Talk:Children of Men/Temp

=Outline=
 * Current task

Lead

 * Could be between 250-275 words
 * ''Add road film
 * Add theme of hope and The Waste Land
 * "Extended shots" and "handheld camera" are two distinct concepts

Children of Men is an Academy Award-nominated 2006 dystopian thriller film directed by Alfonso Cuarón. It is loosely adapted from P.D. James's 1992 novel The Children of Men and stars Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Michael Caine.(c)

In 2027 UK, Theo Faron (Clive Owen) must help a young woman, an African refugee named Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey), escape Britain's oppressive new immigration laws after discovering that Kee is pregnant with the first child in the world after 18 years of human infertility.

Example 1: Upon its release, the film has been a critical success in the UK and the United States(cn), where it has been nominated for American and British Academy Awards.(c) Critics have noted that the film creates a heightened sense of realism(c) through its use of extended, handheld camera shots seamlessly stitched together(cn).

Example 2: The film has been a critical success in its release in the UK and the United States, where it has been nominated for American and British Academy Awards. Critics have noted that the film creates a heightened sense of realism through its innovative use of extended, handheld camera shots seamlessly stitched together, while retaining a metaphorical tone through the entire film.

Meld: Children of Men is an Academy Award-nominated 2006 dystopian thriller film directed by Alfonso Cuarón. It is loosely adapted from P.D. James's 1992 novel The Children of Men and stars Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Michael Caine.(c)

In 2027 UK, Theo Faron (Clive Owen) must help a young woman, an African refugee named Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey), escape Britain's oppressive new immigration laws after discovering that Kee is pregnant with the first child in the world after 18 years of human infertility.(Romney, 2007) (Loomis, 2007) The duality of hope and hopeless serves as one of the primary thematic elements of the story and ultimately serve as bookends for the film.(cn)

suggest: In 2027 UK, Theo Faron (Clive Owen) must help Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey), the first pregnant woman in the world after 18 years of human [[infertility], escape from those would use her baby for their own purposes (Romney, 2007) (Loomis, 2007) The duality of hope and hopeless serves as one of the primary thematic elements of the story and ultimately serve as bookends for the film, which includes a prayer of peace at the end of the film.(cn)

The film was a critical success upon its release in the UK and the Unites States.(cn) It has been nominated for American and British Academy Awards in the subjects of writing, editing, and most notably cinematography, due to the film's thematic use of extended, handheld camera shots.(cn)

Another idea
Since the lead should (1) summarize the main ideas of the complete article, (2) be interesting and pull the reader into the rest of the article, and (3) be able to stand on its own, I simply added a paragraph to the exisitng Lead (which is pretty good) that hits key themes and critical response —


 * Children of Men is an Academy Award-nominated 2006 science fiction film directed by Alfonso Cuarón, loosely adapted from P.D. James's 1992 novel The Children of Men. The cast includes Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Michael Caine.


 * Set in the dystopian United Kingdom of 2027, two decades of global infertility have left the entire human race with less than a century before extinction, and the resulting societal collapse has led to terrorism, environmental destruction, and millions of refugees. Civil servant Theo Faron (Clive Owen) must help a pregnant West African refugee named Kee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) escape Britain's oppressive new immigration laws and rendezvous with the Human Project.


 * Its release was well-received and critics noted its Christmas weekend opening in the United States as appropriate to its messages of hope, redemption and faith. Children of Men, similar to Cuarón's earlier Y Tu Mamá También (2001), continues his extensive use of present-day social, economic and political issues that rise to the level of characters in their roles as backdrops to road film action. Artistically, the film was recognized for its camera-work, employing startling single-shot action sequences. It garnered important awards and nominations in this area.

This pulls in the road film and hope theme items from the list (camera-work I left out as being secondary to the other items and its inclusion would diffuse the Lead's focus) (although since it received award recognition, I could certainly see including it). It's about 170 words and only three paras., so it's short enough to be inviting and should have an attractive triologic symmetry to it.

