3.6: Zodiac v Children (Poll Closed)

Results for this poll have been set to private.
Poll posted 7 months ago.

Create your own.

Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.com

23 Comments

  • Alex Garcia - 7 months ago

    Zodiac for sure, this is an easy one

  • Chris R (San Francisco) - 7 months ago

    Children of Men has left a trail of dark, both brooding and comedic, movies in its wake. For me, it has had some of the toughest matchups thus far in Madness, as Let the Right One In, In Bruges, AND Zodiac have been some of my underdog favorites along the way.

    However, Children’s stunning, visceral one-takes are a sight to behold and cannot be excluded from the next round of Madness.

    I guess the Zodiac’s identity will have to remain a mystery.

  • Chris (Robinson, TX) - 7 months ago

    I’m voting for Zodiac in what I know will be a lost cause. Children of Men will take this in a landslide. And maybe it should because it’s anazing. But Zodiac is a study in tension and obsession, and it deserves some love. I may even think Children of Men is the superior film, and I won’t think it’s wrong when it wins. But Zodiac deserves to go down swinging, at least.

  • Gustav Arndal (Copenhagen) - 7 months ago

    Zodiac is a subtle, brilliant film with plenty to say about our obsession with criminality, which is especially relevant in these true crime-ridden years. But Children of Men is relevant to all of humanity any time, anywhere. It's chilling to watch it become more and more relevant as the world seems to spiral down around us, and we need to keep it around for future generations - if those generations ever come.

  • Andrew Scheps - 7 months ago

    Easy one...The Prestige.

    Oh. Wait. What the...???

    Ok. Um. Yeah, it's an easy one...Children of Men.

  • David (Chicago) - 7 months ago

    Easy choice. Children is chilling, visually stunning, and even more important in this current political climate. It should win it all.

  • Jorge - 7 months ago

    Everything is a mythical cosmic battle between faith and chance. Like Ying and Yang, Lenon and McCartney. Children of Men and Zodiac ended up together in the sweet 16 amongst tens of films by chance, but they were there because of what filmspotting nation believes in, in the first place - their faith.

    It's not just the great writing, the top notch performances that bring it to life or the arresting camera work that takes us there. Children of Men's portrayal of refugee camps, undocumented migrants in cages, terrorism in the streets of London is a prescient and terrifying portrayal of our time. Zodiac is a great film and maybe 10 years ago it would have stood a chance, but not today.

    I cast my vote for Children of Men. Faith put in praxis : -)

  • Chris Massa - Pittsburgh, PA - 7 months ago

    I will admit that I'm on the low end of appreciation for Zodiac, and I need to revisit it. That said, even if I thought it was Fincher's best, I'd still be voting for Children of Men. Not only do I suspect that it could be the dark horse to run away with this entire tournament, but for me, it's neck-and-neck with No Country for Old Men as the best movie of the decade, and one of the most powerful films I've ever seen. No competition.

  • Bob Book - 7 months ago

    I'm as cool on Fincher as Josh. Zodiac may be the perfect material for such a meticulous director, but its depictions of obsession and loss of control still lack a resonant emotional core, as do so many of Fincher's works. If pitted against, say, The Social Network, the latter film would win in my mind every time. Children of Men, on the other hand, is not only the dark horse you have identified in this tournament, but may be a strong and worthy contender for best film of this still-young century. As a work of theological, ecological, and even sometimes humanistic power, Cuaron will never make a better or more important film--not even Roma.

  • Jason Eaken - 7 months ago

    I think Fincher has met his match. Not because "Children of Men" is a better film - it's not, not even close. And I'm voting "Zodiac" all the way.

    I've never been as in love with this Cuaron film as so many others in FS Nation. But it could very well be the sleeper-pick to get to the Final Four, it's that beloved.

    I'll put my complaints in a way that hopefully Cuaron fans can appreciate. "Zodiac" is like the long-take in the car in "Children of Men." It's technically amazing, but almost invisibly brilliant. "Children of Men" is like the long-take at the end of "Children of Men." It announces itself loudly and often - bold, visionary - but it doesn't quite hold together the way its fans keep insisting it does.

    Ok, enough Cuaron shade from me, especially since I do think "Children of Men" is a good movie and Cuaron a great filmmaker. But I can't ride with the hype for this one.

  • Tyler Mikol - 7 months ago

    I just voted for Children Of Men. I feel dirty. Because Zodiac is beyond incredible in every single way.

    The thing is if I voted for Zodiac I would also feel dirty, Because Children of Men is Beyond incredible in every single way.

    This hurts.

    BTW Josh should be punished for not giving Zodiac enough credit. I say we lock him in a room for 48 hours where he is only fed animal crackers and Zodiac is playing on repeat.

  • Liam - 7 months ago

    Of Zodiac loses I will feel immensely sad. I love CoM and consider it one of my favourite films, but next to Zodiac it unfortunately falls second.

