In particular the early part, where capitalism of course has to continue but the UK's government uses the crisis as an opportunity to do more fascism. I highly recommend you all pirate Children of Men and give it another watch. I got very different vibes watching it now then I did when it came out.

Some things that stood out to me:

The living conditions of the refugees were way too nice compared to reality's USA, so the conditions of dystopian England would be a lot worse in reality.

England would not be the sole government that survives a major pandemic.

Pretending that England isn't the only country that exists in this world, society would look like this if the pandemic was even slightly more deadly. The movie was way too optimistic on how we'd handle a pandemic, we know now that if people actually went infertile the western world would go full on accelerationist death cult. Not murdering people would make you a total wuss.

The movie takes place seven years from now, and everything looks like a shittier version of right now except that there's still newspaper stands. Even though the newspaper stand exists solely to provide exposition it's a little weird that print media is still going. Maybe it is accurate and Rupert Murdoch is a key player in the post apocalypse hellworld. Idk it just stood out.

Weird that Charlie Hunnam is in this

    • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      The one consistent criticism I've heard levied at Children of Men is that the goal Theo moves towards over the course of the film, smuggling a woman out of the country and onto a waiting boat, is vague and ill-explained. But the vagueness of Theo's goal is not just a piece of lazy plotting, it's crucial to the film's themes. Theo's mission is a metaphor for the challenge facing the first world citizen. Like Theo, we live in a world of inhumanity and injustice right outside our doors, like Theo we retreat from our responsiblities for this in cynicism. We point out that, while things are fucked up, there's no clear way to unfuck them. If the audience is meant to identify with Theo, they must also identify with his dilemma: why stick your neck out and risk your comfort or even your life fighting for a goal that you can't see and have no reason to believe will succeed? Were solutions to world problems readily apparent, there would be no excuse for inaction. In the film, Theo's cynicism is eventually overwhelmed by his awakening humanity and he pushes forward into a dangerous unknown, his only reassurance that he is acting for the right reasons. That is the sentiment that lingers as the film ends: lack of clear alternatives to injustice is not a justification for allowing injustice to continue unopposed. Not if you value humanity at least.