Although Children of Men is set in the year 2027, about 20 years after the movie was filmed, the technology involved with the film fails to stand out as superior or extremely advanced. At first, I just attributed this to the directors and writers failing to see how much technology would advance. I thought less of the movie because isn’t it obvious that our world will continue to advance in great lengths even without children? But what I failed to realize upon original analysis is that without young minds contributing their thoughts and ideas, difficulty arises in finding new advancements to pursue. I’m not saying that older individuals hinder technological advances, but they tend to quickly become comfortable with things as they are whereas young people constantly search for new challenges to conquer. I think the writers are expressing that without children, not only will we not survive as a human race, but we will be caught in a period of stagnation until we die off. The death of Diego and everyone’s reaction to it adds to this idea because he symbolized the youth and the life of the final generation. Although the people of Britain still had the rest of their lives to live out, they viewed him as the sign of advancement and the future, even if his life had no benefit to society. The creative minds behind Children of Men call into question how our society will be affected by the loss of youth. The technological and scientific failure solidifies the idea of an apocalyptic world with survivors. But, these ideas come from the minds of the directors, and it is up to us to either agree or disagree. It seems that in Mad Max, they face the same problem, because they are still using V8’s with carburetors when we are already past using motors like that.
With that being said, is it possible for humans to advance in a scientific manner without adolescents and younger people driving the action? If so, how significant would the improvements be?
I apologize as well for the lateness, i struggled with computer issues too.