A
apricot_yogurt
Guest
Has anyone seen/ will see this film?
- Status
V
Viki59
Guest
It’s coming out here in December. I read the book and would like to see the film, I love sci-fi.
As I recall, the main premise was that women stopped having babies, and then once mankind had learned its lesson, they started having babies again. From the look of the trailer, mankind isn’t learning much of anything, except how to get better at looting and fighting. But it looks like a well done movie.
As I recall, the main premise was that women stopped having babies, and then once mankind had learned its lesson, they started having babies again. From the look of the trailer, mankind isn’t learning much of anything, except how to get better at looting and fighting. But it looks like a well done movie.
J
JFlats
Guest
I am reading Children of Men by P.D. James. (By the way, reading my review will not spoil the book.)
Written in 1992, the book is set in Britain in the now-not-so-distant future in 2021. The novel begins in 1995, referred to as Year Omega, when a catastrophe befalls the entire planet—universal infertility. The last generation of people born on earth are called Omegas, and the story opens with the death of the first human being of that generation, a 25-year-old, who is killed in a bar brawl.
England is ruled by a dictator and in the years between Year Omega and 2021, the nation that could once boast that the sun never set on its empire has degenerated to “strange faiths and cruelties: prison camps, mass organized euthanasia, roving bands of thugs.” Also on the rise is superstition, belief in extraterrestrials, and “evangelists” who sell salvation to humans who know their race is dying.
The novel jumps between a personal diary maintained by the main character, an Oxford professor, and a narrative about his activities. In the diary he gives a synopsis of the crisis which the planet should have seen coming in the 1990s when the population began to decline. But no one seemed concerned; after all it seemed to herald a reversal of overpopulation. “When Omega came it came with dramatic suddenness and was received with incredulity. Overnight, it seemed, the human race had lost its power to breed.” Even stored frozen sperm had lost its potency. The Omegas were the last best hope for the planet – until testing showed they too were incapable of “breeding.”
As for “Western science [which] has been our god,” it has utterly failed to find either a cause or a cure, though some nations slog on. “We have had twenty-five years and we no longer even expect to succeed. Like a lecherous stud suddenly stricken with impotence, we are humiliated at the very heart of our faith in ourselves. For all our knowledge, our intelligence, our power, we can no longer do what the animals do without thought.”
In universal bereavement all painful reminders of the loss have been removed – children’s playgrounds have been dismantled, all toys have been burnt. Except for dolls – in a strange commentary on the times, beautifully decorated and skillfully manufactured dolls and all their accessories have become treasured items, mostly to middle-aged barren women, who treat the dolls as lovely, “living” children. Animals also become cherished “children.” The author describes a macabre “baptism” of twin kittens dressed in fabulously rich christening gowns.
Because the Omegas were pampered and cherished for so many years, it was too late, once they are found to be infertile, to expect any kind of discipline from them. In an understatement, the professor reflects that “a regime which combines perpetual surveillance with total indulgence is hardly conducive to healthy development.”
Now, twenty six years after Omega, the attitude of many can be summarized by the proclamation of the protagonist’s former university mentor: “On the whole, I’m glad . . . This planet is doomed anyway. Eventually the sun will explode or cool and one small insignificant particle of the universe will disappear with only a tremble. If man is doomed to perish, then universal infertility is as painless a way as any. And there are, after all, personal compensations. For the last sixty years we have sycophantically pandered to the most ignorant, the most criminal and the most selfish section of society. Now, for the rest of our lives, we’re going to be spared the intrusive barbarism of the young, their noise, their pounding, repetitive, computer-produced so-called music, their violence, their egotism disguised as idealism. My God, we might even succeed in getting rid of Christmas, that annual celebration of parental guilt and juvenile greed. I intend that my life shall be comfortable, and, when it no longer is, then I shall wash down my final pill with a bottle of claret.”
Oh, by the way, speaking of Christmas … the movie Children of Men, released in Europe in September, will debut in the States on Christmas Day. The film, directed by the Mexican filmmaker who directed one of the Harry Potter films, is in the words of one reviewer “a withering satire on neo-[conservative] politics” and not as concerned with the “demography is destiny” message that I clearly receive in reading the book. Given that the movie’s “real topic is the Iraq war,” I think I may pass on viewing it.
