[spoiler:f2d5297da3]Personally, I thought it was more shocking that everyone stopped.[/spoiler:f2d5297da3]
I found that scene implausible, and it interfered with my enjoyment of the ending. I was like "no, you've been so restrained throughout this whole movie! Don't slip into melodrama now!"
You speak only the truth. That scene was downright messianic, and I was over it pretty quickly. For me, the movie fell apart at about that moment, and the ending didn't really rescue it, it just made it worse.
I would've liked to see more development of the world situation, but I'm trying to not complain too loudly. It was a really good movie.
I don't get what the big deal is. The movie is about hope and if the entire world is going to plunge into chaos because of infertility, I imagine that when people see their first baby in 18 years (some first time in their lifetime) then they're going to take notice.
It wasn't really done in a way to say that a baby would end all strife, it just showed that it represented some kind of hope for everyone. I don't see any other way the scene could have been done considering the context of the movie.
[spoiler:f2d5297da3]Well, take Sid for an example. As soon as he sees the baby, he goes into greed mode. I think that an entire platoon of soldiers just stopping in the middle of a huge firefight to stare at the first human baby born in 18 years requires a bit too much suspension of disbelief in a movie that is, for the most part, very realistic and gritty. I felt like the entire tone of the movie changed during that scene, and I didn't like it. I understand that scene is pretty metaphorical, but I still feel like it's a bit much.[/spoiler:f2d5297da3]
I read some spoilers for the novel that the movie's based on and it seems pretty different. I should check it out.
The pig by itself wasn't much to go on. But setting it against the smokestacks? Brilliance.
Also, thought this was interesting, though wiki doesn't give a reference for the information
[quote=Wiki entry on Children of Men, Cinematography][spoiler:6fa831939c]For one scene, shot in one extended take, a special camera rig was invented by Doggicam Systems, developed from Doggicam Systems' Power Slide system[2] — and a vehicle was modified so that seats could be made to tilt and lower actors out of the way of the camera. The windshield of the car in which the five actors rode was designed to tilt out of the way to allow camera movement in and out through the front windscreen. A crew of four, including the DP and camera operator, rode on the roof.
All of this took place, in one uncut shot which was filmed as 6 takes over a week and blended together in post production, while numerous dangerous stunts involving fire added in post production, thrown missiles, and stunt falls which include a CGI motorbike added in post production, while the actors performed, dodging the moving camera.
In another scene, featuring an army of actors, also shot in one extended take which was blended together from 5 separate takes on two different locations over 2 weeks of filming, hundreds of bullet shots were added digitally as well as tank mounted 'big gun' impacts, other on set pyrotechnic effects surround the principal actors as they appear to move hundreds of feet along a street, into a building, and up two flight of stairs. The use of handheld camerawork creates an almost "documentary feel" to the cinematography. At one point blood was accidentally squirted onto the camera lens by a stunt woman, which was later faded out throughout the shot in post production.[/spoiler:6fa831939c]
Edit: I suppose I'll spoiler all that just to be safe.[/quote] Wow, I didn't realize so much CG was used. See Hollywood? This is the kind of stuff you should be using CG on, not Star Wars episode 1-3.
[spoiler:3685f81591]Personally, I thought it was more shocking that everyone stopped.[/spoiler:3685f81591]
I found that scene implausible, and it interfered with my enjoyment of the ending. I was like "no, you've been so restrained throughout this whole movie! Don't slip into melodrama now!"
You speak only the truth. That scene was downright messianic, and I was over it pretty quickly. For me, the movie fell apart at about that moment, and the ending didn't really rescue it, it just made it worse.
I would've liked to see more development of the world situation, but I'm trying to not complain too loudly. It was a really good movie.
I don't get what the big deal is. The movie is about hope and if the entire world is going to plunge into chaos because of infertility, I imagine that when people see their first baby in 18 years (some first time in their lifetime) then they're going to take notice.
It wasn't really done in a way to say that a baby would end all strife, it just showed that it represented some kind of hope for everyone. I don't see any other way the scene could have been done considering the context of the movie.
[spoiler:3685f81591]Well, take Sid for an example. As soon as he sees the baby, he goes into greed mode. I think that an entire platoon of soldiers just stopping in the middle of a huge firefight to stare at the first human baby born in 18 years requires a bit too much suspension of disbelief in a movie that is, for the most part, very realistic and gritty. I felt like the entire tone of the movie changed during that scene, and I didn't like it. I understand that scene is pretty metaphorical, but I still feel like it's a bit much.[/spoiler:3685f81591]
I read some spoilers for the novel that the movie's based on and it seems pretty different. I should check it out.
