Why was Julianne Moore even in this movie? There were no twist, turns or suprises.The mind boggles. You were expecting what happened to her?

Don't you think that there are some movies that are different enough and complicated enough that there are a lot of people who just don't have the capacity to appreciate them?

None of this changes the motif behind my comment. If you like something, more power to you. If you don't like something, more power to you. If you find somebody that disagrees with what you like and play the "you obviously have no taste" card, that is smug. You may very well be in the right, but denigrating someone else for not having the same "refined" tastes you have is smug. The genuinely refined response is simply to agree to disagree, and revel personally that you have an appreciation that others lack.

Just got done watching this movie and I freakin' loved it! Couldn't take my eyes off it. So I don't regret picking up this as a blind buy. One of the best films I've seen in years. Will I watch it again? Sure. Probably the same night I finally rewatch Schindler's List and Salo.

^Oh get off your knees.

Please, this isn't film school. This argument is where everybody runs to when the reasoning runs out, The "sorry u didn't get it" plea. Trust me, I got it, and I don't ever want to go back there.

This isn't "an incovienant truth", it's suppose to entertain. Ooo the long take in the woods rocked! -yeah but.....

Go watch Serenity, the beginning few minutes are 1 LONG TAKE! But I'm not creaming my pants just because of a long take.

I have seen worse movies, I'm not saying this movie shouldn't have been made, but I don't EVER want to hear another "this is the second coming of Blade Runner" again on these boards. You want art, there's your art.


Actually, that long take in Serenity was done in two shots. Joss Whedon just hid the cut extremely well.

As far as entertainment goes, I thought Children of Men was absolutely entertaining. Not everyone's cup of tea obviously, but certainly mine.

In reference to the the fact that some people "dont get it", it goes both ways. I love the artistic and technical side of film and I absolutely don't get why crap like Wild Hogs does so well. I don't get the love for Larry the Cable Guy. I don't get why my soon to be mother-in-law loves the Wayans Bros.

Sometimes people just don't get it. Big deal.

The mind boggles. You were expecting what happened to her?


Ahhh. They were shooting at the car; Of course I expected it.
For the story to continue someone "major" had to die.

Julianne Moore's character dying in this movie wasnt a suprise to me;
Steven Segal's character dying in Executive Decision on the other hand!!!
Now thats suprising! (Did I mention funny!)

Executive Decision; When Steven Segal jumped the shark.

Ahhh. They were shooting at the car; Of course I expected it.
For the story to continue someone "major" had to die.

Julianne Moore's character dying in this movie wasnt a suprise to me;
Steven Segal's character dying in Executive Decision on the other hand!!!
Now thats suprising! (Did I mention funny!)

Executive Decision; When Steven Segal jumped the shark.


***THANKS*** I guess thet I won't be surprised when I watch it tonight, then

Sheesh!

***THANKS*** I guess thet I won't be surprised when I watch it tonight, then

Sheesh!

Sorry that information has been ruined then edited out like 5 times now. Once was my fault. It is kind of hard to go over impressions about this movie without going over that part which is why a lot of people tend to talk almost completely in spoiler tags.

once again, someone needs to point out that Blade Runner had poor reviews and terrible WOM back in 1982. I remember it clearly, I was there.

it took a few years for it's unique qualities (and languid pacing) to start to be appreciated.

Haven't seen CoM, and up until recently had no desire to. If it were combo priced, I probably would have ordered it already. Now i'll just wait until my next netflix subscription.

Again. If anyone wants my copy. Im willing to trade.

Anyone have "The Break Up"?

None of this changes the motif behind my comment. If you like something, more power to you. If you don't like something, more power to you. If you find somebody that disagrees with what you like and play the "you obviously have no taste" card, that is smug. You may very well be in the right, but denigrating someone else for not having the same "refined" tastes you have is smug. The genuinely refined response is simply to agree to disagree, and revel personally that you have an appreciation that others lack.

Totally agree. This attitude that some seem to express that if you don't like COM, you're a fool, is pretty offensive.

So basically I have no taste if I think Children of Men is a bad movie?
I surveyed many. At Circuit, some of my personal friends who have seen the movie and even read reviews on line. For the most part all the reviews were negative.