&mdash;  Jim Dunning  talk  : 18:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments

 * The single-shot action sequences are essential, and the only primary themes in the lead should be hope and immigration. I would like to see mention of the YouTube video (in the critical reception section below) but I can't find a secondary source. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 23:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd leave redemption and faith in since there are numerous reviews that compare it to the Nativity story. This also gives the themes mention some depth by not limiting it to a single idea. The immigration (and just as important response to terrorism) issue is included in the "present-day social, economic and political issues" statement, although I have no problem with explicit mention (although the focus was on Cuarón's focus on social issues in more than one film rather than the specific issues addressed in CoM). Also, there are additional sources for the camera work.


 * What's your take on the YouTube piece? Why is it important and important enough to be mentioned in the Lead? The number of viewings is impressive, but if we go by that alone I'd hate to see what else is considered significant. The problem with the views numbers is that they're passive with message board type postings. Maybe I'm reading this wrong — are you saying the YouTube reference should be in the critical response section only?


 * &mdash;  Jim Dunning  talk  : 00:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The "redemption and faith" are secondary themes, relegated to spiritual archetypes per Cuaron. Primary themes are hope and immigration according to the director and most sources.  If you have some good sources, add them here if you want to convince me. Keep in mind that some of the material on this temp page was pulled from the main page and was written by other editors.  When I'm arguing for the YouTube piece, I'm representing the editor who wrote it, because that person is not here to defend it; I have no personal interest in it.  However, there were at least three reliable sources that mentioned some kind of internet marketing campaign, and I believe they were referring to YouTube.  That content is interesting, and I would like to see it mentioned in the lead, but I can't find secondary sources for it.  That's about where I've left it. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 03:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Redemption sources


 * "The idea of the world redeemed by a helpless infant is a specifically Christian one, but here it shines out from a landscape that is bitterly stripped of faith." (New Yorker, 2007-01-08) &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 10:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * "The result is a film that functions both as a gripping action pic as well as an intimate, character-driven story of redemption." (Variety, 2006-12-06) &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 04:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yet another idea
This is just a rewording of the second paragraph of the lead, Viriditas suggested I place it here:


 * Set in the dystopian United Kingdom of 2027, two decades of global infertility have left the entire human race with less than a century before extinction, and the resulting societal collapse has led to terrorism, environmental destruction, and millions of refugees. Mankind's Humanity's best hope 1 lies with The Human Project, a group working towards the survival of the species to save the species 2. When a pregnant West African refugee named Kee (Claire-Hope Ashitey) surfaces, civil servant Theo Faron (Clive Owen) is pulled brought into the attempt 3 to transport humanity's mankind's newly found future 3B away from Britain's oppressive immigration laws to an awaiting rendezvous with the Human Project.

Chickenmonkey 11:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC) (edited) Chickenmonkey 11:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments

