comment #1

ivymike says ...

You're misrepresenting this. It didn't win anything. It was just nominated. Along with The Devil Wears Prada.

comment #2

bipedalist says ...

"CHILDREN OF MEN" WINS 19TH-ANNUAL USC LIBRARIES SCRIPTER AWARD

LOS ANGELES—The author of "The Children of Men" and the screenwriters of the film based on the book have won the 19th-annual USC Libraries Scripter Award. British writer P.D. James published the book, her 12th, in 1992. Screenwriters Alfonso Cuarón, Timothy J. Sexton, David Arata, Mark Fergus and Hawk Ostby adapted the screenplay for the 2006 film, directed by Cuarón.

Scripter is awarded annually by the University of Southern California Libraries to honor writers for the best achievement in adaptation among English-language films released during the previous year and based on a book, novella or short story. Scripter is unique among entertainment and literary awards in that it recognizes both the authors and the screenwriters of a produced book-to-film adaptation.

The Scripter 19 selection committee, led by screenwriter, journalist, novelist and USC School of Cinematic Arts Writing Division Chair Howard A. Rodman, chose "Children of Men" from a field of 45 eligible films released in 2006. The other four finalists competing in the last round of voting were "The Devil Wears Prada," "The Illusionist," "The Last King of Scotland" and "Notes on a Scandal." Rodman announced the winners today on behalf of the selection committee and the Friends of the USC Libraries, who sponsor the award.

"This year's five nominated films were, all of them, heartfelt and elegantly wrought," Rodman said. "In that heady company, 'Children of Men' was first among equals. Messrs. Cuarón, Sexton, Arata, Fergus, and Ostby took P.D. James's bracingly dystopic novel and crafted from it a film at once brave, subtle, shocking. This is writing and screenwriting of the highest order."

"Children of Men" depicts humanity's coming to terms with its impending extinction due to universal infertility. Set in near-future Great Britain, anarchy has overtaken once-ordered societies, leaving little hope for a dwindling population consumed with violence and factionalism. Clive Owen, Julianne Moore and Clare-Hope Ashitey star as humanity's last chance for survival.

Author of the book, "The Children of Men," 86-year-old P.D. James so far has published 19 books in her long career as a writer, member of the British Civil Service and magistrate. Other credits for the screenwriters include "Y tu mamá también" for Alfonso Cuarón; "Live from Baghdad" for Timothy J. Sexton; "Spy Game" for David Arata; and the upcoming "Iron Man" for Mark Fergus and Hawk Ostby.

Universal Pictures distributes "Children of Men," and Vintage published a reprint paperback edition of the book in May, 2006.

The annual black-tie Scripter gala honoring the winning collaboration will be held on Sunday, Feb. 18, in USC's historic Edward L. Doheny Jr. Memorial Library. Henry Winkler will make his third appearance as emcee, with Hal Kanter returning as grand emcee for the seventh time.

comment #3

ivymike says ...

So prestigious the awards are hosted by Fonzie.

comment #4

le corbeau says ...

I haven't read the book but I've read several synopses and so on, and it seems clear to me that it's more of a 1984 thing-- a tale of how fascism comes, in this case tied up with sex rather than socialism. And to me that seems a lot less interesting a theme to explore (though I could be wrong), more like V For Vendetta than the movie of Children of Men.

Obviously what's vital and unnerving about Children of Men is the way it plays on the fears of the present moment-- which is why I don't begrudge the things that don't make sense (why is The Human Project considered an enemy by the government? You'd think they'd be the number one grant recipient in the world) and the things that are too facile (the Abu Ghraib moment). And though I realize that many people are sure Bush is Hitler (we'll see on January 20, 2009), the real danger at the moment isn't that some Big Brother will become Warden of England by smooth-talking us all, but that chaos and destruction will bubble up from mosques and the failed states of the middle east, and we'll lose our better selves both in their actions against us and our reactions to it. That's what the movie evokes so brilliantly, that world in which the fears of the moment have overcome us even as the world remains recognizably ours. Following James' story exactly wouldn't have reached us on that level.

Yes, in some ways the characters are thin (but it's also interesting to connect the dots for yourself-- why does she trust him over the Fishes, instinctively? Discuss) It doesn't matter because it's a visceral experience built on simple, elemental things-- none more so than the effect a baby's cry can have on hundreds at once, in this world. It's stripped down to make us think about basic questions of humanity, and it does so beautifully. It doesn't need to yammer away at us-- as the terrorist in V For Vendetta does, to name one.

comment #5

OddDuck says ...

ivymike, I don't remember reading any of your comments before, but based on these two, my initial impression is that you're a douchebag.

comment #6

ArchiveGuy says ...

