User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 810 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jeannie
    Feb 2, 2007
    3
    A dystopic, boring, depressing, confusing vision of the future, and very politicized for our present state of affairs. The "immigrant rights" angle is one case in point. Lots of logical inconsistencies, unsympathetic, poorly-developed characters, melancholy cinematography, gratuitous violence. I would not recommend this piece of left-wing propaganda to anyone remotely optimistic about the A dystopic, boring, depressing, confusing vision of the future, and very politicized for our present state of affairs. The "immigrant rights" angle is one case in point. Lots of logical inconsistencies, unsympathetic, poorly-developed characters, melancholy cinematography, gratuitous violence. I would not recommend this piece of left-wing propaganda to anyone remotely optimistic about the future. And the "music" stunk. Thumbs down! Expand
  2. BrianK.
    Sep 1, 2007
    3
    This movie was terrible. There were just too many plot problems. Children of Men takes place in Britain in a futuristic age where humans can no longer reproduce. The only thing keeping my attention was the hope that the cause of the infertility would be revealed. However, the only provided explanation is that about 20 years earlier, there was a disease going around, causing the change. This movie was terrible. There were just too many plot problems. Children of Men takes place in Britain in a futuristic age where humans can no longer reproduce. The only thing keeping my attention was the hope that the cause of the infertility would be revealed. However, the only provided explanation is that about 20 years earlier, there was a disease going around, causing the change. Since this phenomenon drives the whole plot of the film, I would have preferred to have been given an explanation lasting more than 20 seconds. Also, I don't want to give too much away, but the ending isn't much of a conclusion. Rather, the camera just zooms out and no questions have been answered and the protagonist is still in the middle of his journey. I'm not saying that I wanted everything to be wrapped up neatly; I just want to see at least some form of finality. Another problem of mine was the characterization. In the middle of the film, people try to kill a woman because she's pregnant, yet, as soon as the baby's born, everybody suddenly becomes nice and peaceful. I understand that the director was trying to show the innocence of children, but going from murderous to crying and hugging in a matter of seconds is just too ridiculous. In addition, I had some problems with the filming. There were a couple of times when vision was distracted because of blood from the scene that splattered onto the camera. As a result, there's a whole scene in which the characters are running around, but I was fixated on the drops of liquid that were dripping down the screen. (Trust me, the blood was not there for a symbolic purpose.) In short, the idea of a futuristic world without fertility may have been a good idea, but the execution was dreadful. Expand
  3. BenH
    Jun 1, 2009
    3
    Great filming.. but poorly developed characters, a complete lack of direction, point or cohesion and heaps of mindless violence and ugliness add up to equal the same old crap we've been shoveled for the last 30 years.
  4. DonaldC.
    Mar 27, 2007
    1
    The only thing half way interesting is that the child is born to a young black girl as it should be considering the black women is the mother of earth.
  5. Dec 8, 2010
    1
    I sort of enjoyed the movie for a while until the nonsense about refuge camps and when it started to look like all this film brought up was questions with no cohession. Specifically if you think the characters developed and evolved throughout the movie and that all the different ideas were stuck together well then you are nuts. Yes the music may have been good or the photos, I dont knowI sort of enjoyed the movie for a while until the nonsense about refuge camps and when it started to look like all this film brought up was questions with no cohession. Specifically if you think the characters developed and evolved throughout the movie and that all the different ideas were stuck together well then you are nuts. Yes the music may have been good or the photos, I dont know and dont really care. I disagree that the ending was crap in that if the director was trying to convey how nuts people hand gone by believeing in some mythical humainity project and that it was just an ordinary boat then yes it was actually quite a good ending, if.... I thought thats what it might have been about how he just failed at the finish line and that the woman was saved by fishermen. The camp thing was nuts, if the regime was so oppresive they would have just killed them all and it seemed to morp from an anti fuji thing at start of movie into an anti muslim thing and there were also causcasians in there, very bizare. Plus the fact he was only hit in the arms(v.unlikely) and that being hit in the arms twice killed him(not so likely). Never explaine why infertility was there and what difference one baby could have made. If they had made this about scientists rushing to understand say a cure for a disease and their being a fascist regime only using it on non-illegal immigrants it would have been a much better movie. Or they could have gone down the whole chase route more throughtly and made human project a peacful orginization protecting the baby from the fishies. Or even the "terrorits" could have been **** who created a disease through gene technology by accident, who were hated but were also required to solve the same issue they created, all of these different scenarios would have been much deeper than what was presented -nothing. Expand
  6. Ben
    Jan 5, 2007
    1
    Truly lousy movie. This is one of the worst movies I've seen in years. I consider myself able to appreciate good, thoughtful, movies... but this was utter dreck. Uninspired, lacking a coherent plot, this movie was just mediocre. The attempts to draw parallels to the current US administration, their policies, and the Iraq war were painful (department of homeland security, illegal Truly lousy movie. This is one of the worst movies I've seen in years. I consider myself able to appreciate good, thoughtful, movies... but this was utter dreck. Uninspired, lacking a coherent plot, this movie was just mediocre. The attempts to draw parallels to the current US administration, their policies, and the Iraq war were painful (department of homeland security, illegal immigrants, Iraq, etc), and felt like they were thrown in to make a point rather than add meaning to the movie. Overall plot and character development were weak, with absolutely no explanation of precipitating or tangential factors (why the infertility, what is the human project, etc). Unmoving, uncaptivating, uninspiring, unbelievable, unimaginative, unfortunate waste of $9.50. Expand
  7. ApocalypseBrown
    Mar 3, 2007
    3
    Pathetic! Tries hard to be something it can never be, which is classy.
  8. AnonymousMC
    Apr 18, 2007
    0
    I recently rented this movie, and i though it was one of the worst movies i've ever seen. So much more could of been with the plot,. The director failed to keep the movie interesting, everything happened too quick and some of the scenes were pointless and kind of cheesy.
    I expected so much more from this film and whoever thinks this movie was good obviosly does not know anything about films
  9. PnArdyPnArdy
    May 13, 2007
    2
    This is one of the most boring and awful blockbusters with horrible acting, decorations, plot, and SFX, I've ever seen. It Definetely doesn't deserve 8 out of 10. Clive Owen plays a legal citizen in the post-apocalyptic world of NWO of the near future. He has to smuggle the last pregnant woman on Earth past the all seeing eyes of NWO spies in the city of London under marshall law.
  10. JamesL.
    Jan 6, 2008
    2
    Boring mindless chase movie. Who's side are we supposed to root for? Problem is you tend not to care. The only thing I was rooting for were the closing credits.
  11. MikeH.
    Jan 10, 2007
    0
    Obviously marketing for this movie deserves a TEN, but the actual content, the actual story, message, moral? ZERO... there IS NO MESSAGE TO THIS FILM. IT IS A CIPHER, it's just a rollercoaster with guns and violence, and the acting comes from being shot at and watching a woman have a baby... there's NO CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. All bang, no substance, so why are people giving this Obviously marketing for this movie deserves a TEN, but the actual content, the actual story, message, moral? ZERO... there IS NO MESSAGE TO THIS FILM. IT IS A CIPHER, it's just a rollercoaster with guns and violence, and the acting comes from being shot at and watching a woman have a baby... there's NO CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. All bang, no substance, so why are people giving this film a TOP rating? I smell a HUGE RAT. Expand
  12. Irwin
    Jan 15, 2007
    2
    Hardly original, Children of Men
  13. JeffD.
    Jan 24, 2007
    3
    This movie has the same feel as "28 days later" yet fails to bring the audience in and allow them to care what's happening to the characters. Storyline had great potential but is filled with meaningless and uninteresting dialog as well as an over-abundance of violence which adds nothing to the story or the progression of the characters themselves. A 2-hour waste of time.
  14. V.Martinez
    Jan 28, 2007
    2
    A stinker...Pop a chewable Prozac before you see this one, because it's bleeping depressing. The world falls completely apart in the next 20 years?? Must be global warming's fault. Underground rebels, fascist soldiers, more chase scenes, cliche here, cliche there. So many unanswered questions that I stopped caring about anything this movie tried to convey, namely that dogs can A stinker...Pop a chewable Prozac before you see this one, because it's bleeping depressing. The world falls completely apart in the next 20 years?? Must be global warming's fault. Underground rebels, fascist soldiers, more chase scenes, cliche here, cliche there. So many unanswered questions that I stopped caring about anything this movie tried to convey, namely that dogs can reproduce, but humans can't (shouldn't?) :0) Maybe Part II will be Puppies of Dogs. Seriously, there are so many people giving this mediocre movie a 9 or 10 that I think maybe our world might look like this in 20 years (me? I'll be in the 'Fugee' section begging for my $9 back). Expand
