Children of Men

Discuss DVDs and Blu-rays released from Arrow and the films on them.

Moderator: MichaelB

Post Reply
Message
Author
marty

#176 Post by marty » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:44 am

toiletduck! wrote:
marty wrote:I don't have a problem with this directive from Qantas. I am a frequent overseas flyer and the next thing I want is for some bozzo to be wearing 'Bush is the World's Number One Terrorist." Whether you agree with the statement or not is irrelevant. Can you imagine the uproar if one was wearing a T-shirt "All Muslims are terrorists so watch out for them on this flight"? Everyone would just go nuts and be up in arms.
Well then everyone needs to calm the hell down and realize that, while the man in the shirt is probably a moron, they can take smug comfort in the fact that they are not the man in the shirt who everyone thinks is a moron.

I'm not trying to derail this, as it had been riding that line quite adeptly, but marty, you do realize just how very little is separating your post from an all-out condoning of censorship. Don't you? Please say you do.

-Toilet Dcuk
Censorship? I don't think so. This guy is trying to make a point of free speech. Well, isn't he clever? The fact is we cannot go on saying whatever we want to say and then hide behind freedom of speech without facing the consequences. What if he had a T-shirt saying "I love having sex with six year old boys?" This nut would then claim freedom of speech again.

Flying is nerve-wracking enough to some these days that we don't need to be reminded of terrorism by some bozzo. This guy could be a nut job who plans on hijacking the plane or opening the door in mid-flight. Who knows?

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

#177 Post by david hare » Mon Jan 22, 2007 3:20 am

The man is far from a moron - I noticed with considerable interest he's even younger than me (by two years) and has done something In wouldnt have dared to do, but he's been brave enough to do this, and then articulate why he did it to the press.


Like Marty (and undoudtedly many others here) Im also a frequent flyer. And Ive seen my share of idiots carrying violin cases or making drunken jokes about having a firearm etc And they are trans-national. But over many MANY years Ive seen people (men and women) wearing Tees with stuff like "I like snatchin' Kisses and vice versa" or even "Pussy for me" or "Im a giant Dick" or"Muslims eat pig" and theyve never had a problem. Clearly national airlines have a responsibility to passengers and themselves to screen people for risk, but this man was wearing something that happens to be true. And which he believes. Except you are not supposed to say it - because of the word "terrorist" - the newest fear tactic in the Capitlaist armamentarium. Ask any European in conversation who the biggest terrorist nations in the world are and they'll say unhesitatingly the USA and Israel. The rest follow (although they always forget Pakistan and Syria for some obscure reason.)

It's Qantas RESPONSE to this guy that is the problem - he was treated like a criminal and then quietly told to "behave" while they ran for media cover. This is the behavior of a fascist country and its corporate operatives (And just remember fellow OZes it's about to be half owned by fucking Macqurie bank who now own all of fucking Sydney. Another fabulous wealth transfer. All that harbor to sell and none of it left after the planet dries up.)

I have seen a lot of shit in my life since I was born in 1949. This one makes me angrier than usual. I can understand all the dynamics and all the rest of it, but what really troubles me is responses from people like Marty and Toilet (indeed) who think the way Qantas managed this was ok. It isnt OK, it reeks of fascism. And it's not confined to Australia. And YOU BOTH rant on in this space about fabbo Euroepan and Asian movies about freedom and individual liberty!!!! Spare me.

Apply some analysis to this event, and use some intelligence and discernment. If I thought it was something you apply to mere film Id think twice about not respecting your opinions.

EDIT: Apologies to Toilet _ i comletely misread his post.
Last edited by Anonymous on Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

marty

#178 Post by marty » Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:17 am

davidhare, I take your point but why are you and most of western media so focused on Muslim deaths and not deaths of any Jews in Israel. I remember during the recent Lebanon war that in one instance 12 Muslims were killed but at the same time 8 Jewish people were also killed but strangely enough this never made the news.

