Way better than Children of Men
-
protolexis — 16 years ago(August 11, 2009 02:51 PM)
Wall of text? I typed five sentences in total and proper grammar was used. I realize it's more than what you're used to reading so it's all good.
"Join the army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill 'em." - Woody Allen -
ray_da_rat — 16 years ago(August 13, 2009 11:46 AM)
i really hope this guy is jokingthis movie was patheticCOM is one one the best movies this decade
and vin better than owenlmao, this kid must be 12 and thinks fast and furious is a good movie..
"Godamnit Jack Bauer. You really are the man."-Dennis Reynolds -
grey_outlaw — 16 years ago(August 21, 2009 12:08 PM)
I was actually replying to Mermaidbronze but if you feel the need to feel intellectually superior to others, join Mermaid and go for it too!
" It's The Fourth Of The Trilogies!"
Lord Of The Ringtones, Orange Net. -
protolexis — 16 years ago(October 21, 2009 01:27 PM)
If you were directing your response at him you should have said "@ Mermaid" or something along those lines. There are dozens of responses to the OP and other posters - we aren't psychic. If you had any intellect you'd know to do that.
"Join the army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill 'em." - Woody Allen -
baykid650 — 16 years ago(August 15, 2009 03:11 AM)
First of all, beep! It takes a lot just to register and be able to post on imdb. Second of all, you're an idiot. The only reason I registered was to tell you you're an idiot. Babylon AD, though probably not as bad as they say, still sucks more golfballs through a hose than a bagless upright on an infomercial. Now, I like me some Vin Diesel in a flick every now and again. None of that Pacifier beep mind you. But this movie is just Minority Report + Children of Men + the Transporter = Futuristic Gibber(s+hit) If you really thought this was better than Children of Men, than you should probably stop being. I doubt it's worth it.
-
Philmosaur — 16 years ago(August 18, 2009 09:13 PM)
I saw this on cable and am really glad I only wasted time on it. While there were some interesting visuals, the actions scenes were very poorly edited, the story was far from original, the dialog was stilted, and there were so many times I thought "WTF?" that the only way I could suffer through the whole disaster was to accept that this was just a mess and see if it could get worse. "Children of Men" was a good film, this was an over-budgeted TV movie, not in the same league.
-
LifeIsGoodHere — 16 years ago(October 11, 2009 11:19 PM)
There is NO comparisonhowever, this is one of Vin Diesel's better movies. Children of Men was a very intelligent movie and I usually am not a sci-fi nut. It was appealing to more audiences than the typical far-out sci-fi flicks arejust MHO.
-
FactUnderChecK — 16 years ago(November 23, 2009 12:18 AM)
whats with all the children of men love? your all gay. you just like it coz you love clive owen.
children of men wasnt bringing an original idea, it was just like all the other 'planet it chaos' modern post appocolyptic movies with guns. except worse because it had an ambigious ending which ment nothing.
children of men sucked dick. masterpiece?? i bet you all think v for vendetta is a masterpiece as well. -
evil_lawn_gnome — 16 years ago(November 26, 2009 01:22 PM)
Actors are not the only principle reason to enjoy any flick but more a less a staple to the over all feel. Children of Men is a good movie because it made me feel something other than the sound of the bass from a speaker every time Vin Diesel blew something up. My conclusion: COM= Win sltcs6010= FAIL
-
FactUnderChecK — 16 years ago(November 27, 2009 06:56 AM)
surface loving ignorance principle reason, more a less a staple to the overall feel? what are u talking about. please, dont even try to sound intilligent if your going to finish a comment with FAIL.
i didnt even enjoy this movie that much, but children of men is just pretentious much like those who enjoyed it. -
lorddeseiz — 16 years ago(December 12, 2009 01:07 AM)
Children of Man is alot better. The realism in that one is far more intense. I guess you would say that babylon AD is better if you like more flashy shiney over the top eplosions and spiffy gadgets that make no sense and defy all laws of fysics, then yea, babylon is better.
If youre more into raw realism and inteligent acting, Children of man will be better.
Personaly I enjoyed them both, have them both on DVD, but if I had to choose id be CoM. Babylon for a brain at zero shootemup, CoM good drama.
And i dont understand whats everyone seeing in Vin Diesel, he just another dumb muscle ? He would never be able to play Clives part in CoM and be as believable as Clive was. Remember the burial scene of Susan ? Like hell Vin can do THAT.
Any last words ?
Shut the beep up -
dont_b_so_BBC — 16 years ago(December 14, 2009 07:15 AM)
No, it's not just you.
Children of Men was put together much better since no one was messing with the directing/editing of the film and so feel more "realistic/believable" to some people. If nothing else, it was a more coherent/comprehensible, not mention well-crafted film. But I'll take cyberpunk over apocalyptic sci-fi any day.
And the apocalyptic back-story in Children of Men is just as un-realistic as the one Cyberpunk one in Babylon A.D., if not more so while the near-future described in Babylon A.D., with the exception of sci-fi gimmick/device cyber-technology, actually mirrors ours more closely/realistically.
E.g. Some people living it up while others starve, great advances in technology which are just "technical" and don't really bring peace/happiness, etc..
Why do people who don't care keep telling other people not to care?