User Reviews

_Children of Heaven_ is pretty shocking in its depiction of poverty in modern-day Tehran. Well, "modern-day": for the first few dozens of minutes in the movie, you might as well be watching a story from centuries ago. The only aspect of contemporary life visible in the frame is a small, old-fashioned TV set; and a radio transistor, like those commonly used 50 years ago, perhaps. Only later in the movie, when the father and son, riding a bicycle, visit "downtown, modern" Tehran, does one clearly realize that the movie is, in fact, fully taking place in the present day, although it certainly doesn't look like it to a Western viewer.

I may be naive, but somehow one would expect a "religious state" to be better capable of taking care of its citizens, so that such extremes of poverty can be avoided. I mean, to shoot a movie in 1997 showing a pair of sneakers as the most precious imaginable possession is just sad. The illusion must be similar to what one used to expect from Communist countries - that they would eliminate sharp class divides within society. That's what Communists used to preach, in theory - but in practice, they failed miserably. Does Iran as a religious society wish to remove such sharp divides? I have no idea, but it was disappointing to see so clearly in the movie that they apparently still exist in Iran today.

After I finished watching the movie, I wasn't entirely satisfied. Basically, everything turned out right, as it typically does in fairy-tales. OK, but it also lends a "phony" aspect to the movie: the movie pretty much tells the viewers, "Ah, it's not really as bad as it all initially seems. Just lay back and enjoy the movie - everything will sort itself out eventually, so there's no reason to get upset. You viewers can go ahead and live your comfortable lives just like before, and you can forget about everything you saw in this movie because, see, these folks are eventually capable of resolving all their problems by themselves."

But is that true in real life? And is it a hallmark of a cinematic masterpiece to make viewers comfortable? To be honest, I'd rather expect the opposite effect from an outstanding work of art. _Children of Heaven_ appears to be soothing the viewers' bad conscience: "We don't really care about all the terrible struggles these poor folks experience on a daily basis, but that's OK, because they can sort it all out by themselves at the end of the day."

There's a fairytale-like atmosphere around _Children of Heaven_; the adults in this world appear threatening, but eventually, as it turns out, most are just kind-hearted folks. In the midst of the harshest conditions, people are, in their depth, mostly good. That's a nice, heart-warming theory, but is reality quite as simple? The movie makes it seem *too* simple and allows the viewers to conclude that no measures need to be undertaken to help those around the world who are currently suffering. That's a less elating, and one might almost say - a kitschy aspect of the movie: "The good will prevail, it always does, so why should I worry or do anything about bad things that exist in this world?"

There's another kitschy aspect in _Children of Heaven_, as there often is with children's movies: the two children in the lead roles are just too cute. What if the two kids were ugly? Would there still be a movie?

Finally, the movie was a bit frightening to watch from a European perspective. I find even "liberal" European schools too suffocating for a free-thinking spirit, but that's nothing compared to how Iranian schools are depicted in _Children of Heaven_. One is reminded of army barracks rather than an educational institution. The "uniforms" worn by everyone except males in the movie (headwear by all women, the exact same clothing by all school kids...) strengthen the "military" impression generated by the movie. Uniform clothing - uniform thinking...

Does _Children of Heaven_ deserve its Oscar nomination? It's a very good movie, beautifully shot and apparently realistic, showing you both sides of Tehran as if you visited it in person, but the movie's praise is perhaps exaggerated. It's very much a movie in the spirit of De Sica's classic _Bicycle Thieves_, and it goes to the credit of _Children of Heaven_ that one can pronounce this comparison without blushing. Still, to me, it lacks the intensity and artistry of the classic - unlike here, I never for a second mistook _Bicycle Thieves_ for a fairy-tale while watching it.

I was in nexus of one movie on star movies two days before named. "children of heaven"...that was accidentally..because the movie was at late night...& i do like to watch the movies at prime time & mostly sci-fi, action, comedy & some time sensitive...but This movie I came in to watch was great experience.

It was a persian, iranian, English language film...

It is a story of two children Ali & Zahra, very briefly crafted, & what a language that was, very simple & polite, even a moderate English speaking person can also understand it.

Such a sentimental story...Ali takes his little sister Zahra's shoes to the shoemaker to be repaired, but loses them on the way home. The siblings decide to keep the predicament a secret from their parents, knowing that there is no money to buy a replacement pair and fearing that they will be punished.They devise a scheme to share Ali's sneakers: Zahra will wear them to school in the morning and hand them off to Ali at midday so he can attend afternoon classes. This uncomfortable arrangement leads to one adventure after another as they attempt to hide the plan from their parents and teachers, attend to their schoolwork and errands, and acquire a new pair of shoes for Zahra. Zahra sees the shoes on a schoolmate's feet, and follows her home, but the two soon become friends.Ali enters a high-profile children's footrace in the hope of receiving the third prize of a new pair of sneakers. He accidentally places first and wins another prize instead.

The film ends with Zahra finding out that she will not get a new pair of shoes, but there is a quick shot of their father's bicycle at the end of the movie that shows what appears to be the red shoes Zahra had been focusing on earlier and another pair of white sneakers, presumably for Ali, whose old sneakers were torn from so much use. The film ends with the final shot showing blisters on Ali's feet. Some versions include an epilogue revealing that Ali eventually achieves the larger-scale success of having a racing career.

that brother-sister moments were made us very calm & heart pulsating..great to watch...I will not miss the chance if I get to see it again

On the face of it, this is a gentle and warm hearted movie that so many reviewers have detailed already that I won't have to go into an explanation of what occurred. The young actor portraying Ali (Amir Farrokh Hashemian) was quite incredible conveying the emotions involved with losing his sister's shoes, trying to explain the dilemma to her and dealing with the school principal who always seemed to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when Ali got to school late.

The sister (Bahare Seddiqui) was also quite good but not as accomplished as her sibling. I actually found the side story of Zahra dropping her pen and her new friend Roya returning it to be somewhat more compelling. The subject of the 'lost' shoes never came up between them, even though Zahra saw her wearing them, retrieved from the discarded material at the produce stand. One wonders why the subject never came up; one assumes Zahra was too shy or embarrassed to ask about them.

What I'm not understanding is why there wasn't more of a sense of closure for Ali and Zahra over the fate of the shoes. Granted, Ali went the extra mile by entering the race contest and winning, but in this case, it was the father who would inadvertently save the day with new shoes for both of them after earning a good day's pay. There is probably some meaning to be taken from the goldfish ending that eludes me, but it's something I won't dwell on. The film works as a feel good movie for the resolution of Ali and Zahra's plight, but I didn't get a sense of what was so extraordinary in the telling.