Yeah, simply saying "I was wrong" is too big a step for ivymike, so he has to get a rather pathetic "last word" in there.

Shmuck.

comment #7

ivymike says ...

Awards haven't made the rounds yet. Not on a Google search. Not even up at its own site. Only says the awards will be presented on 2/18.

So forgive me for not recognizing the award's importance.

I'm sorry. I was wrong.

comment #8

MilkMan says ...

I don't care that you're sorry Ivymike. Instead of being sorry maybe you should just watch what you say. Think before you open your mouth and words come tumbling out like crumbly pieces of horse shit. I know lots of people like you and I normally don't say anything but I can no longer control myself. I'm sitting here are my kitchen table, my kid is drowing in her own mucus because of CF, and I have to be assaulted with your garden variety hipster comments. Jeff reported and he was right and you were wrong and now you should pay for being a premature dildo. I hope when you go out tonight with your retro-fitted buddies that you open your mouth and say something to the wrong person and that the wrong person smacks you across the chops. I bet you have lots of buddies. I bet you are your buddies sit around and talk a lot of jive: How come everyone is so stupid and we are so smart? How come no one has any taste yet ours is so impeccable? You owe Jeff an apology. Don't apologize to us. We don't care. Jeff works his ass off to keep all of us up to date and then you go and whiz in his grill. Oh, what's that, you don't like the Fonz? You insult a Jew on Shabbat? You're not a douche. You're a creep. A creep who would insult Jeff and make fun of the Fonz. Let me tell you something, suck nugget: Henry Winkler is one of the biggest contributors to my kid's Cystic Fibrosis foundation. My kid is probably not going to live past the age...She's going to die before she is five years old...and if she does make it, it's going to be because of people like Henry Winkler. Who's life are you saving? Here's what you're going to do: I want you to go into your bathroom after you're done reading this and I want you to look at yourself in the mirror. Look at yourself for as long as you can. And when you can't take it anymore, please feel free to spit at your reflection and then stab yourself in the eye with your toothbrush. Okay? Have a nice weekend.

comment #9

ivymike says ...

That is one of the most disturbing posts I've ever read anywhere, MilkMan. I sincerely hope you receive the professional help you so clearly require.

comment #10

jeffmcm says ...

Seriously, that was one doozy of an overreaction. There is no reason whatsoever to bring Cystic Fibrosis, of all things, into this thread.

comment #11

MilkMan says ...

Thanks Ivymike. It's been a long time since I connected with a character like that. I felt that I really committed and was in the moment. I don't have a kid with a cf, but my wife is pregnant right now, so I hope I didn't just jinx myself, you know what I mean! But seriously, some guy cut me off on the freeway while I was driving home from work tonight and I had to troll around and let off some steam. My drama degree from NYU is totally worthless. I'm not an actor, but every know and then I like to get my Keitel-on and let 'er rip. I wasn't faking it though when I said have a nice weekend. Please do.

comment #12

le corbeau says ...

I feel like a douche for actually bothering to discuss the MOVIE in this thread.

Oh, and I hope you get cancer and die!

comment #13

CharlieDontSurf says ...

man there are alot of wierdos on this site

comment #14

ArchiveGuy says ...

Thanks for the mea culpa, ivymike (and sorry MilkMan felt like tearing you a new one). It's all good. ;)

comment #15

dre says ...

...i'm speechless

comment #16

dobbsy says ...

First of all: can the people off their meds stay on the Poland site and allow those who want to discuss films at Wellsboro do our work here?

Secondly: ah, yes, those USC Friends of the Library screenplay awards: in the hallowed tradition of...Hurricane, The (1999) Civil Action, A (1998) River Runs Through It, A (1992) Fried Green Tomatoes (1991) Awakenings (1990) Accidental Tourist, The (1988) 84 Charing Cross Road (1987).

Masterpieces all. Hate to EVER agree with Poland but if you can find a screenplay in this mess called COM, you have a stronger microscope than I. Credit to BAFTA for only three tech noms and credit to BFCA for nada.

comment #17

dixiedugan says ...

I think it's pretty decent to give PD James an award...while I haven't read all of COM I've read her other books and enjoyed them.

Fried Green Tomatoes? For real?

comment #18

Mike K says ...

Children of Men is a phenomenal piece of visceral filmmaking, but I can't fault Poland for having problems with the storytelling. The movie's got holes, big ones.

At a number of points in the film, characters behave like plot elements in a movie, rather than people. Motivations are fuzzy, such as bad guys being bad for no discernible reason other than to make sure Clive Owen runs away.

What's on the screen is undoubtedly masterful, but the mechanics cranking away behind the scenes are missing a few cogs, is all.

comment #19

OddDuck says ...

