In Reply to: It's not about plot. Or McGuffins. posted by Harmonia on January 11, 2007 at 14:33:07:
>>> "Cuaron isn't gonna waste vaulable screen time with needless exposition. His scifi inspiration is Tarkovsky, not Spielberg." <<<Harmonia, that isn't a good selling point (at least with me) as I readily admit to loathing Tarkovsky's Solaris. Furthermore, I only appreciate about 50% of Spielberg's work; generally I think he's a sloppy filmmaker. For instance, I can't stand ET, but absolutely love AI; I consider Temple of Doom silly, but find Raiders of the Lost Ark rousing entertainment; I revile Hook, but revere Always; I'm impressed with Close Encounters, but unmoved by Minority report; I find Catch Me if You Can & 1941 amusing, but conversely find Empire of the Sun & Amistad dull; I see Schindler's List as a tightly filmed, personal work that was excellently cast, but consider War of The Worlds as impersonal, manipulative and poorly cast, and so on and so forth).
Now I will say that my wife likes Children of Men even more than I do, but neither of us like Solaris, so go figure.
>>> "For people who want tons of explanation and all loose ends neatly tied up - Cuaron ain't your man. He trusts the intelligence of his audience and leaves things up to us to interpret or complete." <<<
I don't gauge a film by either it's symbolism or how much information the Director & screenwriters chose to share with the viewing public; it isn't about the intellect of the viewer either (if I want mindless entertainment and chases I'll go watch a Republic serial). For me, it's whether I feel the story being told is cohesive (finished) and agree or disagree with the message that's conveyed.
>>> "Cuaron's not interested in why women can't carry babies any more. (There was no explanation offered in the film, BTW.) He's interested in "what's going on now", set in the "what if" to provide more himself narrative freedom. The infertility is just the premise to get things rolling and explore issues in our present. Cuaron would rather ask questions than provide answers - which is fine by me." <<<
Which is fine by me as well, as far as it goes, but sometimes there needs to be more than just a premise even if the solutions are left up to the audience. One can't explore solutions without knowing something about the causes. OTOH, as a chase film with superb action sequences, it's very good.
Again, my caveats aside, this film shouldn't be considered less successful on it's own merits, but IMO cause and effect relationships are important structures for any great SF film. In that regard, at least for me, Children of Men remains a very good film as opposed to a masterpiece of great cinema.
Cheers,
AuPh
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I agree with you about Owen's transformation; that's another reason for rating the film as highly as I did. - Audiophilander 17:23:38 01/11/07 (4)
- "One can't explore solutions without knowing something about the causes." - sjb 17:48:17 01/11/07 (3)
- "Nobody in the film was exploring solutions." - Arguably, that may be one of the film's problems, but ... - Audiophilander 23:48:10 01/11/07 (2)
- The film was speaking more to the heart and emotions than the mind per se. - sjb 09:05:57 01/12/07 (1)
- Excellent point. - Audiophilander 15:03:06 01/12/07 (0)