The main issue with the Children of Men was the fact that almost all of the women were infertile. My issue with this is that there are other ways of having children, like a test tube baby. If this film follows real life events until 2006 then test tube babies would exist. The first test tube baby was born in 1978 so why couldn’t the world look to this as a solution? It does not require women to carry the baby, all it requires is egg and sperm. So if test tube babies existed during and before the movie takes place then why is there so much widespread disaster? Yes, there would still be struggles but the entire world would still be able to function with a smaller population, like it did in the past. If anything this would allow for population control, which may be a good thing depending upon your belief of the human race. Either way the main plot of the movie can be completely negated by the existence of test tube babies. Plus there are egg and sperm banks so the population could still continue for the 18 years of infertility.

Like many movies, the music in Children of Men had a direct correlation to what was going on in the scene. What I thought was interesting was the music that played every time Kee’s baby was the focus of the scene. The music for these scenes reminded me of church hymns. These hymns playing in the background only added to the biblical aspect of Kee and her baby. It made them seem more important, and god like, then they were already portrayed. It especially helped almost exagerate the scene where the fugitives and the army stopped fighting in order to watch them pass through to safety. This music put an additional emphasis on the miracle of Kee’s baby, and added an extra sense of praise for both of them.

After watching the scene in the film where Jasper is telling the story of Theo’s son Dillon by relating his horrible outcome to the relationship between faith and chance, I couldn’t help but think about what the outcome would be if you applied the same concept to Baby Diego and Kee’s baby. Being the youngest person alive, the last one to be born is nothing but chance. Civilians had Baby Diego as their closest memory of what it is like to see or have a baby in that world. The chance that another baby might come along was slim, but people still had faith in that chance. Once Diego was gone, the faith was gone, until another chance at fertility showed itself again through Kee. If you think about it, there are three prevalent lives within the film where the relationship between faith and chance are very active. Dillion’s, Baby Diego’s, and now Kee’s baby. Third time is a charm.

I wanted to discuss a point that was not brought up in class concerning the first scene in Apocalypse Now.  I think it is important in analyzing film to be conscious of the identity of the camera. I always enjoy asking myself, what role does the director wish the viewer to play in the movie? The camera angle, shot length, composition, and other aspects is the lens through which a viewing audience is allowed to interpret a scene. Often for point of view scenes or shots featuring a character delivering a monologue, it is effective for the viewer to think of the camera as another person, as you are indeed the listener of the monologue. In the hotel room scene, specifically when Captain Willard (Martin Sheen) is sitting on a chair, talking about his life.  I interpreted the camera choices made here as the directors way of maintaining Willard’s abstraction from reality, but in a way that makes it seem as though he is conversing with someone. Notice his active listening body language and forward facing posture, the way he is looking up as well, as if he is giving his full attention to the person he is talking to (the viewer).

After re-watching the scene in which Julian is shot (the scene in which there are no cuts, only one continuos shot), I came across an an interesting interview  of Cuaron. In the interview, he explains how the scene came down to the last possible take and that the blood splatter on the camera was actually an accident. What I find amazing is that with so many opportunities for a mistake to ruin the take, in the end it actually helped out the scene and made it more visually entertaining.  http://io9.com/this-iconic-scene-from-children-of-men-was-actually-an-840211730

A slightly different view of the plethora of animals in Children of Men was that humanity had degenerated to the point that people treated the killing of others as no more than slaughtering an animal. There was also the juxtaposition of humans in cages with animals running around on the streets. The value of human and animal life is obviously skewed. There is almost a sense that since humans can no longer reproduce they don’t need another human companion and a pet is superior.

After watching and analyzing the opening scene of Apocalypse Now, I  researched facts online about the movie and came across a documentary that was actually made about the film called Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker’s Apocalypse. What I found extremely interesting was that in the opening scene, the actor actually hits his hand in the mirror and bleeds from it. The director, Francis Coppola was very particular on making the movie feel and be as real as possible. Other examples include when filming in the jungle the crew came across many obstacles when filming scenes and becoming sick.

Please treat this site as an extension of our classroom community. Post intelligently, frequently and with a respect for civil discourse.