But! I still purchased it to make my own mind up.

I did. And I payed the price; $34.99 to be exact.

Believe you me. I wanted the movie to be great!; Forget that!
GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME TO KEEP.

It isn't.

once again, someone needs to point out that Blade Runner had poor reviews and terrible WOM back in 1982. I remember it clearly, I was there.

it took a few years for it's unique qualities (and languid pacing) to start to be appreciated.

Haven't seen CoM, and up until recently had no desire to. If it were combo priced, I probably would have ordered it already. Now i'll just wait until my next netflix subscription.

But that said, I am sure that there are people who didn't like Blade Runner and Still don't like Blade Runner, but their is nothing wrong that.

Its the idea that. A.) If you don't get it that your mentally deficient to someone else and B.) That if you don't like it then automatically you didn't get it and therefore again mentally deficient . Which people have issues with.

I liked the movie. I thought it captured the fatigue and hopelessness of their situation pretty well. I wasn't really sure why the British government was so anti-immigrant since there should have been PLENTY of space for everyone (what, 30-40% of the population is under 18?). I guess there was just a lot of "end of the world" unrest and the gov had to make someone the enemy to take folks minds off their empty homes.

Clive Owen is definitely an aquired taste, as he is a VERY subtle actor and tends to give moody performances. Combine that with the rather non-action hero role and I can see how it would turn folks off. There were many places I expected him to "Cowboy up" and switch on his inner-Rambo but he turns tail and runs instead. Which makes the ending more impressive, to me at least.

[...] even read reviews on line. For the most part all the reviews were negative.


You must have cherry-picked the 9% that were negative. ;)

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/children_of_men/

Cherry picked my way to Best Buy to buy a copy for $34.99.
And even though the Cashier told me the movie was boring and horrible I still purchased it.

I actually liked Clive Owen in Derailed. Which I also bought!

Just got done watching this movie and I freakin' loved it! Couldn't take my eyes off it. So I don't regret picking up this as a blind buy. One of the best films I've seen in years. Will I watch it again? Sure. Probably the same night I finally rewatch Schindler's List and Salo.

LOL. Throw Requiem For A Dream and Mysterious Skin in there for an all day depress-a-thon. You'll need a week of Norbit and Blades of Glory to recover.

Cherry picked my way to Best Buy to buy a copy for $34.99.
And even though the Cashier told me the movie was boring and horrible I still purchased it.And this is supposed to convince us that you're smart?

You must have cherry-picked the 9% that were negative. ;) Actually I've rarely seen a movie with opinions as polarized. At movies.yahoo.com the reviews are fairly close to evenly split between A's and F's. You people who think it was a terrible film - do you really think that those of us who considered it brilliant are fooling ourselves, seeing something that isn't there, or trying to feel superior? I promise you that we got emotionally involved with the story, the cinematography, the writing and acting, and that if you didn't, you missed some fun.

Actually I've rarely seen a movie with opinions as polarized. At movies.yahoo.com the reviews are fairly close to evenly split between A's and F's. You people who think it was a terrible film - do you really think that those of us who considered it brilliant are fooling ourselves, seeing something that isn't there, or trying to feel superior? I promise you that we got emotionally involved with the story, the cinematography, the writing and acting, and that if you didn't, you missed some fun.

This kind of fun I can do without.

The title of this thread is Children of Men...Impressions
I shared mine and you shared yours.
If you liked it great. I just didn't.
Thats all.

Ahhhhh Mr. Wilson! Quit while you're behind.

I am a fan of Clive Owen - going back to the bmwfilm days

Not a fan of this movie - it was ok, but am really glad I rented it

LOL. Throw Requiem For A Dream and Mysterious Skin in there for an all day depress-a-thon. You'll need a week of Norbit and Blades of Glory to recover.
^
Whew! Preach it!

This last page has had me rolling, CPR has also hit all the nails on the head, continuously. He actually WANTED to like it and PAID for it but still gets no love. Guess they disown pretty fast around here.