If one looks back at history and the excellent account of Middle Eastern history is Bernard Lewis' "From Babel to Dragoman", the Jewish people have just as much right as the Palestinian to that land in Israel yet we often hear Muslims bleat how the Jews "stole" their land. No, they didn't. Most of the new state of Israel back in 1948 when Israel was founded, the land was very barren and largely uninhabitable although 200,000 Palestinian had to make way for the incoming Jews (but this is small amount when considering how many actually arrived). The Jews worked hard in developing the land to make it their home and many Muslims were envious of them developing so many riches and westernising the land which so often is against their own religion, beliefs and values. This is never portrayed in western media. The Jews are made out as evil as Satan (no, I am not Jewish!).

During the recent Lebanon war, there was hardly any mention in the local media about how Hezbollah manipulated the media for their benefit. They also fired their missiled into Israel from heavily populated areas knowing full well that Israel will fire back and thus killing innocent civilians. There was one instance where a young girl died in a local hospital from an accident not related to any attack and several members of Hezbollan took her lifeless body from the hospital into the war zone where a man was seen carrying her body. Of course, the western media jumped all over this thinking she died in the nearby bomb blast. She never did but Hezbollah received heaps of sympathy. This story was corrected by a Lebanese journalist who knew the true story. Yet, Israel is being portrayed as the evil state in western media.

I am often amazed how few deaths of Jews are portrayed in western media as if a Jewish life is considered not as worthy as a Muslim one.

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

#179 Post by david hare » Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:21 am

Marty this whol discussion is entirely a propos of the Cuaron.

Lets take it elsewhere.

marty

#180 Post by marty » Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:23 am

davidhare wrote:Marty this whol discussion is entirely a propos of the Cuaron.

Lets take it elsewhere.
I agree.

User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#181 Post by Antoine Doinel » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:17 pm

Finally saw, Children Of Men tonight and liked it very much. I'm not sure why people are saying the ending of the film is "Spielbergian". It offers a faint ray of hope, without any clear answers, in a film that is otherwise relentlessly grim and more often than not, breathtakingly involving.

However, by the time the film wrapped and I saw the five screenwriter credits pop up I couldn't help but feel the film would actually benefit from being twenty or thirty minutes longer. Cuaron and his team created such a palpable universe for their characters I wanted to know more about the refugee camps, the social system in Britain etc etc. There was such a great opportunity to create a larger canvas to paint the story on.

As for the film's politics, they are broadly applied but not with any definite statement. Yes, there are references to Abu Gharib but that's about all I took from it. Otherwise it's a unique idea, executed with some panache by Cuaron. Masterpiece? No. Worthy of award nominations? Maybe for cinematography. But I feel a director's cut might reveal an even stronger picture down the road.

User avatar
Michael
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:09 pm

#182 Post by Michael » Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:49 am

Finally saw it last night. There's not much I can add to what Antoine Doinel wrote in the previous post. He nailed every thing I thought and felt about Children of Men. It's really breathtaking to look at - the astounding cinematography capturing the beautifully grim atmosphere and everything. That was more than enough for me. An exquisitely made film that is hundred times better than any of the Best Pic nominees such as Babel and Little Miss Sunshine...that's for sure. And it's also GREAT seeing Julianne Moore being back in a film of that caliber.

User avatar
jorencain
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:45 am

#183 Post by jorencain » Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:58 pm

Michael wrote:And it's also GREAT seeing Julianne Moore being back in a film of that caliber.
I suppose, but she really seemed like a weak link to me. I LOVED this movie, but every scene she was in felt awkward and forced. Very strange. And I usually have no problem with her.

User avatar
Michael
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:09 pm

#184 Post by Michael » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:09 pm

I know what you mean, jorencain. Not the same as her stunning work with Todd Haynes, PT Anderson and Robert Altman and so forth. But lets hope she's back to choosing better directors.

