I’m pretty into science fiction, and one of my favorite sub-genres is the dystopia. A dystopia is the antithesis or “evil twin” of a utopia. Instead of a future (or other world) in which our society’s problems have been solved, it is a world where they are amplified. Very often a dystopia is a comment on the real world–1984 as a critique of Stalinism, for example.
But I think that in most of the dystopia genre, the story is that of a world that has come through a tremendous crisis period and of a society that has emerged far more stratified and repressive. In other words, there is a discontinuity of some sort, like a large jump into the future without a real filling-in of what happens between now and then. In 1984, for example, The Party already has ultimate control when the story starts. In 12 Monkeys a virus has already forced humans underground. In We the One State has already built its glass city.
Rarely does a dystopian story take place during the collapse itself. Stories that involve time travel (Woman on the Edge of Time and 12 Monkeys come to mind) might have their protagonists travel between the future (after the collapse) and the present (before the collapse), but we don’t see 12 Monkeys‘ virus take its toll or the civil war of Woman start.
Children of Men, on the other hand, takes place during the collapse itself. It is set only a few years in the future (2027) and some of the themes are so relevant today: prison-like refugee camps, global war, police states. In Children of Men, the dystopia is in the process of creation. The world is in the process of falling apart, but it is not yet done falling apart; there is still hope. That aspect, and the fact that the world depicted is so eerily similar to today’s, makes the film so ultimately unnerving. I don’t think it entirely matters that the story was set in the UK; you can’t have a ‘department of homeland security’ being shown putting hoods on people and torturing them without it being seen as an indictment of the US and its policies today.
There is way more to say about this film but I think one important parts is that the first (and only) woman to become pregnant in 20 years is black. Maybe the title ‘Children of Men’ can be understood an indictment of patriarchy. But I think if you think about what happens to the characters (don’t want give away too much here), there is also a very strong antiracist theme as well. The power of reproduction is returned to a woman of color. If the story is a take on the nativity story (which it seems it must be; besides the plot connections, the film opened on Christmas Day) then it is a race-conscious take.
3 responses so far ↓
jennylx // January 15, 2007 at 11:11 am
Thanks for the review Max. I want to go see this tonight. I first heard about it this weekend, when some people in Memphis were talking about it. Then later that day I was sitting next to this young mother from Memphis at the “media justice lunch.” She was there because she had just started an environmental justice group in Memphis called Youth Terminating Pollution. She said that in her neighborhood, which is mostly poor and Black, there is an abandoned U.S. army base that had been re-developed residentially and commercially without ever being cleaned up. Health problems abound there, but young women are particularly affected. She said uteran cancer and other illnesses related to female infertility are extraordinarily high. A 14-year old girl recently found out that she is infertile as a direct result of the toxic dump site.
She said YTP is a group of about 20 young women, working to get their neighborhood cleaned up and they came to the NCMR to learn about starting a newsletter.
blixx // January 15, 2007 at 12:07 pm
i definitely recommend the movie. they don’t really explain the cause of the worldwide infertility problem, and it affects both men and women. but i think in reality it wouldn’t be as simple as everyone becomes infertile around the same time. probably, like you described, those facing the majority of environmental problems that would lead to infertility are poor people, people of color, and people living in the third world. and also, those with access to better and more resources would be more likely to be able to pay to work around the problem. but hey, it’s just a movie.
another thing that your comment made me think of is that the ‘crisis’ has already begun today for many people. in the film the protagonists passed through a series of checkpoints in london until he reached the government area, where people were picnicking like nothing was wrong, even though just a few miles away there was total chaos. that kind of reminded me of the very different realities that people face today in different parts of the world.
Anna // January 15, 2007 at 8:30 pm
I totally didn’t want to see this movie before because I thought it looked really stupid. I’m also a big fan of dystopian stories. I just thought “hollywood movie, world ending, blah blah blah, white man help black pregnant woman.” My impression from the previews is that it was the opposite of what you said. It seemed it had potential to be racist and sexist! But now I want to see it especially in light of the comment about Memphis.