  15. DavidH.
    Jan 3, 2007
    3
    Indeed the world HAS gone bonkers when film academics give rave reviews to this kind of trite rubbish. Children of Men's meandering plotline is in no way helped by the film's confused allegory. Clive Owen is his usual turgid self. The film's social commentary is by equal measure myopic and simplistic. Action sequences, especially the finale, smack of similarities to films Indeed the world HAS gone bonkers when film academics give rave reviews to this kind of trite rubbish. Children of Men's meandering plotline is in no way helped by the film's confused allegory. Clive Owen is his usual turgid self. The film's social commentary is by equal measure myopic and simplistic. Action sequences, especially the finale, smack of similarities to films such as Downfall and the Pianist, the visuals throughout the film are tiresomely familiar to anyone accustomed to other sci-fi releases such as Blade Runner, Brazil, A.I and Minority Report. To top it all off, the drama is thin, exhibiting not a single memorable character. Shame, the editing is suberb. Collapse
  16. RichardF.
    Jan 8, 2007
    1
    What a piece of crap. The set design came directly from the computer game Half Life 2. The story was so thin as to be unbelievable. The premise of a new pregnancy as meaty enough to carry an entire film is laughable. As for the so-called critics- they just use movies as a vehicle for little essays that show their own clever use of words but show no insight into the film itself. Sign me disgusted.
  17. GeorgeH.
    Jan 9, 2007
    3
    Could have been MUCH better than what the trailers lead us to believe. Standard chase film, nothing new or special and actually pretty tedious. I didn't give a hoot about Clive Owen's character or relationship with Julianne Moore. Michael was was especially annoying as his mentor. I found the most interesting characters to be either mute (the teen playing a futuristic video game Could have been MUCH better than what the trailers lead us to believe. Standard chase film, nothing new or special and actually pretty tedious. I didn't give a hoot about Clive Owen's character or relationship with Julianne Moore. Michael was was especially annoying as his mentor. I found the most interesting characters to be either mute (the teen playing a futuristic video game at the breakfast table) or catatonic (Michael Caine's wife). Someone recently said, "Why is it that all storylines (with few exceptions) that take place in the future have a distinctly black/blue/grey look to them? What futiristic despot banned technincolor? Expand
  18. Joseph
    Feb 12, 2007
    1
    I read many reviews before deciding to go see this movie. Every critic said there was a "clear message of hope" to be found in the movie. However, I found no message of hope. The political message was so painfully blunt and forced that it made me cringe. Unfortunately, that political message is the only part of this movie with any substance. I still wish I had walked out of the theater I read many reviews before deciding to go see this movie. Every critic said there was a "clear message of hope" to be found in the movie. However, I found no message of hope. The political message was so painfully blunt and forced that it made me cringe. Unfortunately, that political message is the only part of this movie with any substance. I still wish I had walked out of the theater when I first thought about it (about 30 minutes into it). Expand
  19. JohnF.
    Feb 3, 2007
    2
    I assume the high rating from people is more a political statement instead a true evaluation of the movie. I was very disapointed. The movie was slow and boring. The political message was beaten into us. I expected much better.
  20. JohnT.
    Mar 24, 2007
    1
    After reading all these reviews, maybe I saw the wrong movie. But it was horrible and pointless. Don't waste your time.
  21. MikeyGray
    Mar 31, 2007
    0
    Reminds me of those bad 1980s doomsday scifi action flicks, only with a less interesting plot, and even more lacking in character development.
  22. Matt
    Mar 30, 2007
    2
    Well shot, simplistic, clumsily acted B movie.
  23. DavidT.
    Apr 1, 2007
    3
    Shot VERY Well...Which is Half the Battle BUT a VERY Bad Story Line! Very Anit-Climatic!!!
  24. AideenM.
    Apr 22, 2007
    2
    What a waste! So much could have been made of this plot: why was she the only woman to get pregnant? How did it happen? Who's the father? Instead, it was just one long, dreary, chase.
  25. JoK.
    Apr 29, 2007
    2
    Thoroughly depressing - not enough story, too much unintelligable dialogue, drawn out action scene where basically anyone you grow any affection for is violently eradicated (why couldn't they have got rid off the guy with the blonde dreadlocks wayyyy earlier - and him finding them in Bexhill like that? Annoyingly improbable).
  26. PeterJ.
    May 3, 2007
    3
    When I ready all of the reviews for this movie I could not wait to see it. The storyline looked awesome in retrospect. I was so disappointed that this turned into some kind of future concentration camp movie. I know the premise of this movie was unrealistic to being with, but I was looking for something a little more believeable...
  27. JohnG.
    May 3, 2007
    2
    Liberal fear mongering. Keep your politics out of the plot and perhaps this movie would have been better. Characters were boring, the case boring, the action scenes boring. I don't mind having to think through a movie, but you can be more clever than this drivel.