Well,
[spoiler:3685f81591]I was under the impression, since he said this, that he was going to turn in Theo and Kee/Ki/Key for a reward, the baby was just kind of an added bonus.[/spoiler:3685f81591]
Good CG is defined as "not noticeable." I'm sure any movie that's come out in the last couple of years has had a respectable amount of CG done.
Jinnigan on
0
Big DookieSmells great!DownriverRegistered Userregular
edited January 2007
Just got back from the movie. I have to agree with Dyrwen66 a little here - the movie didn't quite click with me. Don't get me wrong, I liked it. However, there were enough problems that I can't say I was blown away like some of you apparently were.
Pros:
[spoiler:fee2a59c63]- Incredible cinematography.
- The action scenes were great and intense. The scene where Julianne gets shot in the car had me literally gripping the edge of my seat.
- Nice, understated sci-fi backdrop.
- Clive Owens was awesome.
- SOME nice symbolism.[/spoiler:fee2a59c63]
Cons:
[spoiler:fee2a59c63]- Too much symbolism where it wasn't needed (yes, we already got the "War on Terror" references... did they really need to club us over the head with an exact replica of the Abu Graib stuff?) It just wasn't necessary.
- Needed more background information. I'm fine with leaving most things open for interpretation and using subtlety, but by the end of the film, we know almost nothing more than we knew at the beginning. It was just slightly too open-ended.
- The pace seemed too erratic. It was either balls-to-the-wall action, or long, drawn out exposition. This is probably more of a personal preference though.[/spoiler:fee2a59c63]
In any case, even though it wasn't my favorite movie ever, it was still good for the most part. Plus, it was a nice change of pace from the usual movie fare, so I was glad for that. My favorite scene of the movie by far:
[spoiler:fee2a59c63]When they are escaping from the farm and the car won't start, so they have to roll it down the hill and everything.[/spoiler:fee2a59c63]
I was both laughing and gritting my teeth in tension the whole time. It was just a really great scene.
If you wanted more information or thought it didn't explain enough you need to be shot. In the face. I'm sick of hearing that. The entire film was from Theo's perspective, we know what he knows, the rest is unimportant, and the central messages are so simple that you don't need extraneous exposition.
Prohass on
0
Big DookieSmells great!DownriverRegistered Userregular
If you wanted more information or thought it didn't explain enough you need to be shot. In the face. I'm sick of hearing that. The entire film was from Theo's perspective, we know what he knows, the rest is unimportant, and the central messages are so simple that you don't need extraneous exposition.
I need to be shot? That's pleasant.
In any case, no, we DON'T know what he knows. That's my point. We know what he knows from the moment the film begins until the end. There's plenty of background just behind him that he would know about (much less everything else in the story) that could've been tapped into that would've made the film better, but it wasn't.
I'm not saying they should have spilled everything, as I would rather a movie explain too little than too much. However, in this case, they definitely overdid it.
If you wanted more information or thought it didn't explain enough you need to be shot. In the face. I'm sick of hearing that. The entire film was from Theo's perspective, we know what he knows, the rest is unimportant, and the central messages are so simple that you don't need extraneous exposition.
I need to be shot? That's pleasant.
In any case, no, we DON'T know what he knows. That's my point. We know what he knows from the moment the film begins until the end. There's plenty of background just behind him that he would know about (much less everything else in the story) that could've been tapped into that would've made the film better, but it wasn't.
I'm not saying they should have spilled everything, as I would rather a movie explain too little than too much. However, in this case, they definitely overdid it.
And the comparisons to half life 2 and this film continue to mount.
I seriously walked out of the theater feeling like I watched a mix of Gears of War and Half Life, with a good arthouse plot.
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
If you wanted more information or thought it didn't explain enough you need to be shot. In the face. I'm sick of hearing that. The entire film was from Theo's perspective, we know what he knows, the rest is unimportant, and the central messages are so simple that you don't need extraneous exposition.
I need to be shot? That's pleasant.
In any case, no, we DON'T know what he knows. That's my point. We know what he knows from the moment the film begins until the end. There's plenty of background just behind him that he would know about (much less everything else in the story) that could've been tapped into that would've made the film better, but it wasn't.
