thoughts on...children of men

all the hype has finally come to fruition for me, and i have seen children of men. i'm not going to do a full "review" of the movie, but i wanted to point out something i found interesting when talking to people about the film. the main comment i heard was, "oh man, the cinematography was amazing!". and so i thought i was going to walk into an artfully composed, very precise visually constructed film. this was definitely not the case for children of men, in my opinion. but let us distinguish the two different facets of cinematography. in fact, these two facets would probably be applicable to each individual aspect of the filmmaking process. they would be the technical ability of the person(s) and their creative/artistic execution. speaking specifically about children of men, i would argue that the cinematography relied HEAVILY on the technical ability to create the amazing images and shots you see in the film. achieving focus, choreographing takes lasting upwards of 6 minutes, etc., are all things that take much technical skill. the argument could obviously be made that to even dream up these sequences requires creative/artistic execution...and i understand this. but what i'm trying to say is that there seemed to be large portions throughout the film with little emphasis on shot composition. director alfonso cuaron even says on the DVD supplements that the whole idea for the film was to feel like you were following the characters with a DV camcorder. i don't know if you've seen many home movies lately, but it's usually turn it on, hit record, and try to keep your main subject in the middle of the frame. again, this is not a knock on the film, it was an obvious aesthetic choice. much of the reason the film "looks so cool" isn't because of intricately framed shots, it's because the art direction is AMAZING, the locations compelling, and the color correction tasteful and appropriate. on the opposite end of the argument, there are some amazing shots that, even though handheld, are clearly framed by an artist who is painting with his camera.

i've rambled, but i think it's important to talk about the aspects of filmmaking intelligently and intricately. let's not make blanket statements about aspects of films based on a visual gut reaction. that being said, i enjoyed the film and it made me think, which i appreciate. i'd like to watch it again to get more out of it.