Children of Men Screenwriter on How Alfonso Cuarón’s Dystopian Masterpiece Is More Relevant Today

by

Amidst growing fears and uncertainties, such as xenophobia, economic turmoil, severe weather events, rapidly changing viruses, and a widespread sense of despair worldwide, Alfonso Cuarón’s film Children of Men (a work that came after his direction in Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) seems more applicable than ever before. As put by Mark Fergus, one of the five screenwriters credited for this project and nominated for an Oscar who spoke to SYFY WIRE about the movie, “It’s only now that the film has truly been grasped.

In 2006, a movie inspired by P.D. James’ 1992 novel presents a chilling vision of a future not far off where humanity has inexplicably lost fertility. With no fresh generations to maintain and renew hope, society is gradually disintegrating. The sole stable nation remains the United Kingdom, which preserves its status by brutally suppressing dissent and blaming immigrant refugees, labeled as “Sojourners” in the book and “Fugees” in the film, for societal ills.

Fergus remarks, “The world is beginning to follow suit,” given his past works such as the initial Iron Man film and Cowboys & Aliens. He suggests we’re approaching a pivotal point where everything will shift dramatically. It seems like we’re hurtling towards an abyss… The movie anticipated these feelings of unease long before people experienced them today.

For More on Dystopias

Is it Possible for Human Infertility to Occur as Shown in ‘Children of Men’? What Measures Can We Take to Prevent a Dystopian Eco-Crisis Similar to ‘Mad Max’?

or

1. Could the Scenario of Widespread Human Infertility as Portrayed in ‘Children of Men’ Become Reality? How Can We Avert an Ecological Catastrophe Like the One Depicted in ‘Mad Max’?

Children of Men screenwriter talks film’s relevance almost 20 years later

about:blank

The million-dollar query is which disaster (or sequence of disasters) might ultimately lead to humanity’s demise? Could it be climate change, nuclear conflict, epidemic diseases, or even a meteor from distant cosmic realms? Choose your answer. “Children of Men” resonates so profoundly because its portrayal of an apocalypse unfolding gradually encapsulates the essence of extinction for our species, particularly if we persist on the self-inflicted downfall we’ve been following.

Fergus clarifies, “Infertility is simply one form of calamity, though there are numerous others. It seems symbolic in a way. Replace ‘fear’ with any concern you have for our future as a species, and it resonates at that level.

He goes on to explain: “This movie has resonated deeply with people, prompting them to discuss it extensively. It’s easy to understand, but it deviates from the usual, cheerful movie-going experience. Instead, it penetrates one’s thoughts. The first time I watched it at the Writers’ Guild, there was an unusual silence; everyone seemed stunned and speechless. I remember thinking, ‘Wow, that’s incredible. No one knows what to say.’ To me, this silence indicated that they were still grappling with its impact.

In the end, Fergus doesn’t view “Children of Men” as a grim foreshadowing of the future, but rather as a hopeful parable that encourages finding optimism amidst despair. As the screenwriter explains, it’s crucial to find hope or else it becomes challenging to rise each day. If we act with determination or simply refuse to succumb to darkness, then we have a fighting chance. We may discover a path forward, or we will strive to do so until the end – that is the essence of the movie … It’s truly a very hopeful film.

Why did humans become infertile in Children of Men?

Although the film’s central mystery remains unexplored, Fergus and his collaborator Hawk Ostby initially wrote extensive backstory for their final script. This background information encompassed not only the inability of humanity to procreate and the story of Baby Diego, but also the Ark of the Arts. However, most of this world-building detail was ultimately discarded during later revisions by David Arata, Timothy J. Sexton, and even Cuarón himself. Fergus hints that they might use this material in the future, explaining their approach as follows: “When humanity demonstrates its worthiness for salvation, it will have a chance to save itself. However, we must first prove ourselves worthy in a smaller, symbolic way. Sacrifice is what makes us sacred.

It is clear that Theo, a worn-out and heavy drinking bureaucrat, draws inspiration from three fictional heroes: Sydney Carton, Rick Blaine, and Rick Deckard. A sudden surge of purpose fills him when the woman he once held dear (Julianne Moore) requests his aid in safely transporting Earth’s last pregnant woman to a team of scientists who could potentially save humanity.

Interestingly, the fate of humanity hinges on a young refugee named Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey), a person whom the government would likely detain and imprison. Fergus remarks that the writers emphasized her status as a Refugee significantly, mirroring Moore’s character from the book who saves mankind. In a way that feels like scripture, it is revealed that those who ultimately save the world are often the ones treated most cruelly.

Besides praising Cuaron and the other writers, Fergus acknowledges their transformation of his and Ostby’s fugitive journey across the British countryside into the climactic third act – a tense ordeal for Theo and Kee as they confront the hazards within the Bexhill camp. This resembles an intense evolution of Steven Spielberg’s gritty documentary-style approach, reminiscent of Saving Private Ryan, which was developed more than ten years prior. As Fergus puts it, “The danger was condensed into this gauntlet you had to navigate through. It was as if everything was squeezed through a strainer. You needed to endure the horrors of this camp in order to reach the boat and potentially gain freedom. This led to all the visually stunning sequences that were carefully crafted by Cuaron.

As a gamer, I can’t help but marvel at the incredible sequel that unfolded after our epic adventure concluded. The creators took the core elements and elevated them to new heights in an astonishing way. You know how people often complain about the entertainment industry? Well, sometimes it gets it right. A talented team of writers, a captivating storyline, and a visionary director all came together to create something truly extraordinary – greater than the sum of its parts. It’s almost like magic, and I can’t help but feel grateful that this was one of those rare instances where the system worked flawlessly.

Coming off the success of Harry Potter, Alfonso Cuarón essentially had free rein to choose his next project. I simply cannot fathom how it could have been any better than the masterpiece he ultimately crafted. It’s impossible for me to conceive of a different version that nails it more perfectly than he did.

The legacy of Children of Men

The movie “Children of Men” premiered in U.S. theaters on Christmas Day 2006. It received critical praise but didn’t perform well at the box office (earning only around $69 million globally against a production cost of $76 million). Despite this, it is often hailed as one of the best films of that year and won three Academy Awards: Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, and Best Editing. In subsequent years, Fergus has observed that creators, notably those behind the HBO series adaptation of “The Last of Us,” have taken inspiration from this film.

As he watched, he found himself thinking, “Ah, it seems these individuals appreciate ‘Children of Men,'” he recalls. “Not only did the narrative structure and initial premise of ‘They are the resistance, they’re the good guys, but they’re not completely good; they commit terrible acts to achieve good’ resonate with me, but I also picked up on numerous story parallels, which was quite appealing. They were drawing inspiration from classic Hollywood, while we were influencing them. I found it intriguing.

Regardless of their own roles, Fergus modestly deflects credit for himself and Ostby, instead emphasizing the importance of the individual who created the initial story, without whom there wouldn’t have been a film.

The screenwriter asserts, “P.D. James is the individual I believe has been overlooked consistently.” He explains, “This film is an adaptation of her book. Although there are numerous differences, the emotional impact the movie delivers can be found in her writing. I often refer to her as the matriarch of this production. It’s a tale about motherhood, and she truly embodies the role of the matriarch for this entire project… She is the one who conceived this story and instilled such profound emotions within us that inspired us to create this film or wish to be involved in it. To me, that’s a significant aspect – ensuring she is not overlooked.

Read More

2025-02-05 23:17