Children of Men thread

boojiboy7 · Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:21 pm

Don't get me wrong, the obvious and repeated ties into the Iraq war and such made a lot of sense, and some of them were fairly well done (the ties into Abu Ghraib, for example). I would have found it strange if the movie had left all mention of the Iraq war out of it. I was mostly just pointing out that subtlety was not really even the movie's aim, and certainly was never actually accomplished.

I would be intersted to hear the reactions to the movie of someone who is pro-Iraq war, actually. I've noticed that when people agree with the political views of a work, they tend to be much les harsh on how those views are presented.

I did like the pollution thing as well, Faithless. In fact, I kind of liked that whole attitude to the film. There were a lot of people in the movie who were just saying "fuck it" and doing whatever they want. For example, when the main character SPOILERS asks who the fahter is. Of course Kee (wow not subtle) doesn't know, because hell, if we all thoguht we couldn't get pregnant, everyone would probably fuck like rabbits. END SPOILERS

boojiboy7 · Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:29 pm

well, we did see the cousin's house, where the young guy was playing with that wierd cube on mini projection screen thing. Like it seemed like technology advanced a little beyond our own, but then stagnated, even for the rich like the cousin.

boojiboy7 · Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:17 pm

dude, i mean, the wall of articles and posters and shit about the iraq war wasn't enough of a tip off? the martial law on the streets, the insurgence, the fricking parade with the dead body and the people shouting in arabic while holding up banners? I mean, it might not be specifically iraq (though i think it is) but it is most certainly the middle east.

boojiboy7 · Posted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:51 pm

Of course there are logical explanations in the movie for the parade and all that. If there weren't, it would be a stupid movie. However, the images presented were drawing on the modern presentation of the wars in the middle east. You can't think that the choice to have a parade like that in the middle of his movie was just the dircetor saying "eh, maybe i will make them...uhhh...middle eastern?" There is a clear significance to such a choice.

The constant use of the term Homeland Security for the British military is also significant. Yes, the term existed pre-9/11 and all, but it's rise in prominent usage can be directly seen to corrsepond to the fallout from 9/11. This movie is not just drawing on the Iraq war, but is drawing on all of the hysteria that has come out of the usage of modern terrorist tactics in the "civilized" west. The opening bombing sets up that the use of terrorist warfare has become rather common place in modern london, pretty similar to how it has become common place in, say, bahgdad.

The paranoia of the British in seeming to export immigrants for no good reason is only a few short steps away from what the US government was looking to do immediately following 9/11. The movie is taking what has been happening since 9/11 (including the IRaq war) and saying that this (the ruling state of paranoia and fear, not neccessarily the infertility) is the result of it all.

boojiboy7 · Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 6:31 am

Oh, yeah, as a political piece, I like it a lot better than michael moore. though, shit, I tend to think Moore does more harm than good.

Speculative ficiton is just a word lit writers use when they want to write sci fi but dont want it ending up in the sci fi section of the book store. Just saying.

boojiboy7 · Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:54 pm

had not my bro been sitting next to me, a tear or two might have been shed. Maybe they were and I relied on the darkness of movies to cover them up?