  28. SibylP
    Jan 1, 2009
    3
    The cinematography, the art direction, are interesting, the cast is good except for Miriam and Kee (not so much), but all have been put to the service of a bogus vision. What the heck is the point? Infertility is hardly a problem in the real world. Overpopulation is more of a problem. In
  29. JacobR.
    Jan 7, 2007
    0
    This movie was completely pointless. the premise is that people can't have kids, yet one DOES WHILE WE'RE WATCHING THE MOVIE! what the hell was the point? there obviously was never a problem, apparently outside of england people CAN have babies.
  30. BillyB.
    Apr 14, 2007
    3
    I expected a whole lot more from this movie. I thought it started out good, but then it just kept building and building into nothing. The effects were excellent and the action was ok, but the story line really wasn't too great and confused me in many parts. Michael Caine doesn't make a very good hippie either.
  31. ChristopherJ.
    Jun 6, 2007
    3
    I gave my complete attention to this film, and it didn't make much sense. For some reason no women can have babies, and then this black teenager gets pregnant, so then people are excited about her. But then during other scenes it seems like people don't really care about her. Like when she's walking by the soldiers, they don't try to protect her, they just stare at I gave my complete attention to this film, and it didn't make much sense. For some reason no women can have babies, and then this black teenager gets pregnant, so then people are excited about her. But then during other scenes it seems like people don't really care about her. Like when she's walking by the soldiers, they don't try to protect her, they just stare at her. The characters just weren't making sense in their behavior to me. Expand
  32. Jul 3, 2014
    3
    This one was a major disappointment for me. I will start off with the few positives before moving into the negatives. Firstly, the acting was good, especially from Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, and then Chiwetel Ejiofor and Charlie Hunnam is smaller roles. In addition, the cinematography here is great, especially during action sequences. The whole film has this really cool video game esqueThis one was a major disappointment for me. I will start off with the few positives before moving into the negatives. Firstly, the acting was good, especially from Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, and then Chiwetel Ejiofor and Charlie Hunnam is smaller roles. In addition, the cinematography here is great, especially during action sequences. The whole film has this really cool video game esque feel to what unfolds that is just missing the prompts for what you are supposed to do next. In addition, the colors here are great, as the gray everywhere really sums up the despair. Now, for the negatives. There are not a ton, but they are big enough to really hamper this one. Firstly, the story sucks. In premise, it sounds good, but in practice it is boring and uninteresting. In addition, there needs to be some kind of introduction to this world. Many things are occuring in this film and it never really explains why. I know that Cuaron hates backstory, but it is needed in this type of film to allow the audience to understand this futuristic setting. Without it, the audience is left guessing as to why the events are happening. Another major issue surrounds one of the deaths in this film, as it is hinted that it was a specific reason, but the reason is murky at best and really needed better explaining. It is a very important sequence, yet the reasoning behind is left largely unanswered. The script is also pretty bad in most parts as the dialogue had me cringing quite frequently. It all felt very unnatural and poorly worded. Finally, Clara-Hope **** is quite annoying and since she had a large role, it really subtracted from the overall film. Many find this film to be thought-provoking and cautionary. I cannot help but agree, as it left me wondering how it got so much praise and a warning to not trust the general consensus all the time. Expand
  33. MartyH.
    Jun 6, 2008
    0
    This was a truly awful film, what a waste of nearly 2 hours. The film ended as abruptly as it started and left so many things unanswered, it made me wonder what the point was in sitting through such doom and gloom. There is no genius in this film at all, despite what others may say. I would not even give it one star! Your time would be better spent watching paint dry! You have been warned!
  34. BenW
    Dec 27, 2006
    2
    It is one thing to suspend belief for the plot's main storyline, but another to ignore the inconsistencies strewn throughout the movie. Why would the soldiers let them just wander off after discovering the only baby born in the last 18 years?
  35. HollyR.
    Jan 10, 2007
    3
    Blade Runner is my all time favorite film, and while I appreciated the cinematography, special effects and gritty futuristic look of a world in ruins (Children Of Men), the significance of getting this pregnant woman/new baby to the "Human Project" was not explained at all. This movie has nothing on BR, not even in your wildest dreams!!! Sorry. How was the Human Project going to fix the Blade Runner is my all time favorite film, and while I appreciated the cinematography, special effects and gritty futuristic look of a world in ruins (Children Of Men), the significance of getting this pregnant woman/new baby to the "Human Project" was not explained at all. This movie has nothing on BR, not even in your wildest dreams!!! Sorry. How was the Human Project going to fix the problem of infertility in the world? How was one baby going to fix it? Nothing about this was ever explained and the ending was so abrupt it was like they ran out of time. A good movie considers these questions and answers them. I don't buy the whole "it makes you think" crap. That is a total cop-out. Good movies wrap things up. These problems were so huge it totally ruined the rest of an otherwise good film. Expand
  36. JudyT.
    Jan 13, 2007
    2
    Pointless message movie. Says nothing about brotherhood and people being inspired to come together.
