On soft gray mornings widows cry, The wise men share a joke; I run to grasp divining signs, To satisfy the hoax. The yellow jester does not play, But gentle pulls the strings And smiles as the puppets dance, In the court of the crimson king. - King Crimson
In the series the Love of God, Wednesday night's offering was The Children of Men.
“The Children of Men,” is directed by Alfonso Cuarón, who is also one of five screenwriters credited with adapting P.D. James's book. The film felt relentless and exhausting and energetic, and yet captivating in its story line, but it was extremely dark and ominously familiar. I believe these to have all been Cuarón's intent and he was successful.
Set in 2027, global humanity has lost the ability to produce babies for 18 years. The United Kingdom is full of illegal immigrants who are being caught, caged and deported. In this apocalyptic world we see chaos and the stench of impending human extinction.
Theo, because of a number of events, assumes responsibility for the care and protection of a pregnant woman, Kee in this world of infertility. She and her expected child become a symbol of gentle hope for some and of political power for others. However the movie's language is strong and this vision is filled with a lot of violence and we are presented with a world without hope. In fact this hopelessness is basically heading violently to termination and yet this little baby following it's birth stuns for a moment a pitched gun battle between rebels and authorities. This baby offers hope but a jaded strange hope in the 'Human project' an offshore haven away from this fascist state asserting itself against the unwanted and the anarchic disorder.
There were a lot of obvious symbols and lingering shots reflective of the nativity, the birth of Jesus. One could have predicted John Tavener's minimalist music, but there some surprising ones as well . Around the visit to the government fortress the presence of the flying pig balloon from Pink Floyd's Animal, the use of music from King Crimson's In the court of the Crimson King, can give us an insight into the director/screenwriter's mind. It appears PD James' novel is by far more explicitly Christian than the film. In fact we find many characters have been appropriated to fit an intrinsic critique of unbridled political power and the portrayal of a fascist state. (One cannot deny the film's strong allusions to Nazi Germany.)
G.K. Chesterton wrote: “Men who begin to fight the Church for the sake of freedom and humanity end by flinging away freedom and humanity if only they may fight the Church.” Slavoj Zizek on the film's website cites this and asserts "the same holds for the advocates of religion themselves." Obviously this is a potential risk but only when humans decide to fight for the church, and they decide how they will fight for the church. The Children of Men has a similar trajectory to Lord of the Flies by William Golding a descent into disorder. But nonviolent protest and the fight against injustice, provision of hope, has a deep recent history, e.g. Gandi, Martin Luther King, people power in the Philippines against Marcos and currently protest in Myanmar. It has a refusal to thrown away freedom and humanity.
However a scene with a banal meaningless discussion of the relationship of “faith” and “chance” betrays an ambiguity that is intended. Traditionally providence is to accept what happens as an act of God, chance is an empty acceptance denying cause and effect such that what happens has no meaning. Somehow this latter view pervades the movie and even the baby is only symbolic of hope, its birth is a chance event and not a seen as gift or opportunity. Cuarón's adaptation really offers only empty hope the religious is reduced to meaninglessness and inept practices just look at the taichi or meaningless rituals. There is no hope for change. for redemption, only escape. BUT Christmas (coming soon) and birth of the Son/child of God (rather than men) brings not just hope but Emmanuel, God with us.
Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. Luke 1:3-4
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Empty meaningless hope
at 11:30 AM
Labels: God's hand, movies, what's the question?