Thanks for the lol's all :D

LOL. Throw Requiem For A Dream and Mysterious Skin in there for an all day depress-a-thon. You'll need a week of Norbit and Blades of Glory to recover.

Mysterious Skin was a picnic in the park compared to this movie.

I have to say I really, really liked this picture. I've watched it 3 times now and liked it more each time.

I have no problem with those who didn't like it for whatever reason. This world would be a pretty boring place if we all had the same tastes.

He actually WANTED to like it and PAID for it but still gets no love. Guess they disown pretty fast around here.


Hell, I wanted to like it, too. But from the previews I always thought it looked like it would be boring. Then I read comparisons to 28 Days Later which scared me since I didn't care for that movie at all. So I watched it at the $1.50 theater. I still got ripped off.

The book, however, sounds very interesting (see post #152 by Jiffylush (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10192023&&#post10192023)) and I have it on hold at the library right now. I'll be reading it after I finish reading A Scanner Darkly.

The title of this thread is Children of Men...Impressions
I shared mine and you shared yours.

Yes, you shared yours over and over and over. Can I offer some advice and recommend that you not post anymore in this thread? We get that you don't like this movie, 10 posts on the previous page alone! Jeez, between you, patrick99, javdog, over and over, mostly just quips and retorts, nothing really value added, no real discussion anymore. We get it, you didn't like the movie.

Yes, you shared yours over and over and over. Can I offer some advice and recommend that you not post anymore in this thread? We get that you don't like this movie, 10 posts on the previous page alone! Jeez, between you, patrick99, javdog, over and over, mostly just quips and retorts, nothing really value added, no real discussion anymore. We get it, you didn't like the movie.

You know, I really didn't like this movie.

Yes, you shared yours over and over and over. Can I offer some advice and recommend that you not post anymore in this thread? We get that you don't like this movie, 10 posts on the previous page alone! Jeez, between you, patrick99, javdog, over and over, mostly just quips and retorts, nothing really value added, no real discussion anymore. We get it, you didn't like the movie.
Do any of these guys even own HD DVD players? :rolleyes:

I smell disguntled BD trolls... ;)

Do any of these guys even own HD DVD players? :rolleyes:

I smell disguntled BD trolls... ;)

I am a big fan of many Universal HD DVDs. Just not this one.

I am a big fan of many Universal HD DVDs. Just not this one.

Yes, I get it, over and over and over...

;)

You gotta be frackin' kidding me!
Now Im being question on owning a HD DVD Player AND being a Blu Ray supporter!?
You can say whatever you want about me not liking Children of Men
(Did I tell you it sucked!?)
...But calling me a Blu Ray Supporter; Now you crossed the line!

LOL. You guys are wearing your pocket protectors on too tight.

You gotta be frackin' kidding me!
Now Im being question on owning a HD DVD Player AND being a Blu Ray supporter!?
You can say whatever you want about me not liking Children of Men
(Did I tell you it sucked!?)
...But calling me a Blu Ray Supporter; Now you crossed the line!

LOL. You guys are wearing your pocket protectors on too tight.
Well...are you? :D

Check all of my posts on here. All 175.
You tell me if Im a HD DVD Supporter or a Blu Ray one.

Until then...SING ALONG!!

"15 BUCKS, LITTLE MAN, PUT THAT **** IN MY HAND"....(everyone!!!!)

"NA... NA... NAGA, NAGA, NAN NA"

Do any of these guys even own HD DVD players? :rolleyes:

I smell disguntled BD trolls... ;)

I am the person with 50+ HD-DVDs and has sworn off Blu-ray due to BD+. Trust me my dislike of this movie only has to do with the movie itself. Smokin Aces on the other hand I liked and will be getting that as well this week (today?). Universal has and will have lots of movies I like coming out, this just isn't one of them.

Smokin' Aces and Feast are coming home with me next week.
You can also add The Game.

Wow - lots of debate here :)

For what it's worth, I loved Children of Men. Is it different to The Departed or Lucky Number Slevin? Yes. Does that mean that all the various reviews which praised it are wrong? No.

It is a great film, but the story is a little more aspirational and perhaps a little bit political, so not everyone likes it. But I thought that it was great, and the transfer was seemed spot on.