    Killing our darlings all March

  • Mike H. - 7 months ago

    Zodiac has been one of the bigger surprises for me in this tournament so far, just in terms of realizing how beloved it is. It just never hit me like that, though I did enjoy it immensely.

    People literally sobbed in the theater when I saw Children of Men, during at least two scenes (at the end of the long battle, and that last shot). It was by far one of the top 5 most emotional theater-watching experiences of my life as a film lover. I already know I won't be voting against it a single time in this marathon.

  • Bastien - 7 months ago

    I re-watched Children of Men last weekend (thanks Mubi), and it blew me away just as it did the year it came out. I had completely forgotten about that incredible 10min long single take of Faron(Clive Owen) making his way through urban warfare to save Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey). The topics of immigration and border control, especially these days, are painfully on point.
    Also, Micheal Caine growing weed.

  • Billy Ray Brewton - 7 months ago

    Wow. Maybe MY toughest choice ever in a Filmspotting Madness. I absolutely love ZODIAC and consider it to be David Fincher's finest storytelling achievement Scenes from the film still haunt me, and I find it imminently watchable. But CHILDREN OF MEN is a masterpiece and should go down as one of the greatest science fiction films of all-time, if it hasn't already. Cuaron does things in the film that I've never seen before, and I still think it's his best film. I have to vote CHILDREN OF MEN. It's a no-brainer, even though it pains me on such a deep level. If CHILDREN OF MEN doesn't win Madness - well, then - congratulations THE DARK KNIGHT, your overrated sack of bats.

  • Peter Hanink - 7 months ago

    This is brutal. Children of Men is a masterpiece and is so obviously the work of a master at the height of his powers. But it's also devastating and seems to suffer from one-time ism (maybe two-time ism?). On the other hand, Zodiac is not only a great work unto itself, but is eminently re-watchable. In the mood for a thriller? a police procedural? a period piece? a buddy comedy? a newsroom drama? It has something for everyone.

  • Henrik Tronstad - 7 months ago

    Zodiac had it's run mainly due to weak competition.. Clearly Children of men in this match.

  • michael miles - 7 months ago

    Where Cuaron’s Children of Men’s is half a retelling of the Oliver Reed starring 1972 film Zero Population Growth, tone-cloaked in Bergman's 1966 The Shame, Fincher’s Zodiac feels a fresh piece, genuine to its period, with nuance in abundance, and distinct character in even its most minor support roles. Adds up to a film certainly rewatchable once if not twice. Love where Paul Avery (Downey Jr) goes to retrieve his note pad from the pavement, begins mooning Dave Toschi (Ruffalo), then quickly thinks better of it. Anyway, go Zodiac!

  • Erin Teachman (Washington, DC) - 7 months ago

    This is rough. I‘ve been on the Zodiac bandwagon since the film came out, which felt pretty lonely for awhile, but the harsh light of the Madness has revealed quite a few folks who appreciate Fincher‘s tense and riveting exploration of the costs of our dangerous fascination with psychopaths. But in trying times like these, choosing between two films that steep us in the harrowing stakes of existence, that acknowledge the darkness, I have to choose the one that offers a tantalizing glimpse of the coming dawn and vote for Cuarón‘s Children of Men

  • Jacob Meltzer - 7 months ago

    Fincher's best movie versus Cuarón's best movie. This is not fair, but Children of Men is my favorite movie of the 2000s, so if results go as I expect, Children of Men will go up against my second favorite movie of the decade, There Will be Blood, in the Elite Eight and I will be truly broken by Filmspotting Madness at last.

  • Adam Grossman, Vancouver, B.C. - 7 months ago

    This is a doozie match-up of two movies that chill the viewer to their very core. For me, 'Children of Men' is the one that stands up to more constant re-watches and still has so much to say about our world today. I also think it's the one that has a chance - if just a chance - of going all the way in this year's Madness. Cuaron's masterpiece gets my vote.

  • Alex from Tacoma, WA - 7 months ago

    Man, this was the hardest one for me. I stared at my screen for a good 3 minutes before picking children of man, which I found to be enthralling and visually stunning. However, I could have gone either way.

  • Griffin Armour - 7 months ago

    While Children of Men is visually stunning, I think it lacks a certain substance to live up to it's masterful camerawork and direction (I think Roma strikes this balance perfectly). Most of my enjoyment comes out of being in awe of the technical work, the long takes, the sound, but when you look deeper, it's just not all there. Meanwhile, Zodiac is all substance, it holds up to the harshest of scrutiny. It's a slow burn that takes it's toll out on the viewer, few scenes are as tense and stressful as the basement scene, or as painful as the lake murders. After the movie is over, you feel as if you have run a marathon, and you have that same satisfaction. Not only is Zodiac a technical masterpiece, but it has the substance to back it up. Few films have lasted with me like Zodiac.

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment