Please don't spend money on this.

People are voting emotionally.

I'll tell you why so serious

Watching it is like watching the spectacle of a class clown at their best: you laugh at their jokes, instigate their defiance, and "ooooh" when they get in trouble.

Perhaps you're like me. You'd just seen Reds and you want to wash the hopelessness out with some - any - evidence that there is a historical and moral conscience somewhere in the film industry with regard to Stalinism and Soviet Communism. You come across a little-known Australian production called Children of the Revolution which bills itself as a satire of the the western true-believers valorized in Reds; a comedy about a 'useful idiot' so starstruck by Uncle Joe, she flocks to Stalin as a groupie would and ends up pregnant and raising his love child.Now, I, and I'm sure anyone, could imagine about a dozen ways this premise could be developed into a narrative coherent enough to be both cutting and entertaining. What instead ends up on screen is ... hard to explain. It seems like a pre-freshman effort, as if there were some producers with some money to make some movie and they selected the writer-director by opening the window and shouting down to the street, "Hey you! You wanna write and direct a feature film production?" and someone at the bus stop shouted back up, "Sure! I've seen at least a dozen movies!"The movie starts out with the stated premise as a satire, but not very strongly. Then it changes form a half-dozen times as it slogs toward it's conclusion, becoming a romance, then a thriller, then a drama, then a tragedy then a thriller again and so forth. One thing follows the other in sequence only. Characters who have no natural reason to be in the same room with one another develop personal connections and weep together. There's a "race against the clock" thing in there which comes from nowhere and resolves to no consequence. If there's some significant historical event connecting Australia to the Cold War, Children of the Revolution fails to make note of it. The movie is nonetheless set entirely in Australia and has an A-list cast of Australian actors. Taking this into consideration, an explanation for this cinematic abomination reveals itself. Children of the Revolution is the product of public grant money. The actors are fulfilling an obligation to whatever the Australian version of SAG is. We may assume that there was at some point a contest put on by the Australian Film Council, or something like that, and the 'auteur' who wrote and directed this thing was awarded a production grant and given carte blanc to make some kind of movie on the strength of his submission of a ten-minute short.

This film is about a woman obsessed with Communism, and her life after bearing Stalin's child.The film is meant to be a comedy, and it should be viewed as so. Forget the political backdrop of it, and you will find it quite amusing. I find Judy Davis' performance as the obsessed woman very magnetic. She has this dedicated enthusiasm towards Communism, and she portrays it so well. Her despair towards the end of the film, when Communism experiences downfall, is also depicted well. Though it is a comedy, I find the pace rather slow, which is more like a drama. Overall, I think it is an intelligent comedy, much better than the average toilet joke films.

When I saw this film in the TV listings, I thought "could be some good tack." It's much better than that. It starts off almost comedic like, culminating in Stalin singing. Then it enters into the emotional problems Anna has over killing Stalin. The film then focuses on her son Joe, and his problems in finding out he is the son of Stalin, and his gradual descent into Stalinism. The film serves as a warning against Stalinism, about how any abuse of power, no matter the end, is wrong. The interest is held with some superb acting by the cast and the idea of Stalin producing a child and "heir." The movie could use more of an ending, and it does treat itself as being "true" particularly at the end. Having said that this is well worth watching and I recommend it to anyone intrigued by Communism and Stalin.

The ProsTo me, the premise is hilarious - Stalin's love child.I'm always happy to spend two hours watching Judy Davis. I think she's just great.I saw this movie just before I got sick of seeing Sam Neil everywhere and I remember thinking he was neat.The world of Stalin is absolutely hilarious. F. Murray Abraham pulls off a number of macabre gags with great presence.Also, it's a wry look at political activism and some of the poses that resemble it.The ConsGets boring after the first half and the premise doesn't add up to much.Worth seeing just for the courtship of Stalin alone.