Analyzing & Comparing Alfonso Cuaron's Children of Men to a Painting from the 1700's

Alfonso Cuarón Orozco, for some known as ‘Alfie’, was born in November 28th, 1961 in the busy capital of Mexico City. A masterful filmmaker, three time Academy winner for Best Direction, Best Picture, and Best Cinematography. He is known for works like: Y tu mamá también, Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban, Gravity, Roma, and the prolific drama and sci-fi thriller Children of Men, of which we will be talking about.

Cuaron has had an interest or involvement in patriotism, propaganda, and revolutionary subjects highlighted by his conspicuous ability to “[blend] in with the environment but then capturing the protagonist” (Karsten Runquist; Film Critic, on ‘How Alfonso Cuaron became a Master”).

Despite Y Tu Mama También being a coming-of-age film about sexuality and liberation, the underlying message of the film is sustained throughout the film by vividly showcasing the environment the characters find themselves in, which acts as a secondary character as well, and a fundamental voice to the film on itself - in this case the environment being Mexico City.

The influence this film had depicting then the state and politics of the Capital helped turn the specificity and intimacy of the story into a national hit; which is now recognized as a classic, and then formed part of of the opening to a new era of Mexican Cinema because of Cuaron’s masterful use of ‘mise-en-scéne. He did this by “[Exploring] how the social class and their social context informed characters. And how these characters by the same token informed their environment” (Alfonso Cuaron in Y Tu Mama Tambien).

Alfonso’s films breath so heavily because of his understanding of the film language and the absolute use of itsenvironment in order to inform and transcend the viewer into the experience, giving every inch of the ‘mise-en-scène’ specific meaning that adds to the overall theme or quintessential thesis of the picture itself. “In all your films environment is as important as the characters, and never more so than in Children of Men” (BAFTA Journalist Jeremy Brock, in an interview with Cuaron, 2019).

Children of Men was released in 2006, with a duration of 1 hour and 49 minutes. It used a budget of approximately 76 million US dollars. And it was filmed with 35mm Film, with an Arricam LT.

The use of colours in this film is extremely influential to the overall tone and mood. Set in Winter; London, the film carries a bleak, cold, cool, blueish and greyish tones, that help carry the dystopian thematic and gloomy state of the city and the world. However, the tones are subtly accompanied by the vivid greens seen through the UK’s countryside landscapes. Finally, we’re also able to catch glares of early sun light that give the film a dreamy look.

“When infertility threatens mankind with extinction and the last child born has perished, a disillusioned bureaucrat (Clive Owen) becomes the unlikely champion in the fight for the survival of Earth's population; He must face down his own demons and protect the planet's last remaining hope from danger.”

This film stands out from the rest because of its magnificent 360° Production Design (by Jim Clay & Geoffrey Kirkland), meticulously showing the depths of the dystopian world they live in, and turning London into a hell-hole. The insane camera techniques used by the Cinematographer; Emmanuel Luveski, as the film - unlike the rest Thriller-SciFi’s - is filmed with a documentary style, following the main character; Theo, HANDHELD through most of the film. The ONE-TAKE-WONDERS in this film make the overall action in the picture more intense and immersive for the viewer. Cuaron’s signature style behind fast paced, spontaneous editing techniques that continuously show wild mood-swings or unexpected scenarios that make this film one of a kind when it comes to its content. Finally, the outstanding performances from each actor and how they add to the glory of the film and its success. Theo’s character arch despite common is moving, because of how graphic and ephemeral the sequences are; giving us no time to process and obligating us to feel.

Children of Men, 01:10:44 - Still taken from Shot Deck

Children of Men, stands as a revolutionary film because of its fast-paced editing and incredible camera techniques. The fascinating Production Design, the masterful Direction from Cuaron, the breathtaking performance from Clive Owen and the rest of the cast (including Micheal Cane) but mostly, because of the directorial techniques Alfie implements throughout the film.

Using ONE-TAKE-WONDERS in almost impossible scenarios within genres where ‘Documentary Filmmaking Style’ hasn’t quite been seen before. Intertwined with the complex 360° production design felt in their world exploiting the concept of ‘Duality’ “blending in with the environment but then capturing the protagonist… they put themselves (the shots) in a way that isn’t distracting, it feels as though is coming from the background or setting. That combined with some good framing results in what Cuaron is best at: Duality.” (Karsten Runquist; Film Critic, on ‘How Alfonso Cuaron became a Master”)

Children of Men not for nothing stands in TIME’s Magazine Top 100 movies of All Time List, because of the dystopian and totalitarian tale it tells and how Alfonso Cuarón made a message, a warning, or a depiction of what our world would like.