  37. DamonC.
    Jan 13, 2007
    3
    Very disappointing. This is NOT of the best movies of 2006. The narrative is a jumbled mess, the ending is thematically ambiguous - if humankind is so bad, then isn't better to just let it go away? the baby is not a symbol of innocence, but naive hope that will only be dashed again and again, for THAT is the message of COM. Watch for the B+ cinematography, and okay acting from Clive Very disappointing. This is NOT of the best movies of 2006. The narrative is a jumbled mess, the ending is thematically ambiguous - if humankind is so bad, then isn't better to just let it go away? the baby is not a symbol of innocence, but naive hope that will only be dashed again and again, for THAT is the message of COM. Watch for the B+ cinematography, and okay acting from Clive Owen, but forget about everything else. Expand
  38. BarryG.
    Jan 22, 2007
    0
    Ya know when you wake up and its overcast, cold, dreery and drizzling. You just want to go back inside and pull the covers up over your head. If had a blanket during this movie, i would have done the same thing...even on the ju-ju bean dried up coke strewn floor. This movie was a disappointment on so many levels i dont know where to begin. No developed plot, no character development and Ya know when you wake up and its overcast, cold, dreery and drizzling. You just want to go back inside and pull the covers up over your head. If had a blanket during this movie, i would have done the same thing...even on the ju-ju bean dried up coke strewn floor. This movie was a disappointment on so many levels i dont know where to begin. No developed plot, no character development and continual (but non-gruesome) violence to make your stomach turn. And the ending made the entire theater leave with confused faces, angry stomps and even laughs. I cannot believe the critics loved this one. Its a total unadulterated mess i wouldnt waste a rental on. Expand
  39. GlennS.
    Jan 26, 2007
    3
    Most depressing movie I've every seen, bar none. I spent a year in Viet Nam, and this movie made me physically ill.
  40. LM
    Jan 27, 2007
    1
    Generally when these things try to make statements, they give some sort of action call at the end. The only take home message I got was make babies while you can. On the bright side of things, it might be a good husband/wife outting. Just make sure you set up the college fund first.
  41. BetsyB.
    Jan 5, 2007
    2
    This movie made no sense. I haven't read the book but I hope it is not as terrible as this movie. Acting was OK, but there were so many ridiculous holes that I pretty much laughed my way throuth this one.
  42. Aly
    Jan 6, 2007
    1
    This movie is the 2nd worst movie I've seen in my life. I was completely upset that a good somewhat original film idea was screwed up so badly. As others have said there is no character development (the "love" between Julianne Moore and Clive Owen is nonexistent) and the plot is FULL of holes. I feel this movie was somehow rushed in its making and they just kind of threw it together This movie is the 2nd worst movie I've seen in my life. I was completely upset that a good somewhat original film idea was screwed up so badly. As others have said there is no character development (the "love" between Julianne Moore and Clive Owen is nonexistent) and the plot is FULL of holes. I feel this movie was somehow rushed in its making and they just kind of threw it together hoping there might be some good parts. I can't believe that this was given such high reviews and I wait for the next movie with a similar idea that might be done right. Expand
  43. stasz
    Jan 9, 2007
    1
    times like this make me think somebody gets paid for writing reviews and it's not me. Movie has no point and it's absolutely boring. Worst ending in a while as well. Perfect fit for my "whooppie doo" collection.
  44. VM.
    Feb 15, 2007
    0
    This movie is the definition of pretentious. And it is boring. Be warned.
  45. Alex
    Mar 26, 2007
    0
    Huh? Can anybody explain the movie to me? Because after seeing it, I was kind of confuse throughout most the whole movie and I just don't quite understand why people are giving such praise to this. I keep asking people to explain it to me but all they keep telling is "Well...it was shot reallly well" and "It just makes you think...what if?".....Well considering that this movie hadHuh? Can anybody explain the movie to me? Because after seeing it, I was kind of confuse throughout most the whole movie and I just don't quite understand why people are giving such praise to this. I keep asking people to explain it to me but all they keep telling is "Well...it was shot reallly well" and "It just makes you think...what if?".....Well considering that this movie had absolutely no plot and no development in any way its difficult for me to consider the possibilities of this happening. ZERO! Expand
  46. DavidC.
    Apr 21, 2007
    2
    I was really looking forward to seeing this -- perhaps that's why I was so disappointed. This is a cops 'n robbers chase movie -- very little actual plot. Some of the action cinematography is great (what little there is of it), but it's definitely not enough to make this worth renting. I found this movie boring. (For reference sake, I also found Blade Runner boring. I like I was really looking forward to seeing this -- perhaps that's why I was so disappointed. This is a cops 'n robbers chase movie -- very little actual plot. Some of the action cinematography is great (what little there is of it), but it's definitely not enough to make this worth renting. I found this movie boring. (For reference sake, I also found Blade Runner boring. I like sci-fi, but I also like to be kept on the edge of my seat. These movies failed to do this for me.) Expand
  47. Penny
    Apr 22, 2007
    0
    This was absolutely one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Bad acting, bad script and boring.