I'm not saying they should have spilled everything, as I would rather a movie explain too little than too much. However, in this case, they definitely overdid it.
[spoiler:56ee62402b]I'm thinking that the people who were unimpressed with the cease in combat scene just can't really grasp the idea of worldwide infertility. Especially when the problems leading to the fighting was the fact that there were no babies and all of the sudden one just pops up in the middle of the fight? I'm suprised they all didnt put down thier guns and start singing koombiya to be honest. Did you really expect them to see her and say "Ohh look a baby" and then just keep blowing each other away? (which they sort of did anyways) I think a more realistic angle would of been the army putting them in an APC and getting the hell out of there with them to wherever they need to go to help save humanity. [/spoiler:56ee62402b]
After looking over that "CoM should be nominated for Best Picture" video I remembered something they never quite explained:
[spoiler:cfb72ff6d7]Maybe I missed it but was there a reason they killed all the country's cows and burned them in the fields? They used the imagery over and over of the charred corpses in the fields but I didn't catch why they'd done it.
My first thought was a reactionary measure to combat disease, but then again this is 18 years after the epidemic and those cows looked recently-killed. I'd think in an isolationist state they'd want their food sources preserved so they must have had a damn good reason for killing all the cattle.
The only living bovine I remember seeing were in the barn where Kee reveals she's pregnant and since that barn is owned and operated by fishes it is conceivable that those were illegally-kept.
I loved the hell out of this movie, and I don't mind the lack of information presented in it (for me, just about everything was perfect)
What makes me sad, however, is that we'll never see this compelling world again. I felt the "post-apocalyptic" nature of the world was more compelling than most, and I wish we could see more of it, how it came to be where it was, and where it goes from here, including what happened in the rest of the world, just not in the context of this particular story.
Maybe just a seperate, and detailed timeline of events from now, until the movie's beginning.
I dunno. Would more backround information actually do anything positive for this film? I don't think so at all.
It won't change my view of the film but I'd love to know more about the world it takes place in.
[spoiler:2e54fd56bc]like who nuked NYC?[/spoiler:2e54fd56bc]
I dunno. Would more backround information actually do anything positive for this film? I don't think so at all.
It won't change my view of the film but I'd love to know more about the world it takes place in.
[spoiler:1118b057b4]like who nuked NYC?[/spoiler:1118b057b4]
Perhaps rogue farmers, running out of food, feed their dead stock to their own cattle, outbreaks of madcow disease, anythings possible. And Terrorists, anyone, you name it.
I dunno. Would more backround information actually do anything positive for this film? I don't think so at all.
One thing I kind of found myself wondering is how the world turned into a police state. Like, I get that people can't have babies anymore but how does that turn into detainment camps and people being beaten and tortured? It's not really necessary for me to know, but I did wonder about it.
I dunno. Would more backround information actually do anything positive for this film? I don't think so at all.
One thing I kind of found myself wondering is how the world turned into a police state. Like, I get that people can't have babies anymore but how does that turn into detainment camps and people being beaten and tortured? It's not really necessary for me to know, but I did wonder about it.
probably started with a general panic over the baby crisis and then it just spiraled out of control.
I dunno. Would more backround information actually do anything positive for this film? I don't think so at all.
One thing I kind of found myself wondering is how the world turned into a police state. Like, I get that people can't have babies anymore but how does that turn into detainment camps and people being beaten and tortured? It's not really necessary for me to know, but I did wonder about it.
Britain turned into a police state. The rest of the world has more or less fallen apart.
And it's not hard to figure out. There's panic, people start rioting, stop working, everything goes to hell. Under those conditions, any government that does come to power is most likely to be a police state.
Simple as it was, I thought the introduction of the film (much like the rest of it) was awesome.
[spoiler:6f055b6120]The relatively calm cafe scene introducing the Baby Diego thing, then the place getting blown to shit followed by "CHILDREN OF MEN" and a high-pitched ring.[/spoiler:6f055b6120]
I, too, enjoyed the long shots. It brought a little more realism to the action scenes.
One thing I kind of found myself wondering is how the world turned into a police state. Like, I get that people can't have babies anymore but how does that turn into detainment camps and people being beaten and tortured? It's not really necessary for me to know, but I did wonder about it.
