[QUOTE=Route1;18508990][SIZE="7"][B][SIZE="6"]


[COLOR="Blue"][[COLOR="Cyan"]///[/COLOR]///////][/COLOR][/SIZE][/B][/SIZE][/QUOTE]

why so unchill????

idk the chillax-o-meter is mysterious

[QUOTE=Route1;18509005]nm bwo in a bit of a food coma urself?[/QUOTE]

just lotioned myself up real thorough-like

bored as fuck

i want to play street fighter now. if i get frustrated it's a good way to take it out by beating the shit out of someone with style.

prob gonna play some ff5 though cause i don't have street fighter right now : (.

ff5 is basically a fighter though because the sprites attack eahc other

need to start livin life just realized im gonna die probably soon

fuck dudes.

ff5 is really fucking complicated. you have to switch jobs a lot and mix the abilities together. it's not one of the better ones.

i'm sitting by my pool smoking some cigs and eating bananas

been playing 360

chillin

havent done much today

anyone here like the movie children of men?

if so, u wanna read my essay on it and tell me how much it sucks?

juts got home
hung out with abunch of ppl, drank some IDIOT JUICE

wait you went outside

[QUOTE=rasputin;18509045]anyone here like the movie children of men?

if so, u wanna read my essay on it and tell me how much it sucks?[/QUOTE]

idk maybe

[QUOTE=12XU;18509053]wait you went outside[/QUOTE]

is that supposed 2 b surprising :confused:

[QUOTE=Jackie Gleason;18509046]juts got home
hung out with abunch of ppl, drank some IDIOT JUICE[/QUOTE]

lol negro leanin' on that juice



he puttin' tha' team on the back do'

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/FYSjf.png[/IMG]

had this

My friend is obsessed with that brand. I think I've only had one kind of theirs a long long time ago.

rogue is alright, haven't been blow away by their stuff but it's good

it was pretty decent

tasted their chipotle ale too

I am a recent convert to Dogfish head.

friend that had the beer said hes been makin his own
told him to call it redbeard and use me 4 the label :smash:

I'd buy it.

[QUOTE=Deth;18509056]idk maybe[/QUOTE]

gay-be

come at me bro break yo glasses bro

Jason puttin' dey asses on tha' back doe'

so u sold out

[QUOTE=Deth;18509082]come at me bro break yo glasses bro[/QUOTE]

is cool i can [I]take them off[/I]

ill just post the essay here



Utopian and Dystopian Realities in Cuaron’s Children of Men


One of the most powerful methods that director Alfonso Cuaron uses in his film Children of Men is the way in which the viewer is immediately thrust into a relatable world, one which while being recognisable, is steeped in dystopian stagnation and societal decay. Audiences are able to see possible ‘truths’ in this future world because the film acknowledges already existing tensions and magnifies them to the point of civilisation’s collapse. This is what makes Children of Men, as a dystopian fantasy, so effective; its overarching themes and barrage of references actually make an impact on the viewer, rather than transporting him to an imaginary world which he will leave as soon as the film ends. Having seen the film several years ago, its conceptual depth never really was apparent, but since viewing it again with a more scrupulous mindset the film’s profundity in the context of its utopian/dystopian themes became alarmingly clear. What this paper will articulate is the full extent of these themes – a myriad of elements contribute to the ideals of both utopia and dystopia, existing both in the foreground and on a conceptual level. First, an analysis will be made on the ‘geographical’ utopia/dystopias present in the film, such as the present day London, the Bexhill refugee camp and Jasper’s (Michael Caine) home in the woods. Secondly, the conceptual utopia/dystopias will be examined, more specifically the biblical allusions the film makes. Finally, a discussion will be made on how these various elements of utopia and dystopia portrayed in the film intertwine with the actual concept of utopia/dystopia – for example, its non-existence – and how this then ties in with the ambiguous ending to the film. What this paper will attempt to show through its articulation of utopian and dystopian concepts is that the film cleverly remains ambivalent throughout its stark portrayal of dystopia. It hints at various utopias but does not indulge in fanciful political commentary – using recognisable features to draw us into its concept, the film merely comments on how utopia and dystopia exist at every facet of life, all while still being an unreachable element of fantasy.

The very first thing one will notice about the film is that it is set in a not too distant future, one which encapsulates realistic notions of a ‘dystopia’ through its setting of a familiar looking London and not so alien technology. Rjurik Davidson puts it plainly when he states ‘the world of the film is unimaginable without our current world’ (Davidson, p. 129), pointing out that what we see Clive Owen’s character Theo running around in is not so unbelievable a future. In the years between now and 2027 when Children of Men is set, unexplained catastrophes have occurred, leaving the world in political turmoil with rampant terrorism and collapsed societies. This has caused an enormous refugee problem which, for the still standing state of Britain, has resulted in an unending torrent of ‘fugees’.