  48. BarryC.
    Apr 4, 2007
    1
    Film blunders from nowhere to nowhere, are we supposed to know what is happening?. I simply cannot understand the acclaim this pretentious film is getting. Cinematography is excellent, that is the only positive thing that I can say.
  49. BenF.
    Apr 7, 2007
    3
    Great effects. It's just too bad it's another mental exercise. What about those of us who do get it and still thought this movie was boring? Like that one child would even make a difference in that world. I was waiting for a stray bullet to hit the baby. That would have given this movie some meaning.
  50. RichardK.
    Apr 8, 2007
    1
    Hey everyone, read the book and THEN rate the movie...this adaptation is utter garbage; only the general plot survives. I bet the author of the book did not approve this drivel. An over-hyped waste of time and money. What a disappointment.
  51. BrettB.
    May 4, 2007
    1
    Terrible film based on a great novel. The acting was atrocious, especially considering the high-quality of the actors. The high ratings of the critics suggest a mis-calibration or a misquotation by this website.
  52. Amy
    Oct 24, 2008
    0
    Surprisingly BAD. Too predictable, too obvious, no cleverness, forced "originality". What's that word? Oh, contrived. I've rarely been so annoyed. It was a good premise, but the film was complete rubbish. RUBBISH. I WISH there was something thought-provoking in it. If you require this drivel to provoke your thoughts, you clearly need to spend more time THINKING. I am Surprisingly BAD. Too predictable, too obvious, no cleverness, forced "originality". What's that word? Oh, contrived. I've rarely been so annoyed. It was a good premise, but the film was complete rubbish. RUBBISH. I WISH there was something thought-provoking in it. If you require this drivel to provoke your thoughts, you clearly need to spend more time THINKING. I am disappointed in all of you who think or pretend to think this was a great film. It was devoid of intellectual value, I promise you. Look again, and look with some intelligence. Think how much better it should have been. Honestly, was anything in this movie something new to you? Are you still in Jr. High? How could these concepts be news to you otherwise? Will someone PLEASE give me something to stir my mind? It's been too many years without something truly inspiring and I'm going to give up looking pretty soon! I am thankful to see there are a few people with discerning minds out there, though. I had been worrying that there was nobody out there whom I could respect. So many people are so easily impressed by the most banal of ideas. Are they just pretentious or stupid? Both? I wish I could figure it out. Why aren't more people angered by a waste of time like this film? It was an insult to our intelligence, folks!!! Expand
  53. PaulJ.
    Feb 15, 2008
    1
    The story in Children of Men is practically non-existent and covered not much more than an action packed chase from the old peril to the land of deliverance. But this was done on purpose to not loose focus on the sublime messages it miserably failed to communicate because they forgot to include them. As a result many of the scenes drag relentlessly while jarring opera music and a The story in Children of Men is practically non-existent and covered not much more than an action packed chase from the old peril to the land of deliverance. But this was done on purpose to not loose focus on the sublime messages it miserably failed to communicate because they forgot to include them. As a result many of the scenes drag relentlessly while jarring opera music and a hate-crime of a muzak cover-version of 'Ruby Tuesday' plundered that what was left of the viewer's will to live. A bleak, simplistic and utterly pointless affair. Recommended only to viewers with no imagination and to people who can shut down their brain at will. Expand
  54. JoeB.
    Feb 6, 2008
    2
    Dull. Boring. Pointless. Not entertaining. Not much of a message. Sometimes hard to understand dialog. Need I say more.