 * Have you been reading Proust? It still sounds too close to the source.  Just rewrite the entire thing. Make it punchy, less episode of the Madeleine; Like a catchy song. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 10:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It can sound as close to the source as it wants. Sounding close isn't plagiarism. It's barely different from the lead that's in the article right now. Replace "survival of the species" with "saving the species" and "pulled into an attempt" with "forced into an attempt". You're so quick to criticize anything I suggest, yet you can't offer your own suggestion? Why don't you rewrite the lead? If you won't "approve" of anything I suggest. You do it. In my opinion, you're being irrational. Chickenmonkey 11:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Then, let me rephrase what I wrote. You took the same words from the original source.  Rewrite it in your own words. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 11:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologize if it sounds like I'm getting irritated (reading my last comment, it does sound that way), but this would be a much easier process if you would offer suggestions of what it should be rewritten as instead of simply suggesting it be rewritten. If I am looking for you to sign off on it, which I am, then it would go much smoother if you would just write it how you feel it should be written. Chickenmonkey 11:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right, but I'm more interested in what you and Jim have to offer right now. What do you think of his lead in comparison to your own? I think you have a neutral edge, if it's true you haven't seen the book or film. I think Jim has seen it.  Ideally, I would like to see the two of you work together on it. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 11:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I like Jim's lead. I would take his lead and place in the few alterations I've made to the second paragraph (or some version of the alterations I've made). The reason I would do this is because, from what I saw, the problem others had with the previous versions were that saying "Human Project, greatest/best hope for mankind/humanity" read as placing all the hope on the Human Project when all the hope isn't seen as being entirely on the Human Project. Referring to Kee being "the future of humanity" places some importance on her and the baby as well as saying the Human Project is "mankind's/humanity's best hope" places importance on the Human Project. I think it's a reasonable medium between the hope being with Kee and the hope being with the Human Project. Chickenmonkey 12:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As long as the changes reflect the sourced content in the current article, or add additional sources, I suggest you go ahead and make the changes. I already asked Jim to weigh in, but he hasn't responded. We can also change it if it doesn't work.  I have some concerns with an unsourced lead.  Try it in the main article and see what it looks like.  Explain what you are doing in the edit summary.  Good luck. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 12:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments
As for "companion piece to "Y Tu Mamá También," I'm not exactly sure this should appear in the lead section. Arguably, everything Cuarón has made since También has little easter eggs that allude to the film, which was his break-out.  Even Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban has numerous winks to También, but it's not mentioned in the lead.  I think it would be great to expand this in the themes section, but again, not so sure about it being in the lead.  Thoughts? María: ( habla  ~  cosas ) 13:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Great. I'll move it to a theme task. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 13:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Did a little editing. To me, I had to get rid of the "spiritual tone" sentence, because it just does not work. We'll need to add another tidbit relevant to why the film is well received after the long take sentence. Also, for the long take sequence, maybe use the word immersion instead of realism with a useful ref to back it up. Thoughts? --Beanssnaeb 14:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The immersion point is very interesting; I recall someone comparing the film to a FPS. But, the observation about the realism (verite) is a touchstone that appears in many RS.  And, Cuaron has spoken about it at great length.  I've provided at least four or more sources for it on talk, but I haven't moved them over yet.  If you can find them, either on talk or in the archive, please do.  It was in a discussion with Erikster. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 14:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, maybe we can find a reference to cinema verite, that may be most fitting. --Beanssnaeb 14:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not yet convinced that mention of Cuaron's 'Tambien is a fitting area to address the aforementioned Easter Eggs. Hitchcock appeared as an extra in most of his films, but I don't recall any lead where this was mentioned. Perhaps it is better suited to the production area. I'm of two minds on this topic.Arcayne 15:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * agreed. --Beanssnaeb 15:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * We already established this fact. As an aside, your revert, Arcayne, as I mentioned in my edit summary, was somewhat disruptive.  Not only did Beanssnaeb state their reasons for the removal of the "spiritual tone" sentence, but you removed the necessary citation notes.  You also did not explain your revert -- which is what it was -- but instead stated that it was an "improvement" on the lead.  Say what? María: ( habla  ~  cosas ) 15:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Established what as a fact? That it was better suited to the production area? Sorry, must have missed that particular discussion. Perhaps it took place on individual talk pages.
 * Actually, B expressed issues with it. Rather than simply reverting the entire statement, you could have edited it out - which I wouldn't have had a disagreement with, had a sound concensus of agreement been reached. If you don't feel it was better, I can understand that; everyone is entitled to an oponion., However, I might point out that my statements were in keeping with other FA-level leads.
 * Look, I want to create a good article, too. Yes, i removed the lead statement added by Viriditas, and I know you are his pal. Perhaps I feel my statement is better than his. I'll tell you what, Maria - I will place my statement next to his, and we can go from there, working to see which is better.Arcayne 16:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think this is a good idea, throw them side by side and I'll attempt to meld them together if you guys are ok with it. --Beanssnaeb 16:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I am okay with that. I've never been happy about the tail end of my statement about how the metaphor extends through the end of the film. I want to communicate that the director is still working his message during and after the credits, whereas most directors feel their job complete before credits start rolling. I think it would be a disservice to the reader to simply avoid that.Arcayne 16:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, i attempted to normalize them together. I changed your metaphor statement and the other "innovative and realism" statement to "thematic use" of the camera, since much of the film's theme relies on metaphor and immersive realism. now, examples of realism, innovation, and metaphor need to be be properly demonstrated in the theme section and referenced. thoughts? --Beanssnaeb 16:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the melded statement is pretty good, with the exception that I think that a nod to the fact that the movie carries on beyond the last shot of the characters. Without it, most readers perusing simply the summary of the lead won't know that there are thematic components beyond the last scene, lasting to the end. Is there a way to somehow incorporate that difference in the statement? i feel strongly that not noting it in a stronger way detracts fromthe strength of the article.Arcayne 17:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * i gave it another pass, though i fear i may possibly be heading in OR territory. --Beanssnaeb 18:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

