Children of Men
Dystopia has been a preferred theme for an entire generation of 20th century Western writers. From Yevgeny Zamyatin’s compelling We, to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and Orwell’s 1984, novels and movies in this genre tend to present the future as an even murkier and dismal manifestation of the present. All that is human is on the verge of destruction, say these writers. Female writers like Margaret Atwood in The Handmaiden’s Tale and PD James in Children of Men present unique female perspectives on these murky possible futures.
We know that Zamyatin was rebelling against communism in Russia, Huxley and Orwell remained deeply influenced by the World Wars. Orwell accused Huxley of borrowing certain themes from Zamyatin and proceeded to write 1984, the manuscript of which was first approved by Huxley. The story of Zamyatin, Huxley and Orwell remains a separate one.
Running through this theme of dystopic utopias, is a complicated rendering of one central question- what is it that makes us human? Can social and political order be achieved only at the cost of beating out the human element from all humans? Must humans refrain from dissent, forget to voice their opinions, surrender their individual wills and be governed physically, mentally and sexually by an overarching benevolent state? In these most popular stories of dystopia – Brave New World, 1984 and We – we encounter characters that are able to rescue the passions of men and women from destruction at the hands of the state, even though they must themselves be destroyed in the attempt.
We encounter this theme in the movie Children of Men (2006). Based on the novel by PD James (1992) the movie is set in London in 2021. The world has collapsed we learn, but as one poster proudly proclaims, “London Soldiers On”. Women have mysteriously become infertile in this futuristic vision and no children are being born. The movie opens with a news story about the death of the youngest person on earth who is 18 years and some months old. As people weep openly in the streets at this mini-celebrity’s death, we are introduced to a land where there the purpose of existence has been defeated as each generation is the last of its kind.
The subtext of the movie tells us that the world’s production system is in crisis as there are no young workers anymore and no way of sustaining a domestic workforce. Immigrants are imported from other countries to meet the current demand. However, resources are also limited and the British government has adopted a hostile attitude towards immigrants as it feels they impinge on limited resources. They are captured by British Homeland Security and sent to live in camps/ghettos on the Isle of Man where rebels fighting for dignity and equal rights hold sway. There are few resources in this concentration camp and social Darwinism prevails. The book speaks of cannibalism on the island for survival, but the movie ignores this theme and plays with the story in many ways. I will however, concentrate on the movie as different from the book.
The protagonist of the movie is Theo Faron (Clive Owen) a worker for the Ministry of Energy and an ex-political activist. Theo is captured by a rebel group called The Fishes whose leader is Julian (Julianne Moore). She also happens to be Theo’s ex-wife. Julian is trying to get a young Fuji girl named Kee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) to a group called The Human Project, which is a group of doctors dedicated to reversing infertility. Kee is pregnant, making her the last fertile woman on earth.
The Fishes are a rebel group fighting for the dignity of immigrants and challenging the assumption that some humans are more equal than others. As they get a new leader called Luke following the death of Julian, Theo realizes that the group intends to use Kee’s pregnancy as a symbol for their struggle against the government. They intend to use Kee’s baby to get more popular support from the masses. He and an ex-midwife Miriam must protect Kee and deliver her safely to the Human Project.
The movie is about this journey. I found the movie, in one word, compelling. Perhaps I am someone who is regularly fascinated by the dystopic vision and maybe that has colored my judgment a little bit. The movie to me seemed to be a warning and a celebration. It positioned humanity’s callousness and violent ways against a celebration of that very humanity. The end result, the movie tells us, is that we will all end up dead. That is the only certainty. To counter that we humans seek to leave legacies behind so that people may remember us many years later. But the movie presents a worst case scenario. What will happen to art/music/literature if no one remains around to enjoy it? Who will admire Michelangelo’s sculptures fifty years later? Even more magical than the certainty of death is the possibility of life, says the movie. How horrible, says the movie, it must be that there are centuries of human accomplishments and no one to bequeath this inheritance to. And that, the movie says, is what we must remember. Perhaps this may sound a little preachy to some of you. Yet, the subtlety with which this lesson is preached is worthy of applause.