I showed it over Easter weekend in my Home Theatre when I had a load of friends and family over. Not everyone was watching it, as many of us were relaxing outside on the patio. But various folks stuck their head in to peek on what was going on - and three of them came to me later on and asked, basically, "what movie was that? it looks brilliant"

BTW - I watched Lucky Number Slevin again this weekend also. It was even better the second time, as you now catch things that you may not have realized the significance of the first time around, because you know more about what the players are up to.

I like movies that are even more entertaining the second time - so this get's my thumbs up.

Lucky Number Slevin I love. Its a very good movie.
The Departed is the reason why one has a home theater system.
Great movies you can talk about with your invited guests.

Children of Men lacked alot of things; Action was one.
But most importantly the storyline was a little flat.

Lucky Number Slevin I love. Its a very good movie.
The Departed is the reason why one has a home theater system.
Great movies you can talk about with your invited guests.

Children of Men lacked alot of things; Action was one.
But most importantly the storyline was a little flat.

hmmm :confused:

so

a 9 minute, one take, scene of a guy getting shot at, smashes a guys face with a car battery, is almost executed by a guy who is looking for revenge because his cousin was killed, narrowly escapes in a crossfire, enters a building where people run out carrying white flags are shot down while surrendering, ducks in and out of rooms that are under heavy fire and bombings....

isn't action? :confused:

I think The Departed and Lucky # Slevin, together, had less action than CoM (both great movies regardless)

You can see that in one episode of 24 or the Shield.
Children of Men was NOT better than one episode of any of those two shows.
Sorry.

As far as Slevin and Departed. The ACTING was superb on ALL the characters; EXTREMELY WELL WRITEN.

You can see that in one episode of 24 or the Shield.
Children of Men was NOT better than one episode of any of those two shows.
Sorry.

As far as Slevin and Departed. The ACTING was superb on ALL the characters; EXTREMELY WELL WRITEN.
Guess there's no reason to watch movies anymore then, because nothing will live up (action wise) to 24 and the Shield.

Never seen an extended action sequence done in one take on either of those shows. This makes CoM unprecedented.

But hey, you like formulaic filming. Your loss

Children of Men lacked alot of things; Action was one.
But most importantly the storyline was a little flat.

:confused:
Goodness, I mean I knew we had a drug problem in this country, but I didn't know it was this bad...

:confused:
Goodness, I mean I knew we had a drug problem in this country, but I didn't know it was this bad...

Yea, just look at the results of the poll on this movie (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=828519). Apparently, 76.69% are so hopped up they actually liked this movie! :D

Fuzzy thinking. Cuaron is warning us, but it isn't clear what he's warning us against? Not a very effective warning, then. Most movies simply tell their stories and don't have delusions of grandeur that they can change the behavior of the world. This is a brilliant film that has a fascinating premise, sets a mood and keeps it, and does everything right. I think it's human nature, when presented with a frightening vision of the future, to believe that the producer and director are trying to help us prevent it - to warn us to change our ways. Since no one knows what caused the sterility, it's obvious that this wan't their motive. Don't overthink. You'll hurt yourself.


I didn't mean 'warning' in a grandstanding manner on Cuaron's part. The society portrayed is definately frightening, but it is also very plausible (substitute global destruction for infertility). Americans and Europeans (those of us who live in post-industrial nations) are too complacent with our surroundings and way of life. I'm talking about nuclear destruction - a weapon has been used twice, and the world has come close almost a dozen times since, as recently as a few years ago b/t India and Pakistan. It's understandable that folks in Alaska don't want to dwell upon the hundreds of Russian nuclear warheads pointed at them by outdated machines which only give their human counterparts 2 minutes to correct an error (which almost happened in the late 90s). Japanese and South Koreans don't want to worry about the madman up North who has thousands of missiles pointed a Seoul and just developed nukes. And as of now, we are militarizing space ("missile defense" sugercoat for "universal first strike capability) - which makes the Russians even more nervous.

All it'll have to take is one grave mistake by one party against another and *poof*

I come here everyday and read all of the mourning you guys do when it comes to HD DVD releases. No matter what happens with the format you guys still find a way to bitch, moan and complain.