The whole setting is constructed in such a way as to defer onto the viewer the notion that this is a possible future – the awful things we see in the film are mere extensions of the political and social debates of today. Samuel Adago puts is succinctly when he says ‘thus, while Children of Men takes place in the near future, its liberal borrowing from contemporary social and political themes and iconography implies that the dystopian future is now’ (Adago, p. 215). Moreover, the film brings an element of sci-fi into the mix with the plot element of global infertility. As Slavoj Zizek also puts forward in his commentary of the film, this does not necessarily add to the film’s dystopian context, but it certainly makes the situation grimmer for those who’ve survived.

From the outset, all of the aforementioned elements construct what is clearly a dystopia, a world which should be avoided. However, the film retains a sense of ambiguity surrounding its setting – we never find out how everything came to be like this, and we can never really tell who is propagating the conflict. In the opening seconds of the film, we witness a terrorist attack in which many people clearly die. We later find out that terrorism is rampant, but the group in question, the Fishes, claim not to be behind the attacks. This sets up a rather subtle barrier between the elements of utopia and dystopia – we have a clearly broken world, one in which small groups resist the state with their own utopian aims, but with the same logic we have the state resisting these small resurgence groups with their utopian aims. This creates a rather interesting dichotomy within this general setting of ‘dystopia’, with these two conflicting forces making things worse with their preconceived notions of ‘utopia’. With this in mind, one can realise that Children of Men handles the subtleties of a true dystopia wonderfully – there is no single antagonist; the entire world, including everybody in it, is the antagonist. Furthermore, everyone’s conception of utopia differs, and the film expresses this firmly through Theo’s cynicism and mistrust of those around him.

While the world within the film is portrayed to be dystopian, we encounter brief snatches of other geographical areas that allow for a deeper insight into this portrayal – namely, the Bexhill refugee camp and the home of Theo’s friend Jasper. The Bexhill camp, into which the protagonists sneak with the aid of Sid, ‘a human representative of fascist system’ (Schwartzman, p. 4), adds an interesting element to the film. The camp has become a makeshift and utterly derelict city, in which people from every corner of the globe have been locked away. While the simple idea of refugee camps may seem familiar to viewers, particularly due to the blunt similarities Cuaron draws between real events such as the Abu Ghraib torture debacle as well as visual likeness to media covered warzones such as Iraq or Palestine, this constructed one seems to be one step farther away from reality, but only just a single step. The whole Bexhill scene is startling to the viewer, but in many ways still relatable.

While it would by any means be considered dystopian, one thing of note is that a level of humanity exists in the camp that is not really seen beyond it. The people that Theo interacts with, such as the people he works with, or his rich cousin working in the ministry, seem to be either emotionally destitute at the world around them or simply emotionally barren. The refugees, however, cling to life and still have a passionate drive in them towards a better future. We can make this assumption through their readiness to revolt. Their idealism is in stark contrast to their habitat, one which makes the Bexhill location somewhat ambivalent – it seems to be decaying mass of impoverishment but authentic kindness and humanity exists more there than on the outside. This is, again, a clever statement of ambivalence in utopianism on the film’s behalf.

Jasper’s house in the woods where he grows marijuana and looks after his invalid wife can also be construed as utopian – Theo goes there to escape from the harsh realities of his world, and to the viewer it certainly is an escape. Jasper is his closest friend, and together they wind down, smoke Jasper’s crop and make jokes about the government. It is perhaps the only location in the film that we encounter in its unspoiled state, but of course the unyielding dystopia of the outside manages to worm its way into this place too.

While the film’s themes of utopia and dystopia are clearly discernable from the various places represented in it, similar themes from a conceptual standpoint need a little further analysis to be properly understood. One of the most standout features of Children of Men is the almost tongue-in-cheek way it throws references around. One of the most relevant of these references is the film’s cinematic portrayal of the London that T.S. Eliot describes in his classic poem, The Wasteland. Amago writes ‘Theo, much like the sullen individuals who inhabit Eliot’s postapocalyptic cityscape, goes through life not searching for meaning but hiding from the world and awaiting his inevitable death. The barren urban landscape of Cuarón’s London and the existential malaise of his characters generally reflects the atmosphere of Eliot’s London and the shadowy characters who inhabit it’ (Amago, p. 217). In fact, the viewer can draw many thematic parallels between the two literary sources, many of which are highlighted in Amago’s article. What is perhaps most relevant to this paper is the parallels we see between The Wasteland’s critique of modernism’s utopia and the disjointed and highly paradoxical utopia which Children of Men is examining – both are acerbic in their tone and, while emotionally affecting the reader/viewer, remain as ambivalent as the concept of utopia itself.

To add to the film’s repertoire of references, George Orwell’s 1984 obviously plays a big role in Children of Men’s imagery. Of course, these days anything even slightly dystopian in the context of an authoritarian state draws some influence from Orwell’s classic book, but Cuaron’s vision of London in such a circumstance does the term ‘Orwellian’ justice. Even more amusing is the triangular system of references that the film conjures – the scene where Theo asks his cousin for the transit papers shows a large inflatable pig floating in the sky above a grimy industrial park. This is a recreation of the cover of Pink Floyd’s Animals, which itself is a conceptual album of an Orwellian nature. So in essence, we have a film referencing an album which references a book which is referenced by the film, or at least something along those lines.