That's a better meld. ! I think a bit more attention to the fact that the movie goes on a bit past the fade to black on the boat would be helpful. Let me give it a whirl.Arcayne 18:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I see why you want it in, but it is difficult for me to do without it feeling forced or spoiling that part of the movie for people. go ahead and give it an edit and i'll let you know what i think --Beanssnaeb 18:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Still not 100% in love with my edit there, but I don't think it's so much a spoiler to suggest that there is more to the movie after the credits, which I think is something unexpected. We don't have to necessarily say what that is.Arcayne 18:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I like how the suggested lead is looking. I have issues with the proposed mention of the end of the credits, however. Is there an example of any other notable article (GA or FA) that mentions in its lead the movie lasting "beyond the last shot of the characters"? If there was, I may be able to see why this is so important to the article as a whole. A lot of movies have a small scene or even message at the very end of the credits, but should they all be mentioned in the lead? I'm not saying we should avoid this all together; it's quite interesting. But in the lead? I seriously doubt it. María: ( habla ~  cosas ) 19:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know of any FA film articles that have content beyond the credits (although GA articles have outtakes/bloopers which have been incuded). I did say I wasn't in love with the wording. I don't care what form it takes, but something a bit more concrete needs to be said, because ity is unusual, and therefore noteworthy.Arcayne 19:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thematically, I agree that it is important to the film, but I do disagree as to its inclusion in the lead paragraph. It seems out of place, most probably because a) it is not sourced and b) it has nothing to do with the plot, which is what precedes the statement.  If there is an interview out there somewhere in which the director crows about the thematic importance and how it relates to the closing credits, then I still don't know if it would belong in the lead.  I don't think it lessens the article's quality to keep this mention to the themes section.  María: ( habla  ~  cosas ) 19:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand your pov on this. I am not suggesting that we draw attention to it specifically, but alluding to the fact that there are surprise bits in there might be appropriate. As far as I know, most FA articles don't confine the lead to solely the plot, and most take note of the reception, awards, and noteworthy bits.Arcayne 19:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * But you are attempting to draw attention to it, and quite specifically. The Shantih, the children laughing, etc, are irrelevent to what a lead section should contain.  In case you aren't aware: "The lead section of an article serves as a quick introduction to the film. The very first paragraph should cover the basics, such as the film's release year, alternate titles, genre(s), setting, country (if not the US), stars, and director (and possibly writer in some cases), as well as one or two of the most notable, verifiable facts about the film, such as "At the time of its release, it was the most expensive film ever made". The second paragraph should be a brief look at the film's impact: whether critics liked the film or not (and why), whether it was a commercial success or not, and whether any sequels to or remakes of the film were produced."  Nowhere does it mention unsourced, thematic elements.  The lead needs more verifiable facts, not something that borders on OR.  And this isn't just my POV, this is guideline.  Therefore, I think you should seriously rethink your choice of placement.  That's all I'll say on this matter.  María: ( habla  ~  cosas ) 19:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I recommend Arcayne separate his edits, as he is having difficulty with the concept of collaborative editing. María is an expert on this subject, and she is fluent in the application of Wikipedia policy and guidelines, and her opinion holds great weight.  Arcayne, please do not use this temp page for long, tangential discussions.  Listen to María and follow her sagacious advice.  Her continued  criticism is essential to the success of this article. When María talks, you need to listen, because she is telling you something important.  She is telling you how to improve the article. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 20:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have asked you to not address me again, Viriditas. Have you forgotten so quickly? Please focus, and pay attention. While I have great respoect for Maria, and was discussing (a significant difference between that and disruption) the lead paragraph, your opinion carries zero weight with me You are a disruptive influence here, and I simply wish to avoid interacting with you. We had been discussing, calmly, a way to incorporate lead material. I happen to agree with her viewpoint on Lead statements, and was attempting to discover the best way to proceed. However, there aren't any unsourced statements (which, by the way, are not unusually required in a lead, as evidenced by an overview of FA film articles.
 * I'll repeat it one last time: don't address me or anywhere. I have nothing at all to say to you. For everyone else, my apologies that Viriditas has chosen to vent his spleen (yet again) when we are trying to fine-tune the article. I have asked him to refrain and to disengage with me, but he apparently doesn't want to stop harrassing me.Arcayne 21:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is about collaborative editing and editors need to adress each other about the topic in the appropriate place. The editors on this page have expressed concerns with your tendentious pursuit of original research.  Please stop.  Each editor has something to offer within the framework of policy and guidelines.  This page was started to help develop a cast and now, a lead section.  It is not intended to promote the personal views and theories of individual editors.  &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 22:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I am going to collaborate, Viriditas. I am just not going to collaborate with you. I am not interested in your interpretations or your characterizations. You may have expereince, but your behavior has squandered any chance for your collaboration with me. Move one.Arcayne 04:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Think of the article, not the editors. We are not here to debate opinions, dream of unsourced, original research, and analyze ideas. We are here to write the best possible  article.  Go with the flow and stop swimming aganst the tide.  Write the best article you can, but don't churn out cow paddies and expect other editors to worship them on bended knee. There's a lot to do before the lead is completed.  I hope you will do some research and contribute to the cast and critical reception sections.  You can also help to cut down on chatter by keeping comments as brief as possible and to the point. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 04:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Cast
Clive Owen stars as lead character Theo, the activist turned bureaucrat who escorts Kee to meet the Human Project. He was cast in April 2005 and spent a few weeks collaborating with Cuarón and Sexton about the role of Theo. Impressed by Owen's creative insights into his character and the film in general, Cuarón and Sexton brought Owen on board as a writer.
 * ''Add Danny Huston: Theo's cousin
 * Expand to 800 words; current size ?
 * Expand Owen: 25-50