Now you wanna bitch, moan and complain about how someone feels about a hack of a movie that was Children of Men. Thats MY opinion. And though you just can agree to disagree, many of you wanna sit here and bash me, going as far as calling me a Blu Ray supporter and exhibiting other 4th grade behaviors.

You guys are not gonna beat me into submission. I made up my own mind. I payed $34.99 for a crappy HD DVD movie. My opinion.

Now...Who wants to trade?

I didn't mean 'warning' in a grandstanding manner on Cuaron's part. The society portrayed is definately frightening, but it is also very plausible (substitute global destruction for infertility). Americans and Europeans (those of us who live in post-industrial nations) are too complacent with our surroundings and way of life. I'm talking about nuclear destruction - a weapon has been used twice, and the world has come close almost a dozen times since, as recently as a few years ago b/t India and Pakistan. It's understandable that folks in Alaska don't want to dwell upon the hundreds of Russian nuclear warheads pointed at them by outdated machines which only give their human counterparts 2 minutes to correct an error (which almost happened in the late 90s). Japanese and South Koreans don't want to worry about the madman up North who has thousands of missiles pointed a Seoul and just developed nukes. And as of now, we are militarizing space ("missile defense" sugercoat for "universal first strike capability) - which makes the Russians even more nervous.

All it'll have to take is one grave mistake by one party against another and *poof*But nuclear danger wasn't the subject of the movie. I don't know that if the womenfolk of the world really went sterile that all that anarchy would take over, but that was the theme. The end of the human race on Earth is quite a sufficiently powerful tragedy that we don't have to make it into a morality tale. Seems to me that you are projecting your own fears onto this movie because it shows a catastrophic future of uncertain cause.

am I the only one not happy with the sound quality? switch between the French and English sound track, you can tell the Frech sound track is much much better. I don't understand why, because the powerdvd info shows much more data in the English sound track. Could this be the xbox 360 problem?

french track is just a standard dolby I think - it should sound weaker than the DD+

But nuclear danger wasn't the subject of the movie. I don't know that if the womenfolk of the world really went sterile that all that anarchy would take over, but that was the theme. The end of the human race on Earth is quite a sufficiently powerful tragedy that we don't have to make it into a morality tale. Seems to me that you are projecting your own fears onto this movie because it shows a catastrophic future of uncertain cause.

Yeah, precisely. We live in dangerous times - the next 20yrs should be interesting :)

am I the only one not happy with the sound quality? switch between the French and English sound track, you can tell the Frech sound track is much much better. I don't understand why, because the powerdvd info shows much more data in the English sound track. Could this be the xbox 360 problem?

I was very impressed with the sound, but I'm not using an Xbox. On the A2 (which transcodes to DTS 1.5mbps), dialogue was crystal clear and the effects/explosions were very impressive. In fact, I think the tank blasts and explosions before Theo enters the building were better than Saving Prv Ryan, my personal war-scene benchmark.

hmmm--i saw this in the hteater and loved it--havent had a chance to watch my hddvd yet but last night I put it in for a few minutes jsut to skim thorough and make sure the disc was okay...

I cant remeber the details of the fils look in the theater did it always have a bit of a digital look to it? SOme shots I skimmed thorugh looked great but others I thought I saw a jagginess or digitalness--like a musch subtler version of the miami vice disc--am I just crazy?

I watched scanner darkly after that and it looked fantastic!

Just watched the movie again for the 10th time I think. This time at reference audio level (or in other words LOUDER).

The finale action set piece is just an amazing piece of art. One continuous camera shot with all the things happening at once. Its remarkable.

Can't wait for Alfonse to direct a WWII movie :)

Great film, great HD-DVD.
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/ratings

Initially I didn't like the movie. After watching the second time I really liked it and I am terribly depressed. Pregnant women should refrain from watching it.

Just watched the flick earlier today. The picture was great but the audio was phenomenal. I was blown away by how good it sounded. The flick kept me at the edge of my seat.

I'm viewing COM on a 360, hooked up via VGA to a 720P monitor, and the film isn't filling the entire screen space. There are tiny 2/3 inch black bars on the top and bottom. Does anyone else experience this?