User avatar
dadaistnun
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:31 am

#185 Post by dadaistnun » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:18 pm

Michael wrote:I know what you mean, jorencain. Not the same as her stunning work with Todd Haynes, PT Anderson and Robert Altman and so forth. But lets hope she's back to choosing better directors.
She's doing I'm Not There for Haynes and Savage Grace for Tom Kalin, his first feature since Swoon.

User avatar
Michael
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:09 pm

#186 Post by Michael » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:25 pm

She's doing I'm Not There for Haynes and Savage Grace for Tom Kalin, his first feature since Swoon.
Her working with Haynes again is very exciting. Never seen Swoon so I'm not familiar with Kalin.

User avatar
dadaistnun
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:31 am

#187 Post by dadaistnun » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:40 pm

I haven't seen Swoon since it came out (1992), but I recall liking it a lot. The only other thing of Kalin's I've seen is a short called Some of Them Are Old which is footage (stills?) of his friends who died of AIDS. The soundtrack is the Eno song of the same name.

User avatar
Jean-Luc Garbo
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
Contact:

#188 Post by Jean-Luc Garbo » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:09 pm

Where's Kalin been since Swoon?

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

#189 Post by zedz » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:44 pm

dadaistnun wrote:I haven't seen Swoon since it came out (1992), but I recall liking it a lot. The only other thing of Kalin's I've seen is a short called Some of Them Are Old which is footage (stills?) of his friends who died of AIDS. The soundtrack is the Eno song of the same name.
He must have quite an Eno fixation - I've seen another couple of (pre-Swoon, I think) shorts of his with soundtracks provided by Warm Jets / Tiger Mountain songs. One was 'Third Uncle', the other I can't recall.

EDIT: Looks like the films I saw were Nomads (1993, accompanied by "Third Uncle") and Darling Child (1993, accompanied by "Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy)"). Was the "Some of Them Are Old" film Finally Destroy Us?
Lux Catalogue wrote:TOM KALIN
FINALLY DESTROY US

USA, 1991, 4 mins, video
TOM KALIN's work focuses on the portrayal of gay sexuality both in the age of AIDS and historically. His tapes are characterised by beautiful sampled images drawn from a variety of film and video sources.
'These meetings, these partings, finally destroy us.' The sense of loss of these words by Virginia Woolf is the theme around which this poetic work is conceived. Couples kissing, people walking, random faces and dreamlike film of high divers live in a silent world of old and new footage. There is an unselfconsciousness about the people we see which creates a sense of distance and pathos.
Both of the shorts I saw were fine landscape films. Swoon is a landmark of the New Queer Cinema - is it available in a decent DVD edition?

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

#190 Post by david hare » Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:26 pm

I havent seen Swoon since a prem screening run in NYC back in 1992. It came during a great time for gay themed movies, like Jenny Livingstone's Paris is Burning and Todd's Poison.

Not sure if it ever knocked out the usual GLFF circuits here in Oz but it was perhaps a little too formally sophisticated for those audiences I think. People didn't seem to "get" the deliberate insertions of anachronisms like modern telephones and performance breakaways to the camera or in abstract staging into a supposedly period setting. Admittedly only one viewing for me but I was not entirely convinced by its discourse between the Leopold/Lobe material, gay desire and contemporary gay life (in 1991) which was then dominated by AIDS.

There's never been a DVD as far as I know, nor indeed one for the other two pictures mentioned, although they re-released Paris late last year theatrically.

marty

#191 Post by marty » Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:09 pm

davidhare wrote: There's never been a DVD as far as I know, nor indeed one for the other two pictures mentioned, although they re-released Paris late last year theatrically.
Accent have had Swoon and Todd Haynes' films Poison and his short Dottie Gets Spanked in their coming soon DVD section for a whilenow.

criterionsnob
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:23 am
Location: Canada

#192 Post by criterionsnob » Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:35 pm

Can we start a Tom Kalin or Swoon thread?

There is a DVD in R1 from Strand Releasing and it looks great.