  55. JosefB.
    Mar 20, 2008
    1
    Baffled at the praise this almost b-movie has received. Special mention must go to the cringeworthy acting performance by Claire hope Ashity (Kee) and the embarrassing cameo by Caine. Apart from other variables, for me the movie is completely ruined by the ill conceived script featuring umong other abominable scenes a particular one in which is described how the midwife came to notice the Baffled at the praise this almost b-movie has received. Special mention must go to the cringeworthy acting performance by Claire hope Ashity (Kee) and the embarrassing cameo by Caine. Apart from other variables, for me the movie is completely ruined by the ill conceived script featuring umong other abominable scenes a particular one in which is described how the midwife came to notice the sudden stop of newly born children in the world (then) 18 years ago (which is now).Trying to remember it correctly, I think she stated that she noticed a rapid decline in new births in her area and that of her collegues over a period of weeks. Seriously people, who in their right minds wrote this poor excuse of a script? If this were to happen now, you wouldn't be hearing from it from a coworker nor your neighbour, it would be all over the bloody news 24/7, the Internet and God knows what else. This particular scene stood out, but there are numerous other ones that are just as proposterous uncluding the laughably vapid ending. Shame on everyone with an iq above 100 who consider this good cinema. Expand
  56. kena
    Dec 26, 2009
    2
    Very mediocre movie, did not live up the ratings in the least. no explanation, character development, or message whatsoever.
  57. LeventeS
    Jun 25, 2009
    1
    Children of Men suffers from what has been called 'middle child' syndrome, the illness where something is conceived with no real beginning and no real end. It is never explained why nobody can have babies, it is never explained how the girl got pregnant, it is never revealed what happens to the girl and we never find out if our species goes extinct or if she was just a fluke. Children of Men suffers from what has been called 'middle child' syndrome, the illness where something is conceived with no real beginning and no real end. It is never explained why nobody can have babies, it is never explained how the girl got pregnant, it is never revealed what happens to the girl and we never find out if our species goes extinct or if she was just a fluke. The characters are one-dimensional, the action is boring, the story is dross, and the science is simply preposterous. The only good things about this movie were the powerful emotions conjured by the school, and Michael Caine's stellar performance. Other than that, though, Children of Men should have been aborted. Expand
  58. HarryW.
    Jan 11, 2007
    1
    What happens here? Certainly the film won't fill you in. Children of Men is a mess of discombobulated ideas without a thread of coherence. Clive Owen slogs through it bravely. Julianne Moore was likely present for a rehearsal or two and a few takes of minor scenes, and then bye bye. Michael Caine had to be stoned to participate in his few scenes. While Blade Runner was a sharply What happens here? Certainly the film won't fill you in. Children of Men is a mess of discombobulated ideas without a thread of coherence. Clive Owen slogs through it bravely. Julianne Moore was likely present for a rehearsal or two and a few takes of minor scenes, and then bye bye. Michael Caine had to be stoned to participate in his few scenes. While Blade Runner was a sharply focused stylized masterpiece, this is a dim-witted, darkly photographed nonsensical story. Promotional claptrap comparing the two. This flick is very hard to watch and even harder to feel involved with. The outrageousness is made more so by the mere 20 years gap before society has supposedly disintegrated. If the birth of a baby sparks hope for continuing the society pictured here, who wants to cheer the birth? Just as so many reviewers are wrong when they see only negative in movies which viewers find entertaining, they are wrong en mass here to find entertainment in such an empty vessel. Expand
  59. Badbadbad
    Jan 13, 2007
    1
    So if the future is f***ed, how do people still have such beautiful flat screen TVs and telejournalism still so ordered? Perhaps everything is done out of England. Very likely.
  60. ClayJ.
    Jan 14, 2007
    2
    Did anyone notice that all the other mammals in the movie (lots of cats, dogs, farm animals) seemed to have no trouble at all reproducing? Humans are MAMMALS! A totally stupid storyline! Horrible movie!
  61. seao.
    Nov 7, 2007
    2
    A very, very bad film, full of the usual dystopian cliches and a plot that amounts to nothing. The acting is poor (the 'fugees (ugh) in the early scenes seem to have been bussed in from a zombie movie).and the characters are all badly drawn. The exposition at the beginning is unbelievably clunky. Avoid. Avoid. Avoid.
  62. AndrewG.
    Jan 19, 2007
    0
    1) Premise is a more secular rip off of the god awful "Left Behind" series. 2) Reminded me of War of the Worlds in the way that most of the action played out. 3) Stupid, unbelievable things happened at very important points in the movie.
  63. SethC.
    Oct 19, 2007
    1
    Put me in the baffled camp. I would list A Clockwork Orange as my favorite movie ever (as some here have compared this to that masterpiece), but this movie was terrible. 1) why did everyone become infertile? Did it happen all at once, or gradually? 2) Why all the panic. You would think that scientists would be busily trying to figure it out while everyone else supported their effort. 3) Put me in the baffled camp. I would list A Clockwork Orange as my favorite movie ever (as some here have compared this to that masterpiece), but this movie was terrible. 1) why did everyone become infertile? Did it happen all at once, or gradually? 2) Why all the panic. You would think that scientists would be busily trying to figure it out while everyone else supported their effort. 3) What does immigration have to do with any of this? 4) When someone finally gets pregnant, why not let the scientists study her... you know, so that the Human Race will be saved. 5) What good does 1 kid do? Can that kid reproduce with any of the other sterile Earthlings? I could go on and on. Besides that, it was a boring barrage of violence from the old cliche of futuristic distopian mobs. Expand