It's not that much of a stretch. When the world is going to hell in a handbasket, there will always be an opportunistic despot drunk on power waiting to take over and make things worse while promising a scared, easily swayed populace that things will get better under their hands.
[spoiler:2b64958ca8]And the thing with the sudden, momentary cease-fire: Easy. In the military, the commanding officer's order might as well come from God. So when the CO says "stop shooting," you stop shooting. And then the soldiers see the woman and her baby and realize why they stopped shooting. Then when the RPG hit the tank, it's possible that the soldiers started shooting again to protect the baby.[/spoiler:2b64958ca8]
On the subject of death and daemons disappearing: arrows sure are effective in Lyra's universe. Seems like if you get shot once, you're dead - no lingering deaths with your daemon huddling pitifully in your arms, just *thunk* *argh* *whoosh*. A battlefield full of the dying would just be so much more depressing when you add in wailing gerbils and dogs.
One thing I kind of found myself wondering is how the world turned into a police state. Like, I get that people can't have babies anymore but how does that turn into detainment camps and people being beaten and tortured? It's not really necessary for me to know, but I did wonder about it.
It's not that much of a stretch. When the world is going to hell in a handbasket, there will always be an opportunistic despot drunk on power waiting to take over and make things worse while promising a scared, easily swayed populace that things will get better under their hands.
[spoiler:306d08892a]And the thing with the sudden, momentary cease-fire: Easy. In the military, the commanding officer's order might as well come from God. So when the CO says "stop shooting," you stop shooting. And then the soldiers see the woman and her baby and realize why they stopped shooting. Then when the RPG hit the tank, it's possible that the soldiers started shooting again to protect the baby.[/spoiler:306d08892a]
[spoiler:306d08892a]Or, you know, to neutralize the threat, save their own asses, etc, since the baby was no longer in their line of fire.[/spoiler:306d08892a]
[spoiler:b7471eecfc]And then the soldiers see the woman and her baby and realize why they stopped shooting. Then when the RPG hit the tank, it's possible that the soldiers started shooting again to protect the baby.[/spoiler:b7471eecfc]
This is kind of how I took it as well.
[spoiler:b7471eecfc]Before that point, the soldiers outside had basically been taking potshots at windows where they could see activity. After they see the baby, though, and the rpg is fired at them, they basically let loose on the entire building. My immediate thought was that they were trying to provide heavy cover fire so that they could get the baby out of there.
The only thing I found strange about that part is actually that the soldiers didn't react enough. You'd think they would have dedicated half their troops just for protecting the baby. She's basically the most valuable asset in the entire world at that moment... and they just let two refugees walk off with her, her fate left completely to chance? It doesn't seem very plausible to me.[/spoiler:b7471eecfc]
[spoiler:8ad1283b58]And then the soldiers see the woman and her baby and realize why they stopped shooting. Then when the RPG hit the tank, it's possible that the soldiers started shooting again to protect the baby.[/spoiler:8ad1283b58]
This is kind of how I took it as well.
[spoiler:8ad1283b58]Before that point, the soldiers outside had basically been taking potshots at windows where they could see activity. After they see the baby, though, and the rpg is fired at them, they basically let loose on the entire building. My immediate thought was that they were trying to provide heavy cover fire so that they could get the baby out of there.
The only thing I found strange about that part is actually that the soldiers didn't react enough. You'd think they would have dedicated half their troops just for protecting the baby. She's basically the most valuable asset in the entire world at that moment... and they just let two refugees walk off with her, her fate left completely to chance? It doesn't seem very plausible to me.[/spoiler:8ad1283b58]
[spoiler:8ad1283b58]I think realistically someone in charge would assign a shit-load of bodyguards and escort that woman out of there. It's not like that building was a prime target or anything, they were minutes from bugging out before the airforce shock and awed the place to dust anyway. I know it doesn't work for the plot of the movie, but I would have at least liked to see a few guys want to follow them down the street instead of everyone focusing on that school/office when it really didn't strategically matter.
They could have just had those soldiers forced away for some other reason, but I guess they just needed to end the movie at that point. No sense stretching that any longer than it had to.[/spoiler:8ad1283b58]
[spoiler:56a331b2ba]I didnt take it that way at all, not the soldiers protecting the baby part. i though it was more that they were amazed to see a baby, and then human nature kicked back in and they started fighting again[/spoiler:56a331b2ba]
I figured that the whole world hadn't gone all to shit and Britain wasn't the only "safe place" left, and that it was just propaganda and all that bs government feeds it's people.