 * Expand Moore: 25-50

Julianne Moore portrays political activist Julian, the former wife and mother to Theo's deceased child. She was cast in June of 2005.


 * Expand Caine: 25-50

Michael Caine plays Theo's friend Jasper Palmer, a retired editorial cartoonist and neo-hippie. Caine based Jasper on his personal experiences with friend John Lennon. The role of Jasper was a change for Caine as it was the first time he ever portrayed a character who would do things like fart or smoke cannabis. Cuarón explains,  "Once he had the clothes and so on and stepped in front of the mirror to look at himself, his body language started changing. Michael loved it. He believed he was this guy".


 * Expand Ashitey: 50-100
 * Expand Ferris: 25-50
 * Expand Ejiofor: 25

The film also stars relative newcomer Claire-Hope Ashitey as Kee, the pregnant woman whom Theo protects, Pam Ferris as Miriam, Kee's companion and caretaker, and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Luke, the rogue leader of the resistance movement.

Comments
Hey, did a little revamping of this cast page for merging whenever you feel comfortable with it. The Theo gun statement is probably best suited for production or in themes. also, no wikitable for cast should be present if there are paragraph descriptions of the main cast. Frankly, i think wikitable casts look unprofessional, but that's my opinion. --Beanssnaeb 16:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Great work. I support the addition of this version of the cast section to the article and look forward to expanding it. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 10:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought I'd at least add Pam Ferris, since she has a few well-known roles under her belt (one includes HP:PoA with Cuarón), and for lack of anything better to say, I've described Miriam as Kee's "companion and caretaker," since I can't remember if it's mentioned in the script how they met. This may need to be altered, though. María: ( habla ~  cosas ) 15:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Production

 * Cars have different styled fronts and all of them seem to have Sat Nav. They also seem to have the speedometer projected on the windscreen, which already happens in some cars. Otherwise, they are basically the same.(cn)
 * Add secondary source for Freesound

Children of Men is the first major motion picture known to legally use a Creative Commons-licensed sample from Freesound in its production. In the credits, the film attributes user thanvannispen for the use of "male_Thijs_loud_scream.aiff".