While The Wasteland and 1984 play a pivotal role in the formulation of the dystopian world that we see in Children of Men, perhaps the most consistently referenced piece of literature seems to be the Bible. Some of these references are blunt and obvious while others are more subtle, but it’s clear that many of the film’s thematic allusions and plot elements revolve around a reworking of the biblical narrative. Sarah Schwartzman’s article ‘Children of Men and a Plural Messianism’ provides an excellent analysis of these religious themes, themes such as the roles of the main characters and the sequence of events. How this is relevant to the concept of utopianism is in the way the film projects the collapse of civilisation and its subsequent rebirth with these biblical references as a stalwart foundation. Religion, particularly those that are Abrahamic, is naturally concerned with utopianism, and promotes its ideals in one way or another – concepts such as Paradise and Heaven are heavily utopian, and feature prominently in the minds of anyone practicing these faiths.

Whether or not Children of Men is making a specific comment on religion, or the religious idea of utopia, is hard to say. Schwartzman states that ‘the film relies on Christian theological symbols to propose a new kind of messianism -- one in which many messiahs will collectively restore human sacrality and fertility by dismantling rigid systems of social control. By envisioning the apocalyptic world as one that dehumanizes outsiders, Children of Men is able to merge religious messianic motifs with a cultural critique of political borders and ideologies of exclusion’ (Schwartzman, p. 1). When taking heed of this perspective, it seems possible that Cuaron’s film is deconstructing the idea of religious utopia and bringing it ‘down to earth’, or reinvigorating it with a humanly essence. Schwartzman’s article goes through a vast number of symbols and allusions to the biblical narrative and it’s perhaps not appropriate to relist them all here, but the very obvious can at least be elaborated upon. The role of Kee as the Virgin Mother is articulated in the article, as well as Theo’s position as not only Joseph, the non-biological ‘father’ of the child (more importantly, the child that will save humanity), but also as the Messiah, sacrificing himself so that he may be reborn to save the world. This latter perspective is supported by Kee’s decision to name her daughter Dylan, after Theo’s deceased son. In this way, Theo’s legacy lives on. Schwartzman further adds the character of Julian (Julianne Moore) to the list of ‘messiahs’ in keeping with her idea of plural messianism, stating that Julian’s role as a mirror ‘signifying both her heightened position in the cause for restoring humanity, and perhaps also signifying her ability to reflect or illuminate others' abilities to be part of the movement’. With her death, Julian ‘mirrors’ her messianism onto Theo, who will take it to the end.

Due to its variance of interpretation, this idea of messianism may not be entirely digestible by all viewers, least of all its connection to utopianism that I’m making. As mentioned before, it deconstructs its religious themes within the context of this modern dystopia, recreating this age-old narrative with a different utopia – not utopia in Heaven, but an ambiguous and always mysterious utopia here on Earth. Schwartzman seems to be the only one in the literature that follows this line of thought – for example, Michael Rowin writes in his review of the film that ‘Cuaron recuperates the missing dimension of epic fantasy by infusing Children of Men with unmistakable mythological overtones’ (Rowin, p. 2) and goes on to debase the film’s messianic elements as irrelevant to its political and cultural overtones. This is merely based on varying interpretations of the film, as its torrent of references and ambivalent stance towards certain topics can definitely lead to different perspectives.

There is no denying that both utopia and dystopia play significant roles in Children of Men. This concept is central to its theme, but interestingly – as I hope I’ve outlined in this essay – it remains neutral and unbiased in its portrayal. We know that this dystopian London is an awful place, we know that the state is authoritarian and for all purposes an evil entity, but the film retains a sense of ambiguity around these topics, allowing the viewer to take whichever position tickles their fancy. Better yet, the film creates its dystopian setting with elements that are from our own world, such as references to ecological issues and political issues (Abu Ghraib comes to mind), but it does not make any specific comment about these issues – they are just part of this dystopian world which surely awaits us if these issues are not tackled. So implicitly, the film does take a side, but it does not impose its position onto the viewer. In regards to utopianism, this ambivalence is considerably important – utopia and dystopia are figments of imagination but have fascinated humans to the point of inspiring us to act them out. However, it’s becoming apparent, especially in today’s world, that ideas of utopia are no longer applicable. They can still be used to initiate change, but to follow these ideals blindly in order to achieve the ‘perfect’ society, a society that is different to every person who can conceive the concept of utopia, is foolhardy. Through its indistinct depictions of dystopia and utopia, through its conceptual deconstruction of ‘utopia’ and of collapse and rebirth, Children of Men supports this idea of ambivalence – we will never know a ‘utopia’, but should not let this unattainable fantasy stop us from bettering our world.

tl;dr

i'm all about local brews lately

yeah, I liked that paper a lot.

only criticisms would be the first paragraph which comes off as overly wordy in comparison to the rest of the paper and the shift into more first person stuff (I've showed you, and so forth) near the end which I think is more a personal thing, but I always find papers more evocative when they don't remind me of the author.

otherwise good stuff