Is it something in the water?

[shunn]

What is going on in Mexico? First Pan's Labyrinth from Guillermo del Toro, and now Children of Men from Alfonso Cuarón, both directors whose work I've admired in the past but who have far exceeded themselves this movie season.

I finally saw Children of Men last night, and I wish I'd done so sooner since then my Hugo nominating ballot would have looked a bit different. I can't say enough good about this film. Adapted very loosely from the bloodless P.D. James novel, it's dystopian science fiction of a high order, and movie-making of an even higher order.

I won't belabor the wealth of throwaway details tucked away throughout the movie that makes its near-future landscape seem so real and plausible, like the little laser-painted warning symbol that appears on a shattered car windshield in a corner of the screen. I won't touch on the subtleties of character and symbolism worked almost subliminally into the fabric of the film, such as the way the inherent trustworthiness of Clive Owens' character is illustrated in the way all the animals in the movie are quietly drawn to him.

But I will rhapsodize about the way Cuarón directs his spectacular, thrilling, and harrowing action set pieces. From a terrifying ambush shot mostly from inside the crowded target car to a tense escape scene where both the pursuers and their quarry are trying to compression-start their vehicles on a long-but-not-long-enough downslope to Owens' epic scamper through a battle between various insurgent groups and Homeland Security troops in a refugee camp for illegal aliens that looks more like Beirut than Brixham, Cuarón manages to put the viewer right in the center of the brilliantly choreographed action while still conveying a perfect sense of what's going on everywhere at every moment. His mastery is such that you don't lose your place in the action or have any trouble following what's happening. His vision is cohesive and coherent.

This stands in contrast to most action movies today, which substitute flashy, choppy editing, blurred camera moves, and confusion for true, clear-eyed excitement. Just try to find the edits in Cuarón's action scenes. They're there (except in one magnificent extended tracking shot during the refugee camp battle), but they're so organic to the action that you hardly notice. Cuarón's direction in Children of Men is a masterclass in how to do it right.

Children of Men paints a vision of a grim future, but its style, always in service to its story, is so virtuosic that the movie becomes a joy to watch. I want to see it again.

Comments

[albionidaho.livejournal.com]

I drove about eight hours total through horrible weather to see Children of Men, and it was totally and completely worth every minute. I, too, want to see it again...

[baldanders.livejournal.com]

most action movies today, which substitute flashy, choppy editing, blurred camera moves, and confusion for true, clear-eyed excitement.

This is completely true, and makes me repeatedly wonder why even fans of action movies watch action movies anymore.

[slurpy316.livejournal.com]

the voice of reason in the US. i've been bemoaning on imdb about how hollywood (and indeed a lot of american film goers, and truth be told a lot of british ones will be just as thick) just doesn't 'get it' when it comes to films with subtexts and characterisation, and err not being set in the USA and with a nice happy ending.

I'm nearly finished the book, and really still waiting for it to saunter out of first gear. The film is just so much better. I was reminded of the 'good' sci-fi of the 70's. Nice dystopian stuff that wasn't scared to be a little bit political. Rollerball, Soylent Green, The Omega Man, hell even the original Planet of the Apes.

I got onto some trip about Philip K Dick but think that was protecting the adaptations of his books from my hollywood scorn (blade runner, a scanner darkly, and even total recall are all refreshingly watchable amid the rest of the hollywood stodge. The Fucking Core. I ask you. one of the worst films ever made and i'm bitter as hell i'll never get those 2 hours of my life back.

i'm rambling. i just wanted to say i was glad you enjoyed CoM as much as i did. Although i really shouldn't be surprised given who and what you are.

[steelbrassnwood.livejournal.com]

I agree on all counts (and I'd like to see it again if only to watch that amazing tracking shot again), although I'm not as down on the book, which in some ways I preferred to the movie. While the story line was less dramatic, and Theo as a character much more detached, it was also more plausible and had some very interesting things to say about the uses of power. I really would have loved to see the character of the Warden brought to screen; the reduced version of him in the film was disappointing. The same goes for Rolf and Julian and Luke, although the addition of Claire-Hope Ashitey's character was inspired. And even the detached, or as you put it quite well, "bloodless" feel to the book was kind of the point: they were all sinking into lassitude and hopelessness.

But yes, it was a hell of a film, and those small touches really made it work: the futuristic cars that looked run-down and cheap and crappy, the constant drumbeat of propaganda advertisements in the background, the office equipment. Oh, and how about the pig over the Battersea Power Station???

Apparently the chase scene in the car was shot by a camera rig mounted on the roof of the car, mostly in real-time like the long tracking shot.

[derrylm.livejournal.com]

All-star Canadian fuckwit Mark Steyn hated the movie. Hated it:
http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/article.jsp?content=20070122_139464_139464

Apparently slavish devotion to the book is required, as is odious politics.

D