Miscellaneous Movie Musings

innerSpaceman · 12-30-2006, 05:36 PM

On the other hand, a pretty woeful movie like Children of Men, that appeared to have a point, was wonderful.

I didn't particularly like Et tu Mama Tambien, but Alfonso Cuaron's other three films have been uniformly fantastic. (The Little Princess, Harry Potter and the Prisonzer of Azkaban, and his latest.) The guy's a budding genius, imo.

His latest is a great fable about a dystopian future where mankind has been infertile for almost 20 years. The vision of the future presented is completely eerie. Cuaron wisely strayed from the book and, instead of making the scene futuristic, made the environment uncannily like our own ... with the terrifyingly believable addition of world chaos.

Clive Owens (great, as usual) stumbles into the situation of protecting the first pregnant woman in 18 years. In a wonderful performance, Michael Caine offers a bit of safe haven in what is otherwise a suspenseful, harrowing adventure.

Much has been made of the fact that Cuaron used extremely long takes for much of the film ... but I found the film so engrossing that this bit of technique was barely noticeable. If anything, it pulls you into the story and the action in a unique way, and does not stand out as showy filmmaking.

This is not a cheerful movie, but I highly recommend it.

Alex · 12-31-2006, 12:08 AM

Just got back from it as well and also mostly enjoyed it. I also give Cuaron three out of four successes but a different three (it is Prisoner of Azkaban that I find deplorable).

The first long cut was well done, adding to the suspense of the scene, and subtle enough that if I hadn't heard about the long cuts beforehand I probably wouldn't have noticed.

The second one was just needless showing off and did nothing for the movie (and apprently had at least one unperceived cut anyway). The problem with our modern digital age is that I don't believe what I see on film is real anyway so long cuts for the sake of a long cut isn't really impressive.

I remember the forgetabble Nicolas Cage movie Snake Eyes and it started with what seemed to be a 10 minute single shot that was actually cleverly edited and masked digitally. That's pointless. The beginning of Touch of Evil, that meant something. The second one in Children of Men was somewhere in between but closer to Snake Eyes.

But it is a ballsy movie for many reasons and well worth seeing (unless you're someone who only goes to movies to be made happy).

12-30-2006, 05:36 PM	#1
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	On the other hand, a pretty woeful movie like Children of Men, that appeared to have a point, was wonderful. I didn't particularly like Et tu Mama Tambien, but Alfonso Cuaron's other three films have been uniformly fantastic. (The Little Princess, Harry Potter and the Prisonzer of Azkaban, and his latest.) The guy's a budding genius, imo. His latest is a great fable about a dystopian future where mankind has been infertile for almost 20 years. The vision of the future presented is completely eerie. Cuaron wisely strayed from the book and, instead of making the scene futuristic, made the environment uncannily like our own ... with the terrifyingly believable addition of world chaos. Clive Owens (great, as usual) stumbles into the situation of protecting the first pregnant woman in 18 years. In a wonderful performance, Michael Caine offers a bit of safe haven in what is otherwise a suspenseful, harrowing adventure. Much has been made of the fact that Cuaron used extremely long takes for much of the film ... but I found the film so engrossing that this bit of technique was barely noticeable. If anything, it pulls you into the story and the action in a unique way, and does not stand out as showy filmmaking. This is not a cheerful movie, but I highly recommend it.
	Submit to Quotes

12-31-2006, 12:08 AM	#2
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Just got back from it as well and also mostly enjoyed it. I also give Cuaron three out of four successes but a different three (it is Prisoner of Azkaban that I find deplorable). The first long cut was well done, adding to the suspense of the scene, and subtle enough that if I hadn't heard about the long cuts beforehand I probably wouldn't have noticed. The second one was just needless showing off and did nothing for the movie (and apprently had at least one unperceived cut anyway). The problem with our modern digital age is that I don't believe what I see on film is real anyway so long cuts for the sake of a long cut isn't really impressive. I remember the forgetabble Nicolas Cage movie Snake Eyes and it started with what seemed to be a 10 minute single shot that was actually cleverly edited and masked digitally. That's pointless. The beginning of Touch of Evil, that meant something. The second one in Children of Men was somewhere in between but closer to Snake Eyes. But it is a ballsy movie for many reasons and well worth seeing (unless you're someone who only goes to movies to be made happy).
	Submit to Quotes