity. He is no super hero and the story is  feasible, with a bitter sweet end. What are you're thoughts?


----------



## Ensign Shah (Nov 2, 2015)

Love this film. Gives me goose bumps every time I watch it. Don't have a bad word to say about it. Like you said, the reluctant hero that Clive Owen plays is all the more endearing.


----------



## Vince W (Nov 2, 2015)

I saw this on Netflix and absolutely loved it. It was one of Owen's best roles. I thought it was going to be too depressing for me, but there's actually a note of hope by the end.


----------



## Ensign Shah (Nov 2, 2015)

I know what you mean @Vince W. The first time I watched it I was anxious all the way through but thank goodness for hope!


----------



## Delfilm (Nov 5, 2015)

Great film - shame it starred Clive Owen. I could never find anything genuine in any of his performances. What ever happened to him?


----------