I watched it last night from netflix, loved the movie but I noticed that it filled the entire screen. I though that all HD-DVD's were OAR and this movie couldn't have been filmed in 16:9??? Do I have the settings off or something???

I watched it last night from netflix, loved the movie but I noticed that it filled the entire screen. I though that all HD-DVD's were OAR and this movie couldn't have been filmed in 16:9??? Do I have the settings off or something???

Not all movies have the same aspect ratio. In this case Children of Men was filmed in 1.85 :1 (which is damn close to the 16:9 format of widescreen HDTV's).

Some other examples of movies out now on HD DVD with a 1.85 :1 aspect ratio are:

The Ant Bully
The Big Lebowski
Breach
Hulk
The Skeleton Key
Bullitt
Under Siege
Corpse Bride
Hollywoodland

etc.

So I just watched this movie for the first time on a blind buy from Amazon's b2g1 free deal.

I am SO impressed with this movie. Thanks for pointing me towards this classic.

IMO, This was one of the best Sci Fi movies made in the last decade. This was a terrifying storyline alone, and keeping the action in a small country like England a very novel idea considering how cosmopolitan it's become.

Besides, any movie that has "In The Court of the Crimson King" in the soundtrack has my vote ;)

Beautiful movie, beautiful HD DVD. This is kind of like Kubrick sci-fi, much more about ideas, than effects. I loved it and I think it will one day be considered a classic.

It has no Hollywood qualities, and is completely original (filming style wise)

...unlike IamLegend (haven't seen it, just pre-judging)

Brilliant movie on all accounts. Clive Owen was great. I'm a big fan of Michael Cain and Julianne Moore, too. I wish they had more screen time, but their stories were wonderful. Surprising movie that I can't recommend enough.

I have this film ,The plot is good, the acting is good, the PQ is great.It sounds the dogs
all round a great film

Loved it

The cinematography was exceptional.

It's pretty much amazing.

Among the very best HiDef release despite the added grain. 300 beats it tough in sharpness :)

Among the very best HiDef release despite the added grain. 300 beats it tough in sharpness :)

Can't wait to get it. Was one of the 5 amazon freebes on my new A30 I ordered today. God these deals are too good to pass up.

Beautiful, compelling and landmark HD DVD and movie. A true classic, I loved it. A must have HD DVD!! The commercials/ads shown in the U-Control are great. Highly recommend this.

Excellent title and looks decent on HD DVD.

Great movie. Great looking and sounding hd dvd.

It is definitely a great film; the PQ/AQ definitely put it in the top Tier 1 releases.

Children of Men is one of those films that sits in your gut some quite some time ... long after you've left the theatre, days after you've cleansed your soul with something "less challenging". Michael Caine was brilliant in his relatively brief part. At first I thought he was just "being Michael Caine again"; but not so -- the "sits in your gut" litmus test proved me wrong. Clive Owen, too, was astonishing; and even the bit parts like Charlie Hunnam whom I didn't even recognise. The story itself is a brilliant premise, however implausible; and the working out terrifying but compelling, like a train-wreck in motion.

Awesome film. Destined to be regarded, as the dust settles over the years, as much better than was believed upon initial release. Like Fahrenheit 451: a dog at the box office, yet an icon in retrospect. One hopes that Children of Men will attract more people who actually see the film, however.

This ranks among some of the best looking material that I've seen on HDM. The image depth at times is nothing short of spectacular.

Image depth was good because the director gave tremendous focus to backdrops. However the 1:85 OAR sometimes robs us off the WOW factor when you adjust your viewing distance by even 1 feet.

I assume AR is aspect ratio, but what does the O stand for?

Original Aspect Ratio ... delivered to the movie viewer in an aspect ratio identical to what the director shot the film in / shipped to the movie theatre.

These days that means one of:


4:3 (TV or 1.37:1 "Academy Ratio")
16:9 (HDTV or 1.85:1 "Wide Screen" using all your pixels)
2.35:1 (47:20 anyone? 12:5? black bars top and bottom even on a wide screen HDTV, Cinerama)


There are slight variations (like 1.33:1 or 1.77:1) but these match up with the above.