Hope

 * Hopelessness: Suicide pills are available with government rations. They are manufactured as Quietus, with the slogan "You choose when." (diff. between book and film, ref. to Hamlet, appearance in prop. film)

Popular culture

 * Compare death of Baby Diego to death of Princess Diana (Hollywood Reporter, 2006-09-05) "...public mourning of Diego...echoing the national hysteria over Princess Diana" (Film Comment, 2007)
 * Unclear who is Prime Minister or monarch. One headline, "Charles Should Be Throned" is seen at one point, but a date is unknown.  Sid sarcastically introduces himself as the King of England.(cn)

Immigration

 * Identity cards have been issued.(cn)
 * Illegal immigrants are kept in cages (sourced) on train stations and the like to prevent them from leaving.(unsourced)

Heroic Journey: Myth and Religion

 * Importance of discovery over destination like the Aenid, Divine Comedy, and Canterbury Tales. (America, 2007-02-05)
 * Wasteland (mythology): Nigel's "spiritual sterility" (Bradshaw) reinforced by 'Crimson King' audio track,(Hollywood Reporter, 2006-09-05) contrasted with the Christian symbolism of Kee as the Virgin Mary (Christian Century, 2007-02-06) whose child will redeem a world "bitterly stripped of faith." (New Yorker, 2007-01-08)
 * Baptism by fire (Covert, Star Tribune): redemption(unsourced)
 * Descent to the underworld (JR). "CoM culminates in an extraordinary, out-and-out descent into hell."  "Nods to Greek mythology are equally heavy handed, with Theo as Orpheus in the underworld, and even a symbolic crossing of an underground river by boat." (Iain Millar)

Children of Men is acknowledged by Cuarón to be a "companion piece" to his 2001 Y tu mamá también: just as the earlier work is a road movie set against the political and social backdrop of Mexico, Children of Men is also a road movie where "the social environment is as important as character." "The story of this movie is just the coat hanger. What's important is the fabric that you're going to hang." However, whereas sex and love are the themes in Y Tu Mama, Children of Men explores the juxtaposition of hope and faith in the face of overwhelming futility and despair.

The film's source, the novel The Children of Men by P. D. James, describes what happens when society is unable to reproduce. The theme of infertility expands as a metaphor for an increasing loss of hope for humanity. The "almost mythical" Human Project, with its goal of creating a new world, is turned into a "metaphor for the possibility of the evolution of the human spirit, the evolution of human understanding." Opening on Christmas Day in the United States, critics compared the characters of Theo and Kee with Joseph and Mary, calling the film a "modern-day Nativity story". James refers to her story as a "Christian fable" while Cuarón describes it as "almost like a look at Christianity": "I didn't want to shy away from the spiritual archetypes," Cuarón told Filmmaker Magazine. "But I wasn't interested in dealing with Dogma." The audience swims through an ocean of Christian symbolism, where British terrorists named "Fishes" protect the rights of fugees.

To highlight these spiritual themes, Cuarón commissioned a 15-minute piece by British composer John Tavener, an Orthodox Christian whose work resonates with the themes of "motherhood, birth, rebirth, and redemption in the eyes of God." Calling his score a "musical and spiritual reaction to Alfonso's film", snippets of Tavener's "Fragments of a Prayer" contain lyrics in Latin, German and Sanskrit sung by a mezzo-soprano. Words like "mata" (mother), "pahi mam" (protect me), "avatara" (saviour), and "alleluia" appear throughout the film.

Although set in the future, Children of Men is never far from the present, a goal of Cuarón's he uses to bring forth the overwhelming atmosphere of despair. He explains that cinematographer Emmanuel 'Chivo' Lubezki "used to say all the time, 'We cannot afford one single frame without a comment on the state of things.'" The film "is a frame-by-frame essay, not on the future but on the past and present, with a dizzying array of references, from Goya to Pink Floyd to Abu Ghraib." Critic Jason Guerrasio describes the film as "a complex meditation on the politics of today" which highlights the debate on immigration. Ethan Alter observes that the film "makes a potent case against the anti-immigrant sentiment" popular in contemporary societies like the United Kingdom and the United States. Alter also notes the visual nature of the film's exposition, which occurs in the form of imagery as opposed to dialogue. For example, the refugee camps in the film were intended to visually invoke Abu Ghraib prison, Guantánamo Bay detainment camp, and The Maze. Other popular images appear, such as a prisoner in a pose resembling the photograph of Satar Jabar in the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandal, and a sign over the refugee camp reading "Homeland Security".