I did catch Life in a Glass House at the beginning and I really just pray that it was a coincidence and not some kind of political statement because I really just wish Thom Yorke would shut up and keep writing music.
I figured that the whole world hadn't gone all to shit and Britain wasn't the only "safe place" left, and that it was just propaganda and all that bs government feeds it's people.
[spoiler:69a28a7f8a]I didnt take it that way at all, not the soldiers protecting the baby part. i though it was more that they were amazed to see a baby, and then human nature kicked back in and they started fighting again[/spoiler:69a28a7f8a]
Yeah, that seemed like it. I don't see how there would have been much thought to the whole 'valuable asset' issue.
[spoiler:04ba8c490a]They are simple soldiers, which would explain their amazement but unwillingness to make decisions on a subject that has nothing to do with killing an enemy combatant or avoiding imminent death.
And Sid did not see the baby as an opportunity, his reaction basically was "what the fuck is that? hide it!". He saw their situation as wanted people as a financial opportunity. He would have acted like that even without the baby. Plus he had a direct familiarity with them. To the soldiers, they were just strangers.[/spoiler:04ba8c490a]
I figured that the whole world hadn't gone all to shit and Britain wasn't the only "safe place" left, and that it was just propaganda and all that bs government feeds it's people.
Then why were all the refugees trying to get in?
They only seemed to be other europeans, sure maybe Britain is the last "safe place" in europe, but I doubt it is like total chaos everywhere with all the governments being overthrown and Britain being the last one. It's most likely just propaganda the government is showing their people to show that what they are doing is right and they are needed.
I figured that the whole world hadn't gone all to shit and Britain wasn't the only "safe place" left, and that it was just propaganda and all that bs government feeds it's people.
Then why were all the refugees trying to get in?
They only seemed to be other europeans, sure maybe Britain is the last "safe place" in europe, but I doubt it is like total chaos everywhere with all the governments being overthrown and Britain being the last one. It's most likely just propaganda the government is showing their people to show that what they are doing is right and they are needed.
They weren't Europeans.
[spoiler:ea52c2ab4c]Maybe you missed it but Kee was African, Julianne was American and a great deal of the people in the internment camp were Middle-Eastern Muslims. In the opening sequence you see a brief flash of New York city with a mushroom cloud over it. Clive Owen asks Julianne about her parents and if they were in NYC "when it happened". She says yes and he replies "I'm sorry."[/spoiler:ea52c2ab4c]
So no, it isn't propaganda, the world is going through a lot of shit and only small, isolationist dictatorships have survived, the only example being Great Britain.
I figured that the whole world hadn't gone all to shit and Britain wasn't the only "safe place" left, and that it was just propaganda and all that bs government feeds it's people.
Then why were all the refugees trying to get in?
They only seemed to be other europeans, sure maybe Britain is the last "safe place" in europe, but I doubt it is like total chaos everywhere with all the governments being overthrown and Britain being the last one. It's most likely just propaganda the government is showing their people to show that what they are doing is right and they are needed.
They weren't Europeans.
[spoiler:3f2716b5b4]Maybe you missed it but Kee was African, Julianne was American and a great deal of the people in the internment camp were Middle-Eastern Muslims. In the opening sequence you see a brief flash of New York city with a mushroom cloud over it. Clive Owen asks Julianne about her parents and if they were in NYC "when it happened". She says yes and he replies "I'm sorry."[/spoiler:3f2716b5b4]
So no, it isn't propaganda, the world is going through a lot of shit and only small, isolationist dictatorships have survived, the only example being Great Britain.
I know that in the other parts of the world is tough too, but it seems like the government is trying to make it's people think that this is the last baston of hope, even though there are bombings and lots of touble in britain too. I doubt that it is complete shit in the U.S, Canada, and Russia or other big countries with the governments done and everything is almost destroyed.
Posts
[spoiler:f2d5297da3]Well, take Sid for an example. As soon as he sees the baby, he goes into greed mode. I think that an entire platoon of soldiers just stopping in the middle of a huge firefight to stare at the first human baby born in 18 years requires a bit too much suspension of disbelief in a movie that is, for the most part, very realistic and gritty. I felt like the entire tone of the movie changed during that scene, and I didn't like it. I understand that scene is pretty metaphorical, but I still feel like it's a bit much.[/spoiler:f2d5297da3]
I read some spoilers for the novel that the movie's based on and it seems pretty different. I should check it out.