HATED IT!
-Men on Films

I watched this on Sky HD last Saturday and for me it was a major disapointment, I had high expectations after reading this forum but the film was not my cup of tea.
It felt like the film was a made for TV number :(

It had the same depressing feel about it like 28 days which I also had the misfortune of seeing, I can fully understand why it didnt make good money at the box office....its crap!!

So essentially any movie that aims to be different, doesn't leave you happy and bubbly all the way through and broaden your mental horizon's are crap? then you sir need to stick to your "mainstream" mind numbing movies and go on pretending ww2 didn't happen and that people all around the world aren't starving :)

Original Aspect Ratio ... delivered to the movie viewer in an aspect ratio identical to what the director shot the film in / shipped to the movie theatre.

These days that means one of:


4:3 (TV or 1.37:1 "Academy Ratio")
16:9 (HDTV or 1.85:1 "Wide Screen" using all your pixels)
2.35:1 (47:20 anyone? 12:5? black bars top and bottom even on a wide screen HDTV, Cinerama)


There are slight variations (like 1.33:1 or 1.77:1) but these match up with the above.

16:9 is not 1.85:1.

16:9 is 1.78, which is HDTV.

1.85 is the other aspect besides 2.35:1 that is used for movies. It's a tiny bit wider than 16:9, thus tiny bars on top and bottom. A lot of the time, they open up 1.85:1 films to 1.78:1 for home video HD. Or sometimes they don't, like for this movie.

Well 1.85:1 and 1.78:1 seem the same because most TVs have overscan that hides those black bars on the top and bottom of 1.85:1 movies.

Great cinematography. The long long long steadicam shots reminded me of Full Metal Jacket. They were brilliantly executed.

But I didn't care very much about the characters or the performances or the plot. Clive Owen's expressionless performance seemed by the numbers to me. When Michael Caine has the best performance in a film, I know I'm not going to walk away impressed.

The plot had only one goal and it seemed like nothing more than a way to tour the viewer through as much pointless violence and oppression as possible before the movie ends. On look, people we don't know getting blown up. Look, a bunch of people got shot. Wonder who they were. We're supposed to accept that Britain could suddenly become more ruthless and oppressive than Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union without any explanation.

Great cinematography. The long long long steadicam shots reminded me of Full Metal Jacket. They were brilliantly executed.

But I didn't care very much about the characters or the performances or the plot. Clive Owen's expressionless performance seemed by the numbers to me. When Michael Caine has the best performance in a film, I know I'm not going to walk away impressed.

The plot had only one goal and it seemed like nothing more than a way to tour the viewer through as much pointless violence and oppression as possible before the movie ends. On look, people we don't know getting blown up. Look, a bunch of people got shot. Wonder who they were. We're supposed to accept that Britain could suddenly become more ruthless and oppressive than Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union without any explanation.
Well, personally I think it was one of the best movies of 2006. YMMV.

For me, it was an absolute must-buy on HD DVD.

Loved the movie. It actually made me think after it was over - getting rare these days.

Loved the movie. It actually made me think after it was over - getting rare these days.

I'm glad I rented it first. This is not a buy for me. I liked some of the concepts in the movie (I love science fiction, and usually enjoy future dystopic fiction), but found that it fell flat. The plot made little sense, but I can't tell if that was the fault of the original book or the screenwriters. The main problem was the array of characters that I really didn't care about.

Loved the movie. It actually made me think after it was over - getting rare these days.Kind of "Blade Runner meets the Road Warrior". Great look, astonishing action; nothing cheap or mindless about it.

Though I must admit I'm not sure of the film-maker's message. In any case, a great HD DVD. :thumbs up:

Considering how many bad movies we have been put up with , this one was a pleasant suprise.

Considering how many bad movies we have been put up with , this one was a pleasant suprise.Yes, though unfortunately my wife didn't like it at all--too bad as I do also think it's a great candidate for repeat viewings, particularly as I couldn't follow all the dialog (those Brits, you know! ;)) though of course the plot was straightforward enough. The more I think of it, the more I think it might be a Great Film... :)