The movie is humorous and it doesn’t bore us to tears, like most such movies are wont to do. Perhaps the hand-held camera and the way it weaves in and out of a war zone following one and then two other characters, losing them, finding them again and sticking to no one in particular and doing this in very long sequences, places the audience in the center of all the action. And in the middle of these terrible affairs and slogan shouting, Kee gives birth in a startling scene on a filthy mattress covered only with Theo’s coat. If the movie plays in India perhaps the censor board will snip away at this scene. It depicts an actual birth (perhaps aided by CAG) and a baby slipping out of Kee’s tired and worried body umbilical cord and all. As her stomach suddenly deflates in the next shot the audience was left virtually speechless. Hats off to Alfonso Cuaron (the director) for pulling this off!
I hate to admit this but the movie really made me think hard about women’s bodies. Forever perceived as messy, penetrable and subversive women across the world are made to feel ashamed of their bodies. In this movie, which beautifully did not choose a skinny glamazon as Kee, women’s bodies are depicted as beautiful in all their colored, swollen, skinny, big, fat, small-chested, big-breasted glory. Kee’s pregnancy is the stuff gossip and sordid tales are made of. We are not told if she is a prostitute, or has been exploited or is by choice sexually promiscuous. We only know that she doesn’t know or care about who the father of her baby is. The fact that she is pregnant is enough for her and apparently for everyone else. Women’s bodies are beautiful, says the movie, because they can magically divide and this is what keeps humanity going.
Cuaron also uses clever motifs to emphasize the lack of children in the movie. Almost all the characters (including the rebel group) have household pets which seem to be a poor substitute for children. There are sheep, cows, dogs, cats, etc which instinctively imitate the helplessness and innocence of children. In one shot a kitten tries to climb up Theo’s leg as a child would grab onto an adult’s leg. The angst of humanity is further demonstrated by the clever positioning of Quietus, a product for committing suicide which is marketed and has universal acceptance. In the book the Quietus is a ritual where people are assisted in committing suicide by drowning. Cuaron depicts Quietus as a serum of some kind which can be injected into a person and will cause death. A secondary character in the movie called Jasper (Michael Caine) uses it on his invalid wife.
Children of Men is a semi-apocalyptic vision of our not so distant futures. Group identities rage across cities which have become battlefields. In the camps people chant Allahu Akbar and mutter in different languages. And somehow, Cuaron is able to tell us through his camera that this is all in one word- pointless. No one will ever celebrate the sacrifices of the present generation. The world has lost any meaning. It is mostly emptied of positive emotions. Even Theo who narrowly escapes a bombing in his favorite café is almost resigned to his fate. His demons break over his head alone and nothing seems to shock him except the vision of Kee’s swollen and stretch-marked belly and engorged breasts.
The battle scene that takes place in the concentration camp is reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan. However, unlike the confusion of the camera in Spielberg’s movie where it didn’t know which character to follow, Cuaron’s camera is clear about when it wants to pursue whom and for how long. The battle scene is very real indeed.
In the final analysis I am still a little stunned by the movie. A part of me liked it and a part of me felt it was gimmicky in some areas (like when the rebel leader gets all soppy on Theo). Another dispassionate part of me felt that it didn’t really matter if the movie was good or bad. What matters most is the fact that it easily endorses a necessary point of view about women’s sexuality. In an age where women are encouraged to wrap themselves up and present themselves as perfect Christmas ornaments, the movie bravely stands up to these notions. It tells us that the women need to be celebrated not for how easily they can squeeze themselves into extra-small Victoria’s Secret lingerie and lacy babydolls, but for the fact that these are the only creatures on earth which hold absolute power over life. But the movie doesn’t try and lionize women either or present them as goddesses. It presents them as individuals first, but superior individuals since they hold the key to future generations. Kee reminds us of contemporary depictions of the Virgin Mary with baby Jesus. But Cuaron keeps reminding us she is not. Her daughter is a miracle, but she is not Jesus.
For those of you interested, Cuaron also made the thoroughly disturbing but delectable movie Y Tu Mama Tambien (And Your Mother Too) and directed Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Definitely a director to watch out for!
My rating: 4 noddies out of 5.
We know that Zamyatin was rebelling against communism in Russia, Huxley and Orwell remained deeply influenced by the World Wars. Orwell accused Huxley of borrowing certain themes from Zamyatin and proceeded to write 1984, the manuscript of which was first approved by Huxley. The story of Zamyatin, Huxley and Orwell remains a separate one.