Edit: I suppose I'll spoiler all that just to be safe.[/quote] Wow, I didn't realize so much CG was used. See Hollywood? This is the kind of stuff you should be using CG on, not Star Wars episode 1-3.
Well,
[spoiler:3685f81591]I was under the impression, since he said this, that he was going to turn in Theo and Kee/Ki/Key for a reward, the baby was just kind of an added bonus.[/spoiler:3685f81591]
Pros:
[spoiler:fee2a59c63]- Incredible cinematography.
- The action scenes were great and intense. The scene where Julianne gets shot in the car had me literally gripping the edge of my seat.
- Nice, understated sci-fi backdrop.
- Clive Owens was awesome.
- SOME nice symbolism.[/spoiler:fee2a59c63]
Cons:
[spoiler:fee2a59c63]- Too much symbolism where it wasn't needed (yes, we already got the "War on Terror" references... did they really need to club us over the head with an exact replica of the Abu Graib stuff?) It just wasn't necessary.
- Needed more background information. I'm fine with leaving most things open for interpretation and using subtlety, but by the end of the film, we know almost nothing more than we knew at the beginning. It was just slightly too open-ended.
- The pace seemed too erratic. It was either balls-to-the-wall action, or long, drawn out exposition. This is probably more of a personal preference though.[/spoiler:fee2a59c63]
In any case, even though it wasn't my favorite movie ever, it was still good for the most part. Plus, it was a nice change of pace from the usual movie fare, so I was glad for that. My favorite scene of the movie by far:
[spoiler:fee2a59c63]When they are escaping from the farm and the car won't start, so they have to roll it down the hill and everything.[/spoiler:fee2a59c63]
I was both laughing and gritting my teeth in tension the whole time. It was just a really great scene.
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
In any case, no, we DON'T know what he knows. That's my point. We know what he knows from the moment the film begins until the end. There's plenty of background just behind him that he would know about (much less everything else in the story) that could've been tapped into that would've made the film better, but it wasn't.
I'm not saying they should have spilled everything, as I would rather a movie explain too little than too much. However, in this case, they definitely overdid it.
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
I seriously walked out of the theater feeling like I watched a mix of Gears of War and Half Life, with a good arthouse plot.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
What exactly did you want to know?
That was by far the best scene in the movie.
I loved that "sudden quiet" scene.
[spoiler:cfb72ff6d7]Maybe I missed it but was there a reason they killed all the country's cows and burned them in the fields? They used the imagery over and over of the charred corpses in the fields but I didn't catch why they'd done it.
My first thought was a reactionary measure to combat disease, but then again this is 18 years after the epidemic and those cows looked recently-killed. I'd think in an isolationist state they'd want their food sources preserved so they must have had a damn good reason for killing all the cattle.
The only living bovine I remember seeing were in the barn where Kee reveals she's pregnant and since that barn is owned and operated by fishes it is conceivable that those were illegally-kept.
Your take?
[/spoiler:cfb72ff6d7]
What makes me sad, however, is that we'll never see this compelling world again. I felt the "post-apocalyptic" nature of the world was more compelling than most, and I wish we could see more of it, how it came to be where it was, and where it goes from here, including what happened in the rest of the world, just not in the context of this particular story.
Maybe just a seperate, and detailed timeline of events from now, until the movie's beginning.
[spoiler:2e54fd56bc]like who nuked NYC?[/spoiler:2e54fd56bc]
Perhaps rogue farmers, running out of food, feed their dead stock to their own cattle, outbreaks of madcow disease, anythings possible. And Terrorists, anyone, you name it.
One thing I kind of found myself wondering is how the world turned into a police state. Like, I get that people can't have babies anymore but how does that turn into detainment camps and people being beaten and tortured? It's not really necessary for me to know, but I did wonder about it.
probably started with a general panic over the baby crisis and then it just spiraled out of control.
i'd blame religion.
And it's not hard to figure out. There's panic, people start rioting, stop working, everything goes to hell. Under those conditions, any government that does come to power is most likely to be a police state.
