I'd expected so much from "Children of Men" from the reviews and the high rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
One critic called it Samuel Beckett on Red Bull. I love that idea.
I usually love dark, post-apocalyptic thrillers. My wife and I saw it Friday night, and we both found it depressing, gratuitously brutal and predictable. It has one scene worth seeing:
In the middle of bloody urban warfare, a woman carrying the first baby born to humanity in 18 years walks out of a ruined building. As her baby's cry reaches everyone around her, they stop fighting and stare in awe. You knew this scene was coming, but it was still beautiful.
Then, somebody starts shooting again and the combatants apparently forget about the baby. What? I know the film is making political statements about how dumb we are ... but wouldn't protecting that child instantly trump all other missions of the soldiers?
I did love Michael Caine as the pot-smoking hippy.
But if you're looking for a better fall-of-the-British-empire-post-apocalyptic thriller, go for "V for Vendetta."
(INCIDENTALLY, my wife blames me for bad movies, like I wrote them ... she tells me I owe her "Memoirs of a Geisha" for this one. Ouch!)
Also this weekend, I caught "Crank" on DVD. I like Jason Statham
and his "Transporter" films, and I thought the premise of the hitman poisoned with stuff that'll kill him if his heart slows, was interesting.
But the film just made me queasy -- action without the feel-good.
My son tried to get me to watch "Jackass Number 2," and I refused. I did agree to see the opening (running of the bulls in suburbia- funny), the best bit (about an actor set up to act like a terrorist who encounters an angry run-weilding cabbie, who, it turns out, is also an actor- cruel, but kinda funny.) and the closing number (a grand Busby-Berkley-esque musical number to Jerry Herman's "Best of Times"- truly amazing and funny.)