Running through this theme of dystopic utopias, is a complicated rendering of one central question- what is it that makes us human? Can social and political order be achieved only at the cost of beating out the human element from all humans? Must humans refrain from dissent, forget to voice their opinions, surrender their individual wills and be governed physically, mentally and sexually by an overarching benevolent state? In these most popular stories of dystopia – Brave New World, 1984 and We – we encounter characters that are able to rescue the passions of men and women from destruction at the hands of the state, even though they must themselves be destroyed in the attempt.
We encounter this theme in the movie Children of Men (2006). Based on the novel by PD James (1992) the movie is set in London in 2021. The world has collapsed we learn, but as one poster proudly proclaims, “London Soldiers On”. Women have mysteriously become infertile in this futuristic vision and no children are being born. The movie opens with a news story about the death of the youngest person on earth who is 18 years and some months old. As people weep openly in the streets at this mini-celebrity’s death, we are introduced to a land where there the purpose of existence has been defeated as each generation is the last of its kind.
The subtext of the movie tells us that the world’s production system is in crisis as there are no young workers anymore and no way of sustaining a domestic workforce. Immigrants are imported from other countries to meet the current demand. However, resources are also limited and the British government has adopted a hostile attitude towards immigrants as it feels they impinge on limited resources. They are captured by British Homeland Security and sent to live in camps/ghettos on the Isle of Man where rebels fighting for dignity and equal rights hold sway. There are few resources in this concentration camp and social Darwinism prevails. The book speaks of cannibalism on the island for survival, but the movie ignores this theme and plays with the story in many ways. I will however, concentrate on the movie as different from the book.
The protagonist of the movie is Theo Faron (Clive Owen) a worker for the Ministry of Energy and an ex-political activist. Theo is captured by a rebel group called The Fishes whose leader is Julian (Julianne Moore). She also happens to be Theo’s ex-wife. Julian is trying to get a young Fuji girl named Kee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) to a group called The Human Project, which is a group of doctors dedicated to reversing infertility. Kee is pregnant, making her the last fertile woman on earth.
The Fishes are a rebel group fighting for the dignity of immigrants and challenging the assumption that some humans are more equal than others. As they get a new leader called Luke following the death of Julian, Theo realizes that the group intends to use Kee’s pregnancy as a symbol for their struggle against the government. They intend to use Kee’s baby to get more popular support from the masses. He and an ex-midwife Miriam must protect Kee and deliver her safely to the Human Project.
The movie is about this journey. I found the movie, in one word, compelling. Perhaps I am someone who is regularly fascinated by the dystopic vision and maybe that has colored my judgment a little bit. The movie to me seemed to be a warning and a celebration. It positioned humanity’s callousness and violent ways against a celebration of that very humanity. The end result, the movie tells us, is that we will all end up dead. That is the only certainty. To counter that we humans seek to leave legacies behind so that people may remember us many years later. But the movie presents a worst case scenario. What will happen to art/music/literature if no one remains around to enjoy it? Who will admire Michelangelo’s sculptures fifty years later? Even more magical than the certainty of death is the possibility of life, says the movie. How horrible, says the movie, it must be that there are centuries of human accomplishments and no one to bequeath this inheritance to. And that, the movie says, is what we must remember. Perhaps this may sound a little preachy to some of you. Yet, the subtlety with which this lesson is preached is worthy of applause.
The movie is humorous and it doesn’t bore us to tears, like most such movies are wont to do. Perhaps the hand-held camera and the way it weaves in and out of a war zone following one and then two other characters, losing them, finding them again and sticking to no one in particular and doing this in very long sequences, places the audience in the center of all the action. And in the middle of these terrible affairs and slogan shouting, Kee gives birth in a startling scene on a filthy mattress covered only with Theo’s coat. If the movie plays in India perhaps the censor board will snip away at this scene. It depicts an actual birth (perhaps aided by CAG) and a baby slipping out of Kee’s tired and worried body umbilical cord and all. As her stomach suddenly deflates in the next shot the audience was left virtually speechless. Hats off to Alfonso Cuaron (the director) for pulling this off!
I hate to admit this but the movie really made me think hard about women’s bodies. Forever perceived as messy, penetrable and subversive women across the world are made to feel ashamed of their bodies. In this movie, which beautifully did not choose a skinny glamazon as Kee, women’s bodies are depicted as beautiful in all their colored, swollen, skinny, big, fat, small-chested, big-breasted glory. Kee’s pregnancy is the stuff gossip and sordid tales are made of. We are not told if she is a prostitute, or has been exploited or is by choice sexually promiscuous. We only know that she doesn’t know or care about who the father of her baby is. The fact that she is pregnant is enough for her and apparently for everyone else. Women’s bodies are beautiful, says the movie, because they can magically divide and this is what keeps humanity going.