[spoiler:6cbabe4d53] Fishes interrogation chamber:
"Armageddon begins: Russia detonates nuclear bomb, Kazakstan Annihilated"
"Charles the second dethroned"
"US troops full assault"
"Test tube Daisy dies"
"Violent Reaction"
"Age Doesn't matter"
"the unforgettable"
"Fertility drug kits"
"Millions died in seconds"
"something about FCA or USA nuclear fallout"
"something about a plastic surgeon scandal" <-- those were the largest of all
"immigrants protest against governments racist new policies"
"fallout spreads across africa"
"Raid nabs refugee weapons cache"
"Militias capture Cincinatti, Bozeman, and Spokane"
"something about property getting siezed"
"something about a lethal leak killing 1500----"
[/spoiler:6cbabe4d53]
That might provide a little more backstory to people who thought it was lacking
I have a really really good eye when I go to theatres.
Edit: and I saw it 3 times.
[spoiler:6f055b6120]The relatively calm cafe scene introducing the Baby Diego thing, then the place getting blown to shit followed by "CHILDREN OF MEN" and a high-pitched ring.[/spoiler:6f055b6120]
I, too, enjoyed the long shots. It brought a little more realism to the action scenes.
It's not that much of a stretch. When the world is going to hell in a handbasket, there will always be an opportunistic despot drunk on power waiting to take over and make things worse while promising a scared, easily swayed populace that things will get better under their hands.
[spoiler:2b64958ca8]And the thing with the sudden, momentary cease-fire: Easy. In the military, the commanding officer's order might as well come from God. So when the CO says "stop shooting," you stop shooting. And then the soldiers see the woman and her baby and realize why they stopped shooting. Then when the RPG hit the tank, it's possible that the soldiers started shooting again to protect the baby.[/spoiler:2b64958ca8]
[spoiler:306d08892a]Or, you know, to neutralize the threat, save their own asses, etc, since the baby was no longer in their line of fire.[/spoiler:306d08892a]
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
[spoiler:b7471eecfc]Before that point, the soldiers outside had basically been taking potshots at windows where they could see activity. After they see the baby, though, and the rpg is fired at them, they basically let loose on the entire building. My immediate thought was that they were trying to provide heavy cover fire so that they could get the baby out of there.
The only thing I found strange about that part is actually that the soldiers didn't react enough. You'd think they would have dedicated half their troops just for protecting the baby. She's basically the most valuable asset in the entire world at that moment... and they just let two refugees walk off with her, her fate left completely to chance? It doesn't seem very plausible to me.[/spoiler:b7471eecfc]
Oculus: TheBigDookie | XBL: Dook | NNID: BigDookie
They could have just had those soldiers forced away for some other reason, but I guess they just needed to end the movie at that point. No sense stretching that any longer than it had to.[/spoiler:8ad1283b58]
3DS: 2852-6809-9411
And Sid did not see the baby as an opportunity, his reaction basically was "what the fuck is that? hide it!". He saw their situation as wanted people as a financial opportunity. He would have acted like that even without the baby. Plus he had a direct familiarity with them. To the soldiers, they were just strangers.[/spoiler:04ba8c490a]
They only seemed to be other europeans, sure maybe Britain is the last "safe place" in europe, but I doubt it is like total chaos everywhere with all the governments being overthrown and Britain being the last one. It's most likely just propaganda the government is showing their people to show that what they are doing is right and they are needed.
3DS: 2852-6809-9411
[spoiler:ea52c2ab4c]Maybe you missed it but Kee was African, Julianne was American and a great deal of the people in the internment camp were Middle-Eastern Muslims. In the opening sequence you see a brief flash of New York city with a mushroom cloud over it. Clive Owen asks Julianne about her parents and if they were in NYC "when it happened". She says yes and he replies "I'm sorry."[/spoiler:ea52c2ab4c]
So no, it isn't propaganda, the world is going through a lot of shit and only small, isolationist dictatorships have survived, the only example being Great Britain.
[spoiler:85d3fad8c7]Theo spent most of his time fleeing the Fishes, for fuck's sake.[/spoiler:85d3fad8c7]
Immigrants are flooding in and its only a matter of time before the government crumbles to chaos.
I know that in the other parts of the world is tough too, but it seems like the government is trying to make it's people think that this is the last baston of hope, even though there are bombings and lots of touble in britain too. I doubt that it is complete shit in the U.S, Canada, and Russia or other big countries with the governments done and everything is almost destroyed.
3DS: 2852-6809-9411
Lager countries have probably devolved into a more tribal society with poor communications over large areas since there seems to be widespread revolt.