Milkman's postings are brilliant. Keep 'em coming!

comment #20

Craig Kennedy says ...

Milkman, that was solid. Even before I was sure you were yanking ivymike's chain.

As for the original topic, I still have a bee in my bonnet over Jeff's need for certain movies to provide airtight explanations and not others. I'm officially letting it go right now and hope never to mention it again.

The thing for me about alleged plot holes is that if the movie is really working for me on other levels, those kinds of things don't bother me too much. If the movie doesn't grab me however, every little inconsistent detail jumps out at me and provides mounting evidence that what I'm watching blows.

I would not be surprised to find out CoM doesn't quite hold up to logical scrutiny, but for now I don't care. It was probably the most viscerally intense films I saw all year.

comment #21

le corbeau says ...

"Motivations are fuzzy, such as bad guys being bad for no discernible reason other than to make sure Clive Owen runs away."

Actually, all that was clear enough to me-- they want the baby because then they're the ones with the answer (even though they actually have no idea why she's fertile) and the people will rally to their side and overthrow the government. (An awfully religious/cultish tack for a revolutionary political movement to take, but of course, hardly unprecedented in real life.)

Everything they do is about that-- which is why, I suppose, Kee looks to Theo as the only one who sees her and her baby as something other than a political pawn.

comment #22

Josh Massey says ...

Hey, I liked "Fried Green Tomatoes."

comment #23

ivymike says ...

Just a simple point about the so-called naysayers. I'm not sure anybody has actively said the movie is bad. Most think it's okay-good. They're just baffled at the types of praise that proclaim the picture as a "revelation" or "best of the decade." It strikes them as overdone.

From there it seems to devolve into a stupid circle where the naysayers ask the supporters to explain themselves. And when met with answers they deem unsatisfactory, offer their critiques of why it doesn't meet such a high standard. Then it just turns into a brawl.

comment #24

dobbsy says ...

ivymike: thanks for the note of caution on the vexing case of COM.

from one who thinks the film isn't well-written, directed or acted, i will be first to accept that it is creating an emotional experience for a WHOLE LOT of people i really respect.

so i don't want a brawl and i'm still very curious to read the explanations for why/how it is working for these filmgoers cos i jes don't get it.

i would have expected a quick tank in the marketplace, so if it also seems to be heading into the black, i'll confess to being wronggggg on its possibilities for connecting with the average American folks outside our li'l critical pinhead beltway.

comment #25

Craig Kennedy says ...

I'm not one of those who is ready to proclaim it "Film of the Decade" Dobbsy but I did think it was 10 times more interesting and entertaining than your favored Apocalypto.

I came out of it thinking it was a great entry in the Sci-Fi/Action genre but not quite ready to attach all of the thematic meaning those who love it have done. I'm not saying it's not there, but I'll have to see it again before that stuff sinks in.

I loved how its depiction of the future didn't really call attention to itself. It was obviously not the present but it was pretty subtle. Contrast that with say Minority Report which I liked but felt like Spielberg was trying to cram in every idea he'd gotten from all of the futurists he'd talked to and it was distracting.

A lot of fuss has been made about the single-shot action sequences. What I liked about them was that despite all the attention they've received, the cinematography had a purpose. It wasn't just showing off. The sequences almost felt like they were happening in slow motion (not unlike our memories of being in a car accident or something) and this served to heighten tension and suspense rather than simply providing the chaos and carnage of your typical Bruckheimerian crap fest. The tension would build and then explode in something unexpected. Totally engaging.

I also liked how the film didn't waste a lot of time on exposition (a point that continues to annoy many of the film's detractors). I felt it gave you all the information you needed but never let itself get too bogged down. It was constantly moving on to the next thing, but I was never confused what was happening.

I guess that's it. Isn't that enough?

comment #26

ivymike says ...

Interesting little bit of info.

Minority Report actually has a 1-point higher rating at Rotten Tomatoes than CoM -- 92% to 91%.

comment #27

Craig Kennedy says ...

That is interesting. I don't remember Minority being that critically well regarded.

comment #28

mitch says ...

The only thing this award bestows is acceptance and recognition as most favorable by the majoriy of voting for the 19th-annual USC Libraries Scripter Award. Nothing else.

comment #29

mitch says ...

To pose an argument in favor of any preference based on bestowed awards can be quite tenuous. Witness Crash winning best picture.

Just my recommendation.

comment #30

rocco says ...

Wow, Poland's dissection is more thorough, intellectual, and objective than anything Jeff has written since officially becoming a blogger...how long has it been now, a year or so I might have to start reading Poland more often...no, I'm not kidding...I mean, Jeff doesn't even pretend to write 'articles' anyore...