Cuaron also uses clever motifs to emphasize the lack of children in the movie. Almost all the characters (including the rebel group) have household pets which seem to be a poor substitute for children. There are sheep, cows, dogs, cats, etc which instinctively imitate the helplessness and innocence of children. In one shot a kitten tries to climb up Theo’s leg as a child would grab onto an adult’s leg. The angst of humanity is further demonstrated by the clever positioning of Quietus, a product for committing suicide which is marketed and has universal acceptance. In the book the Quietus is a ritual where people are assisted in committing suicide by drowning. Cuaron depicts Quietus as a serum of some kind which can be injected into a person and will cause death. A secondary character in the movie called Jasper (Michael Caine) uses it on his invalid wife.
Children of Men is a semi-apocalyptic vision of our not so distant futures. Group identities rage across cities which have become battlefields. In the camps people chant Allahu Akbar and mutter in different languages. And somehow, Cuaron is able to tell us through his camera that this is all in one word- pointless. No one will ever celebrate the sacrifices of the present generation. The world has lost any meaning. It is mostly emptied of positive emotions. Even Theo who narrowly escapes a bombing in his favorite café is almost resigned to his fate. His demons break over his head alone and nothing seems to shock him except the vision of Kee’s swollen and stretch-marked belly and engorged breasts.
The battle scene that takes place in the concentration camp is reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan. However, unlike the confusion of the camera in Spielberg’s movie where it didn’t know which character to follow, Cuaron’s camera is clear about when it wants to pursue whom and for how long. The battle scene is very real indeed.
In the final analysis I am still a little stunned by the movie. A part of me liked it and a part of me felt it was gimmicky in some areas (like when the rebel leader gets all soppy on Theo). Another dispassionate part of me felt that it didn’t really matter if the movie was good or bad. What matters most is the fact that it easily endorses a necessary point of view about women’s sexuality. In an age where women are encouraged to wrap themselves up and present themselves as perfect Christmas ornaments, the movie bravely stands up to these notions. It tells us that the women need to be celebrated not for how easily they can squeeze themselves into extra-small Victoria’s Secret lingerie and lacy babydolls, but for the fact that these are the only creatures on earth which hold absolute power over life. But the movie doesn’t try and lionize women either or present them as goddesses. It presents them as individuals first, but superior individuals since they hold the key to future generations. Kee reminds us of contemporary depictions of the Virgin Mary with baby Jesus. But Cuaron keeps reminding us she is not. Her daughter is a miracle, but she is not Jesus.
For those of you interested, Cuaron also made the thoroughly disturbing but delectable movie Y Tu Mama Tambien (And Your Mother Too) and directed Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Definitely a director to watch out for!
My rating: 4 noddies out of 5.
posted by Vasundhara at 4:20 PM
5 Comments:
Vasu, as always brilliantly written.... Even though i had to look up some of the words in the dictionary, i thoroughly enjoyed the review... I will see u in a coupla days maam.... i hope u have my no... and also i had requested some dvd's... hope u remember... take care...
Hey Vasu! Great review. I watched the film a couple of weeks ago and loved it too. Your review brought back memories of the adrenalin rush!
nice blog
And a very valuable member he made. phentermine. For a moment he held it dreamily before him, as if still engaged oxycontin in gentle reminiscences called up by the act.. I can remember my grandfather Titbottom, although I wellbutrin was a very young child, and he was a very old man.. How much? neurontin Three thousand dollars.. Her daughter Jane is in no danger of being ruled hydrocodone by any 'flattering tongue' of mine.. This procedure is readily described, although its practice demands instruction xanax and experience.. For this reason it was constructed prevacid after the plan of a reflex apparatus; the motility, originally the path for the inner bodily change, formed a discharging path standing at its disposal.. If he had to sail at all, this kind of nexium sailing suited Mr.. I think soma I have seen the same thing even in this city.. Podington, who thought they were going effexor to drown...
This makes me want to see the movie. You've brought up some very interesting points, and I like your analysis of some of the motifs in the movie, especially in terms of the female body.
Post a Comment
<< Home