Children of Men
Dave got a copy of P.D. James' book "Children of Men" for Christmas from one of his friends. We both read it and although Dave thought the author copped out a bit by using a few sci-fi cliches here and there, we both really liked it. I couldn't put it down. Another thing we both agreed upon was that it seemed like it was practically written to be a movie. The copy Dave received has a big sticker on it that reads "Soon to be a major motion picture", a fact I happened to mention to my dad on the phone one evening. I told him I couldn't wait for it to come out and was thus informed that it had come out already, last summer in fact, and that it starred, and I quote "You know, that guy...what's his name...you know...he was in...ummmmm...what else has he been in?...ah, jeez, what's his name?...uhhhhh...hey Debbie? What's the name of that guy that was in...uhhhhhh..." Eventually we figured out he was thinking of Clive Owen. You know, what's his name who was in that movie. So "Children of Men: Now a major motion picture starring Clive Owen" got bumped up to the top of the Netflix queue.
A warning, there are some spoilers below.
I was disappointed in the movie, partly because it veered so far away from the book, but also because I didn't love the focus of the movie. It ignored most of what I found to be really terrifying in the book which was how the government used fear to control the people, which allowed them to get away with the forced slavery of immigrants and the mass murder of the elderly. What would be the state of mind of the people who were willing to look past reality and except these things as the way it had to be in order for the country to run smoothly? The book ends with Theo putting the ring of England on his finger, and you just know that despite his finally being capable of looking outside of himself and his past, he's probably going to become as much of a dictator as his cousin, Xan, was. Xan ("Nigel" onscreen) pops up in the movie, as does the Quietus (in the movie it's a pill. A pill!), but you're not really sure why they bothered. It's almost as if they deemed it necessary to pay some sort of homage to the book other than using the same character names that they just threw those in.
I read a quote from the director on Wikipedia that describes how he dislikes "a cinema about exposition and explanation" which is ironic because although he used symbolism in the movie, it was often so obvious you felt he stopped short of suspending the action so that one of the characters could turn to the camera and explain it to us, like "Look! She just told me she's pregnant! And she's standing in a barn! And she doesn't know who the dad is! Could this *be* any more like the nativity?".
Has anyone else seen the movie or read the book? What did you think?