User avatar
dadaistnun
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:31 am

#193 Post by dadaistnun » Thu Feb 08, 2007 1:44 pm

Poison was released in region 1 by Fox Lorber with a commentary by Haynes, Vachon, and Lyons. It appears to be out of print, though.

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

#194 Post by miless » Thu Feb 08, 2007 4:00 pm

dadaistnun wrote:Poison was released in region 1 by Fox Lorber with a commentary by Haynes, Vachon, and Lyons. It appears to be out of print, though.
aren't all Fox Lorber titles out of print (they went belly-up a few years ago)... Criterion has scooped up a handful of FL titles including Clean, Shaven, Jules & Jim, 400 Blows, Ran, Yi Yi, Shoot The Piano Player... I know that there are others, butI cannot think of them right now... (I am also really hoping that Criterion got Nostalghia from FL, because just what we need in R1 is another shitty transfer of a Tarkovsky film)

User avatar
dadaistnun
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:31 am

#195 Post by dadaistnun » Thu Feb 08, 2007 4:17 pm

miless wrote:aren't all Fox Lorber titles out of print (they went belly-up a few years ago)... Criterion has scooped up a handful of FL titles including Clean, Shaven, Jules & Jim, 400 Blows, Ran, Yi Yi, Shoot The Piano Player... I know that there are others, butI cannot think of them right now... (I am also really hoping that Criterion got Nostalghia from FL, because just what we need in R1 is another shitty transfer of a Tarkovsky film)
Oh, yeah. Duh. I'd love for Criterion to pick this up (any Haynes for that matter). Zeitgeist still has the theatrical rights as far as I can tell/

Cinesimilitude
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:43 am

#196 Post by Cinesimilitude » Sun Feb 11, 2007 9:04 pm

I caught this last night, and I don't think I can fully comprehend how much I loved it. It's possible that this film had me more wrapped up in the plight of a few characters than any other film I've seen. Maybe it was my sleep deprivation, but I was biting my nails all the way through the film, cause after the major character was killed, it just set a tone of "you don't have a damn clue what's going to happen here". I really wish someone could see tis movie without seeing the trailer, as I'd love to watch their reaction. the single Image I had of Owen in the boat going through the grate was the one thing that detracted from my experience. I agree that the film would benefit with an extra 30 minutes or so, as long as the ending remains unchanged. More of Theo's activist history and overall backstory would have greatly added to the emotional impact of the film. The scene in which the 2 sides stop fighting (those of you who've seen it know which part I am talking about) Is my favorite moment in the film, and probably among my top 10 moments of films made this millenium. Can't wait for the HD-DVD of this one.

User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#197 Post by Antoine Doinel » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:52 pm

A British company called Foreign Company created all the fake ads and billboards in the film. Here's a trailer featuring a bunch of the ads and products they created for the film. Pretty cool stuff.

filmnoir1
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:36 pm

#198 Post by filmnoir1 » Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:21 pm

I just picked up the region 1 release of this film today. The special features are quite good. There is a making of featurette about the use of long takes, especially the sequence in the car. Also there is an interesting short commentary by Slavoj Zizek on the film. This is a film that is going to generate interest from scholars as well as average viewers for some time to come.

User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

#199 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Sun Jun 17, 2007 2:30 am

flyonthewall2983 wrote:I gotta admit, I wasn't really impressed. When the legend "from the director of Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire" or whatever showed up, all bets were off for me to take this seriously.
I don't think I've ever been so wrong in my fucking life. It's brilliant.

User avatar
lord_clyde
No. 33 Killer
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Ogden, UT

#200 Post by lord_clyde » Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:38 am

flyonthewall2983 wrote:
flyonthewall2983 wrote:I gotta admit, I wasn't really impressed. When the legend "from the director of Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire" or whatever showed up, all bets were off for me to take this seriously.
I don't think I've ever been so wrong in my fucking life. It's brilliant.
Isn't it though? Imagine my surprise when the credits rolled and there were eight names credited to the screenplay.

Post Reply