children of men

just watched this one last night. it was good, but im not entirely sure what all the hype was about? i remember when this one first came out in the theater and all the critics were clamoring and saying how amazing it was, but i guess i just dont see it. dont get me wrong, i thought it was good, but thats about it.

the concept was quite interesting: the idea that there hasnt been a child born anywhere in the world for almost twenty years is a great premise. then, miraculously they find a woman who is pregnant, and they must keep here away from the government for some reason. this is the part where the story falls apart, i think. the basic setup is filled with great conflicts and studies of human nature in the face of realizing the end of our species is in site. but... for some reason the story seems to focus more on immigration and the legalization of drugs. what? where does that fit in? you know, im not sure. it seems like there is an opportunity missed here. the story is too sidetracked to really deal with the powerful impact this situation would have on a society, let alone its individuals.

that being said, the cinematography and camera moves are truly something to behold. some directors like quick editing and split second cuts in their films, while others like to have long takes that create a mood. well, this movie takes the idea of a long take to the extreme. there are many times where the camera will continue rolling, uncut, for three or four minutes. sure, thats not groundbreaking or anything, until you realize this: all the long shots take place during the action sequences! there are hundreds of extras, tons of explosions and effects, along with the main actors who must all do their job perfectly, or else the whole long and expensive shot would have to be redone. talk about pressure!

the movie itself was kind of a miss in my opinion, but its almost worth watching for the uncut action scenes alone.