God bless,
Written in 1992, the book is set in Britain in the now-not-so-distant future in 2021. The novel begins in 1995, referred to as Year Omega, when a catastrophe befalls the entire planet—universal infertility. The last generation of people born on earth are called Omegas, and the story opens with the death of the first human being of that generation, a 25-year-old, who is killed in a bar brawl.
England is ruled by a dictator and in the years between Year Omega and 2021, the nation that could once boast that the sun never set on its empire has degenerated to “strange faiths and cruelties: prison camps, mass organized euthanasia, roving bands of thugs.” Also on the rise is superstition, belief in extraterrestrials, and “evangelists” who sell salvation to humans who know their race is dying.
The novel jumps between a personal diary maintained by the main character, an Oxford professor, and a narrative about his activities. In the diary he gives a synopsis of the crisis which the planet should have seen coming in the 1990s when the population began to decline. But no one seemed concerned; after all it seemed to herald a reversal of overpopulation. “When Omega came it came with dramatic suddenness and was received with incredulity. Overnight, it seemed, the human race had lost its power to breed.” Even stored frozen sperm had lost its potency. The Omegas were the last best hope for the planet – until testing showed they too were incapable of “breeding.”
As for “Western science [which] has been our god,” it has utterly failed to find either a cause or a cure, though some nations slog on. “We have had twenty-five years and we no longer even expect to succeed. Like a lecherous stud suddenly stricken with impotence, we are humiliated at the very heart of our faith in ourselves. For all our knowledge, our intelligence, our power, we can no longer do what the animals do without thought.”
In universal bereavement all painful reminders of the loss have been removed – children’s playgrounds have been dismantled, all toys have been burnt. Except for dolls – in a strange commentary on the times, beautifully decorated and skillfully manufactured dolls and all their accessories have become treasured items, mostly to middle-aged barren women, who treat the dolls as lovely, “living” children. Animals also become cherished “children.” The author describes a macabre “baptism” of twin kittens dressed in fabulously rich christening gowns.
Because the Omegas were pampered and cherished for so many years, it was too late, once they are found to be infertile, to expect any kind of discipline from them. In an understatement, the professor reflects that “a regime which combines perpetual surveillance with total indulgence is hardly conducive to healthy development.”
Now, twenty six years after Omega, the attitude of many can be summarized by the proclamation of the protagonist’s former university mentor: “On the whole, I’m glad . . . This planet is doomed anyway. Eventually the sun will explode or cool and one small insignificant particle of the universe will disappear with only a tremble. If man is doomed to perish, then universal infertility is as painless a way as any. And there are, after all, personal compensations. For the last sixty years we have sycophantically pandered to the most ignorant, the most criminal and the most selfish section of society. Now, for the rest of our lives, we’re going to be spared the intrusive barbarism of the young, their noise, their pounding, repetitive, computer-produced so-called music, their violence, their egotism disguised as idealism. My God, we might even succeed in getting rid of Christmas, that annual celebration of parental guilt and juvenile greed. I intend that my life shall be comfortable, and, when it no longer is, then I shall wash down my final pill with a bottle of claret.”
Oh, by the way, speaking of Christmas … the movie Children of Men, released in Europe in September, will debut in the States on Christmas Day. The film, directed by the Mexican filmmaker who directed one of the Harry Potter films, is in the words of one reviewer “a withering satire on neo-[conservative] politics” and not as concerned with the “demography is destiny” message that I clearly receive in reading the book. Given that the movie’s “real topic is the Iraq war,” I think I may pass on viewing it.
God bless,
C
Crow
Guest
The book is now on my ‘to read’ list and thank you.
God bless…
God bless…
K
kage_ar
Guest
I read this awhile book - AFAIK James’ only venture into sci-fi, and I found it a good read.
S
SeekerJen
Guest
Has anyone else seen it yet?
We saw it last night. Wow. Really powerful movie. The premise is: what would a world without children be like? How would that change things? It’s rather depressing but also hopeful at times, and very moving in some places. The R rating is for a reason, there’s some graphic violence (although not necessarily gratuitous) and some language, and one instance of partial nudity although not in a sexual way. There’s not any sex in the movie.
Overall, I thought it was a surprising and well-done movie.
We saw it last night. Wow. Really powerful movie. The premise is: what would a world without children be like? How would that change things? It’s rather depressing but also hopeful at times, and very moving in some places. The R rating is for a reason, there’s some graphic violence (although not necessarily gratuitous) and some language, and one instance of partial nudity although not in a sexual way. There’s not any sex in the movie.