  64. ShermanS.
    Jan 23, 2007
    3
    I found this movie quite tedious. There was chaos everywhere but you never saw the government behind it, just the results. It was clear that any moment the characters in the movie realized they could only expect the worst, so there was no surprise that the worst happened. They really had little control over anything and so I didn't care what happened and was glad when the movie was I found this movie quite tedious. There was chaos everywhere but you never saw the government behind it, just the results. It was clear that any moment the characters in the movie realized they could only expect the worst, so there was no surprise that the worst happened. They really had little control over anything and so I didn't care what happened and was glad when the movie was over. I think to care would have been like rooting for a pinball as it bounced around in its game-bound world. Not likely. There have been plenty of chaotic/anarchic views of the future in movies and this film did nothing new for me. Go see V for Vendetta; at least it makes a political statement. Expand
  65. GlennF.
    Jan 28, 2007
    2
    Random, nihilistic, and violent. I kept waiting for an explanation for the improbable political and military decisions, which never came. Defies scientific explanation as well. Well-shot sequences in a boring bummer of a film.
  66. Cassandra
    Feb 12, 2007
    1
    Behold a boring leftist fantasy (replete with cheap, already dated, political shots) masquerading as something deep. Fine acting (mostly wasted) and technical virtuosity do not a good story make. I
  67. BobS.
    Feb 16, 2007
    3
    THe film's story seems to be made up as they went along. It is often just inane. Although I liked much of the acting, story is important too and this film lacks a coherent one, and we have violence for the sake of violence. A wasted effort.
  68. AaronL.
    Apr 15, 2007
    2
    It is ironic how many of the good reviews for this film cite ignorance as the reason why others have hailed this movie as abysmal. Ignorance is failing to uncover the logical fallacies inherent in this deplorable attempt at enlightenment. This film only contains true meaning for those too ignorant to see past mirage that is this vile realm.
  69. JohnI.
    May 11, 2007
    0
    I picked htis up at Hollywood video store as a used DVD; I wish I hadn't. From the looks of the DVD case, it looked like it would be action packed but I thought wrong. This was actually the worst movie I have ever seen ever; MUCH worse than the cheesiest Sci-fi channel movie you've ever seen, and worser than a "booty shaking" video on youtube. This movie just fails ar I picked htis up at Hollywood video store as a used DVD; I wish I hadn't. From the looks of the DVD case, it looked like it would be action packed but I thought wrong. This was actually the worst movie I have ever seen ever; MUCH worse than the cheesiest Sci-fi channel movie you've ever seen, and worser than a "booty shaking" video on youtube. This movie just fails ar everything; it had a intriguing thing in mind(mysterious infertility in the human race) but they didn't have anything to show for it in the actual movie. The one pregnant woman is running away from people, to who knows where, and when they get there, they continue running..When the finally escape to wherever they are trying to get to, the movie cuts off..Seriously, I wish I could unwatch this movie, get my money back, and make sure no one else has to watse their time with this bull. If anyone should think this movie is good in any kind of way except being absolute crap, this must be the first piece of "entertainment" they have ever come in cotnact with. I so desperately wish you could give this lower than a 1, but a 1 is alot more than this crap deserves. Expand
  70. Markk
    Jul 18, 2008
    2
    The first half hour or so is ok but then the film just completely collapses. What a horrible script. It turns into a mindless chase flick. If you like checking your mind out when you watch dumb films see it but everyone else should avoid it.
  71. earwax
    Dec 29, 2006
    3
    Nicely filmed. plot kind of sucked. too many unanswered questions. totally implausable premise. to hard accept the idea that humans can't reproduce.
Metascore
84

Universal acclaim - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 37 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: David Ansen
    70
    Children of Men leaves too many questions unanswered, yet it has a stunning visceral impact. You can forgive a lot in the face of filmmaking this dazzling.
  2. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    80
    Picture more than delivers on the action front -- not in bang-for-your-buck spectacle but in the kind of gritty, doculike sequences that haul viewers out of their seats and alongside the main protags.
  3. Owen carries the film more in the tradition of a Jimmy Stewart or Henry Fonda than a Clint Eastwood or Harrison Ford. He has to wear flip-flops for part of the time without losing his dignity, and he never reaches for a weapon or guns anyone down. Cuaron and Owen may have created the first believable 21st-century movie hero.