Without dictating how the audience should feel by the end of the film, Cuarón encourages viewers to come to their own conclusions about the sense of hope depicted in the final scenes: "We wanted the end to be a glimpse of a possibility of hope, for the audience to invest their own sense of hope into that ending. So if you're a hopeful person you'll see a lot of hope, and if you're a bleak person you'll see a complete hopelessness at the end."

Comments

 * I support summary style from the main article split into sub-topics. You are doing a complete rewrite that is changing the meaning of the source citations.  For example, the Seattle Times ref does not support the Filmmaker statement above it, in the concluding paragraph.  Its placement in the original was essential to the meaning; the unanswered questions were about infertility, not, as you have rewritten it to indicate, as a reflection on the absence or presence of hope - that's a big change.  That is only one example of the problem.  The best thing to do is to split the article into sub-topic headings.  Then, take the existing text, which has an ordered placement, where each citation follows from the other, and create a summary style, with or without sub-headings. I hope you understand that I like what you have done, but meaning must also be preserved. You wouldn't have had any way of knowing this unless you had read every source cited in detail. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 23:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Children of Men is acknowledged by Cuarón to be a "companion piece"...
 * I like the intro you've written, Jim. It's a little wordy, and I can see a few improvements, but I  think we should go with your first paragraph.  Very well done!  I think it's important, however, to maintain the connection that you removed: the road movie genre is a subset of the heroic journey, a personal quest for self-awareness that takes Theo from "despair to hope". James refers to her story as a "Christian fable", a Christian allegory whose title is derived from Psalm 90(89):3 of the KJV; The director "didn't want to shy away from" the Christian symbolism, deciding to maintainin the spiritual archetypes without the dogma.  This leads into the Christian symbolism and then explains the opening on Christmas Day in the United States, with critics comparing Theo and Kee with Joseph and Mary, calling the film a "modern-day Nativity story".  I think this continuity, these connections, this thread, need to be maintained, and could reasonably be worked into the first paragraph, summary style. Of course, this will be expanded in the split article. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 03:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Critical reception

 * Word count: ?
 * Source performance
 * Add Venice Film Festival awards?
 * Add reliable secondary source for YouTube

The film opened in the United Kingdom on Setember 22, 2006. (Comment:Film Comment describes its UK performance as modest, but we want sourced quantitative assessments instead or in addition to it) In the United States, Children of Men opened in limited release on December 25, 2006, debuting in 16 theatres to qualify for Oscar nominations.

On YouTube, a fan-made video called Why "Children of Men" should be nominated for Best Picture was released. Set to Jarvis Cocker's Running the World, the same song which played during the film's end credits, it featured critical praise for the film and urged the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to nominate it for their highest honor. In the end, the film was not nominated, but the video was watched over 120,000 times and over 430 viewers voted it among their favorite videos on the entire site. 

Comments
This section needs a rewrite. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 10:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ark of Arts

 * Ministry of Arts scene compared to Antonioni's Red Desert (Contra Costa Times, 2006-12-25)

The Ark of Arts is a collection of outstanding art rescued from the chaos in Europe. The collection is run by Theo's cousin Nigel (Danny Huston). Among the collected pieces there are:


 * Michaelangelo's David (America, 2007-02-05) (with a metal prothesis)
 * Picasso's Guernica
 * Bansky's "British Cops Kissing" (Film Comment, 2007)
 * Pink Floyd's inflatable giant pig

Propaganda film

 * Add and format sources
 * Add Quietus commercial
 * Add visual backstory vs. actor exposition quotes
 * Convert to prose or keep cited table?
 * Most (if not all) paper adverts have been replaced by video. Video advertising also appears on the sides of buses and at newspaper stands.(cite needed)
 * According to a newspaper headline that decorates the box where Julian puts Theo, Africa has suffered from nuclear fallout.
 * Trains and buses are installed with televisions displaying what seems to be propaganda. One such advert displayed names of cities and images of destruction before ending, "The World Has Collapsed. Only Britain Soldiers On."

"The world has collapsed," proclaims a public service announcement promoting Britain as the last bastion of civilization. In a world where disasters have destroyed most major countries, "only Britain soldiers on."