Overall, I thought it was a surprising and well-done movie.
K
Kelly
Guest
Fr Z over at “What does this Prayer Really Say” has quite a bit to say about this movie.
wdtprs.com/blog/2007/01/terrible-movie-alert-the-children-of-men/
wdtprs.com/blog/2007/01/terrible-movie-alert-the-children-of-men/
S
SeekerJen
Guest
Hmm. I haven’t read the book, so I’m not qualified to address the translation of book-to-movie. I also didn’t think the LOTR movies were terrible, and I am a big fan of the books, so my outlook is obviously different from that of the posters on that blog.
Again, this is simply my opinion of the movie. I didn’t feel that my $9 was totally wasted, which is a rare occurence when I see a movie in the theater.
Again, this is simply my opinion of the movie. I didn’t feel that my $9 was totally wasted, which is a rare occurence when I see a movie in the theater.
B
Bobby_Jim
Guest
Is it anything like Japan, or Western Europe?
D
didymus
Guest
No, people don’t stop having children – for reasons unknown nobody can have children, even with the aid of fetility treatments.
The book was excellent – I don’t think I’ll see the movie.
K
kage_ar
Guest
The reviews I’ve heard said that those of us who did read the book will not like the movie. One said the screenwriter did not read the book 
This bummed me, because I very much enjoied the book, and I am afraid I will be frustrated by the movie…
So - anyone else read this book?
This bummed me, because I very much enjoied the book, and I am afraid I will be frustrated by the movie…
So - anyone else read this book?
L
Lissla_Lissar
Guest
Not yet- I’m going to the movie tomorrow, so I don’t have time to read the book beforehand. I’ve read a number of very good reviews, and I’m looking forward to it.
It’s got The Operative from Serenity in it! It can’t be too bad.
It’s got The Operative from Serenity in it! It can’t be too bad.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
I thought “Children of Men” was great. I haven’t read the book, but the movie can stand on its own. It’s gritty and sublime at the same time. Lots of Christian (as well as Buddhist and Hindu) references. Don’t forget – if you see it – to stay until after the credits.
Q
queen_anne78
Guest
Well. I read the book. And I saw the movie.
I was pretty pumped about both BEFORE I read/saw them…after reading so much about the premise on different blogs (including Father Z’s, link posted above) I thought it had such great potential to comment on the beauty and GIFT that fertility is…how fragile and…well, really miraculous and I have to be honest.
The book was…weirdly disapointing. And the movie was TERRIBLE. I went with a big group of friends, and we all agree it was a total waste. The most frustrating thing is that the IDEA is so breathtakingly honest…What would a world without kids look like? What would that do to people? We live in a world where people see children as entitlements…as in “I am entitled to use contraception as long as I want because I am entitled to be “in control” of my own fertility” and then we have people who say "I have waited x number of years for kids, NOW I am ready, and I am entitled to have them, no matter what the moral and financial cost (read IVF, surrogacy, etc.)
The book, I feel, leaves the reader hanging and asking, “Uh…ok?” The movie is even worse…lol as one of my friends said upon leaving, “So…I’m not real sure what the point of that was…except I THINK to say that the Iraq War the is reason no one can babies??? Maybe?”
The movie and the book basically have nothing in common…except the basic “Future society unable to have kids…and some names are the same.”
I pretty much wish I would not have spent the money, and I feel real bad that I got my friends to go see it with me.
I was pretty pumped about both BEFORE I read/saw them…after reading so much about the premise on different blogs (including Father Z’s, link posted above) I thought it had such great potential to comment on the beauty and GIFT that fertility is…how fragile and…well, really miraculous and I have to be honest.
The book was…weirdly disapointing. And the movie was TERRIBLE. I went with a big group of friends, and we all agree it was a total waste. The most frustrating thing is that the IDEA is so breathtakingly honest…What would a world without kids look like? What would that do to people? We live in a world where people see children as entitlements…as in “I am entitled to use contraception as long as I want because I am entitled to be “in control” of my own fertility” and then we have people who say "I have waited x number of years for kids, NOW I am ready, and I am entitled to have them, no matter what the moral and financial cost (read IVF, surrogacy, etc.)
The book, I feel, leaves the reader hanging and asking, “Uh…ok?” The movie is even worse…lol as one of my friends said upon leaving, “So…I’m not real sure what the point of that was…except I THINK to say that the Iraq War the is reason no one can babies??? Maybe?”
