Stunning film-making

Rating: 10/10 (8 January 2007)

My lady friend who saw, "Children Of Men" with me, did not like it, another lady I know thought it awful! The film is dark and gritty with a depressing "End of the world" scenario. The motivations of the lead players are questionable, and the ending is vague and ambiguous. Nothing is clearly spelled out nor simplified, So why did it I like it? The story depicts a time in the near future, the year 2027, The major world centers have already been decimated by the exchange of nuclear weapons, and only England stands as the last bastion of civilization with a governed populous. Humankind now faces a biological death grip. No woman on the planet has conceived nor given birth in eighteen years. The phenomena of worldwide infertility goes unexplained; it could be a plague, pollution, or an act of divine retribution. What is certain is that, with no children being born mankind has reached it's end.
England had adopted a zero tolerance for illegal immigration, people from all nations flock to the United Kingdom, for shelter and work. Immigrants are herded into refugee camps, and treated like criminals. In the streets, civil unrest rocks the country as armed leftists, with a pro emigration stand, and terrorist tactics, battle the governments repressive forces. The Leftists await the day when a grand uprising will bring down the government and its defense forces. It is a chillingly familiar and violent world, painted brusquely upon the screen.
As we meet the films protagonist, Government worker, Theodore Faron, played by Clive Owen, he is kidnapped by the rebels, under the command of his ex lover, Julian Taylor, played by a no nonsense, Julianne Moore. She needs to get an official document, almost impossible to obtain, a Document of Transport , for an illegal. The rebels have taken under their wing a young lady (Claire-Hope-Ashitey) from the refugee camps. She is pregnant, and they are seeking to transport her to a special group, only rumored to exist, called "The Human Project" There, scientists and doctors, concerned with the worlds survival, would care for the mother and child.
I heard on the radio, a conservative moderator call the film leftist leaning, with disdain. He cited the directors youth (46) and nationality, (Mexican) to back up his claim. I disagree with him, the film was even handed, It showed corruption on both sides of the political spectrum. The concern was for the young pregnant woman, whose child represented the hope and the future of all mankind.
The most striking aspect of this film, is the manner in which it makes one feel a participant, more than just a viewer. Not since Ridley Scott's, "Blackhawk Down" have I felt such intensity in it's depiction of urban street battle, as the government and rebels clash. The Director achieves this, by using a steady, but fluid hand held camera,and long single takes, filming the scene directly, without cross cutting. It lends a documentary feel to the footage. We are placed in the heat of the street battles dodging bullets from both sides. It feels remarkably real. This movie is a bravura piece of film making, it does not draw attention to it's techniques, while it engulfs the viewer in it's engrossing action. There are at least three remarkable long cuts that left me breathless, and a few more that left me in tears because of the emotional intensity.
End of the world anarchy has been the subject of several movies. The intelligent British film, "Day the Earth Caught Fire" (1961) and the American counterpart, "Panic in the Year Zero" (1962) sought to capture the fall of civilization, None has done it better then, "Children of Men." I give it ****1/2 out of five stars.