Alfonso Cuarón made Children of Men as an adaptation to the P.D. James novel “The Children of Men” however, both stories are different. The Mexican Director based the film solely on the synopsis of the novel. The film would be taking place in 2027, only three years away from our world today. He based the film around the themes - or crises - that would shape the new century. He talks about the thesis of the film by describing how “A lot of these things are uncomfortable to watch. And at the end [it’s] for you to make your own conclusion that if after you witness what you witness, there’s room for hope. And if there is room for hope, what do we do with this hope?” Alfonso Cuaron on Children of Men.

Children of Men, 01:40:10 - Still taken from Shot Deck

The directorial signature style behind the Mexican Filmmaker lies around ‘Hope’ and ‘Humanity’ showcasing both themes in most of his films. He perfectly depicts it in Children of Men, along with ‘Compassion’ and ‘Sympathy’ for the early human life. The crisis the world is facing in the film being infertility, brings chaos and violence around the world.

The falling action of the film presents us with a scene in live war conflict between a terrorist-activist group (Fishes) and the government’s military. Despite death, poverty, and famine, nothing seems to stop the horrors of war. When suddenly the violence appears to be stopped - momentarily - by the cry of a newborn baby, abruptly stopping the conflict by shocking and putting in question the armed troops at the war zone, for what’s at stake. Alfonso paralyzes the moment, by creating a holy one. Cuaron eliminates race, politics, and hatred with the cry of a newborn baby.

This scene, and particularly this still is juxtaposed with the work of ‘Belisarius Begging Alms’ by David Jacques-Louis. The similitude around both artist’s careers and their come up rises some questions worth noticing when comparing these two pieces. As they rose in recognition they’re suddenly given the chance for exposure, when they bluntly decide to showcase a piece that transcends the ordinary and instead gurgles a new era of art, while subtly triggering the current one.

David breaks the style by opening up the new era of Neo-Classism. Both David and Alfonso triggered society with a magnum-opus that would catapult them into the next level of artistry and public recognition through their understanding and subtle manipulation of the art through prediction, relating the social structure and politics surrounding the state, world, and/or monarchy.

Both works relate by changing the roles of the characters appearing in each piece. But most importantly by how the works relate with the use of symbolism, blocking, mise-en-scéne, and overall environment drawn/seen across each piece. The artists decided to leave an open end to the story inside the frame by questioning the morality of its viewers through compassion. Hope for life (Children of Men); respect for the state(Belisarius Begging Alms), as it’s seen separately in each painting. The character of Belisarius relates to Theo in the aspect that they’re both “reforming bureaucrats who were themselves isolated and on the defensive of the government” (Thomas Crow, on Nineteenth Century Art A Critical History, pg. 23; A Call To Order).

The most interesting thing appears by having Belisarius as the message. He is representing state and honour despite opposition, even when brought to misery, as it’s seen in the painting; meanwhile, Theo, is the one communicating the message as the messenger, despite opposition, though not driven by honour but by hope, even when brought to misery. Nevertheless it is Belisarius and the Newborn baby whom represent subjectively the same token, for me.

Theo was not one of the greatest generals in human history, on the contrary. The fact that he, a random civilian, angry bureaucrat, and ex-activist is taking the part Belisarius was suppose - and did - take, presented on such a similar compositional piece is ironic, but rather fascinating. It perfectly illustrates the evolution of our time; our conflicts; and our glorification and depiction of our leaders, their causes and finally their perception to society and the state.

An extremely different message influenced by its time, put together by revolutionary artists and interpreted by a radically different audience, leaves us questioning: What are we really fighting for? Hope or honour? What will keep us from freedom? If we even deserve to be free. Both paintings act as a message and a warning of humanity’s relentlessness and unforgiving aim to our leaders and our own - human - race. Particularly when absolute power gets in the way.

Written by Tonino.

*This article is posted with learning purposes only. Written by an eagerly passionate film student in the pursuit of growth and knowledge within the critique world in order to better understand motion pictures. Every critique is constructive and appreciated.*