The movie and the book basically have nothing in common…except the basic “Future society unable to have kids…and some names are the same.”
I pretty much wish I would not have spent the money, and I feel real bad that I got my friends to go see it with me.
R
rr1213
Guest
I saw it last night and liked it a lot, my wife much less. Putting aside for a moment the movie’s comments on the current situation in Iraq and illegal immigration, the basic concept is intriguing. What would happen to the world if everyone became infertile? Obviously, the human race would end once the current generation of men died. But, what about the meantime? How long until the collapse of society and the emergence of Hobbes’ state of nature…solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short? I think the collapse would come sooner rather than later, a point that the movie makes. Children are hope. If there are no more children, then to many there is no more hope. No more reason to live.
On another note, what would be the last society to go? Who would maintain at least the veneer of civilization the longest? The British? “Britain soldiers on” is one of the slogans of the quasi-authoritarian goverment that remains in Britain. Would it be the UK or somewhere else? Or would all go at the same time?
On another note, what would be the last society to go? Who would maintain at least the veneer of civilization the longest? The British? “Britain soldiers on” is one of the slogans of the quasi-authoritarian goverment that remains in Britain. Would it be the UK or somewhere else? Or would all go at the same time?
T
thursdaytheman
Guest
I am just curious about what specifically makes or breaks Children of Men. The negative critiques offer no specifics for what was negative or positive about the film. It would be great to get people talking about what specifically worked or did not work for them in this film.
Personally, I saw the film yesterday, and I thought it was the best film I have seen in a long time. So, let us all throw onto the table what we thought worked and did not work with this film.
Personally, I saw the film yesterday, and I thought it was the best film I have seen in a long time. So, let us all throw onto the table what we thought worked and did not work with this film.
T
thursdaytheman
Guest
I am just curious about what specifically everyone thinks “makes or breaks” Children of Men. The negative posts offer no specifics within their critique. It would be great to get people talking about what specifically worked or did not work for them in this film.
Personally, I saw the film yesterday, and I thought it was the best film I have seen in a long time. So, let us all throw onto the table what we thought worked and did not work with this film.
Personally, I saw the film yesterday, and I thought it was the best film I have seen in a long time. So, let us all throw onto the table what we thought worked and did not work with this film.
L
Lissla_Lissar
Guest
That was the most interesting point. For all those living, the choices are all hemmed in with the futility of their lives. So hedonism, violence, apathy, total lack of respect for life- all of those make sense in the context of the film. Everyone’s going to die by eighty or so, there will be no one left. That would certainly make me despair.
I was interested in the possibility of the riots and bombing as a staged media event. Also, I didn’t understand the significance of the animals, both alive and dead, that were everywhere.
The movie had some very big plot holes, but the acting, cinematography, and script were very well done. It wasn’t my favourite movie, but it was a good post-apocalyptic, Brave New World thriller.
G
gwenred
Guest
Did anybody else see the movie “Children of Men”? The premise of the movie is that the human population is dying because something has caused men to be infertile. They never specify exactly why, but imply global warming, environmental issues, possibly a pandemic, etc. It begins with news coverage of the death of “Baby Diego” – who was the youngest known human at age 18. The actual plot involves a man who is hired to escort a young pregnant woman to a place called “Project Human.” She is the first pregnant woman for 18 years. For some reason never explained in the movie, England is the country everybody wants to live in, but they have established and enforce strict anti-immigration laws, and all who are caught are deported immediately. This makes it even riskier for the pregnant woman, who is from Fugi.
Anyway - a lot of fodder for discussion, whether you have a greenie-weenie bent, or whether it sparks your pro-life sensibilities. Just curious what others thought of the movie.
*(Just a note: No offense meant by the greenie-weenie comment - I have some of those tendencies myself, though I just consider it good stewardship
) *
Anyway - a lot of fodder for discussion, whether you have a greenie-weenie bent, or whether it sparks your pro-life sensibilities. Just curious what others thought of the movie.
*(Just a note: No offense meant by the greenie-weenie comment - I have some of those tendencies myself, though I just consider it good stewardship
) *
J
JimmyV
Guest
Yes, I saw this movie and recommend it. The movie treats the decline in Europe’s population seriously. I believe it was reviewed on Decent Films if you would like more information.
- Status