Recently, I've become aware that certain films are able to transcend the medium by being completely self-assured in their atmospheres…
Everything is Connected
A set of six nested stories spanning time between the 19th century and a distant post-apocalyptic future. Cloud Atlas explores how the actions and consequences of individual lives impact one another throughout the past, the present and the future. Action, mystery and romance weave through the story as one soul is shaped from a killer into a hero and a single act of kindness ripples across centuries to inspire a revolution in the distant future. Based on the award winning novel by David Mitchell. Directed by Tom Tykwer and the Wachowskis.
"What is an ocean, but a multitude of drops?" - Adam Ewing
I think the only sensible way to review this film is by each of it's inter-twining stories. In chronological order, of course:
Time and setting: South Pacific Ocean, 1849
Genre: Sea-faring adventure/period drama
Protagonist: Adam Ewing (Jim Sturgess)
Well, I suppose a good place to start is the worst place to start, because things can only get better. Although the events of this section are meant to be small and cramped to show the gravity of the events that are to follow, this doesn't seem to gel with the rest of the story. The other stories have a bigger scope, while nothing much happens in this…
It speaks volumes of a filmmaker when they can fluently negotiate, perhaps perfect, multitudinous genres during their careers. What speaks even louder and distinctive volumes is that adept versatility showcased in and confined to a singular film, which navigates genres in such a fluid manner that the coalition of possibly conflicting styles is in fact flawless. Cloud Atlas is one such phenomenal film for the Wachowski's and Tom Tykwer, and what they orchestrate beneath the 172 minute smokescreen is unparalleled, exceedingly audacious and possibly, in due time whilst the film ferments, a revered classic in cinema.
Historic and futuristic; comedic and mightily dramatic; thrilling and introspective, Cloud Atlas traverses an abundance of eras, harnessing the theory that each choice we…
David Mitchell’s novel is one of the most impressive novels I have ever read. It is an exercise in style, an exploration of the nature of humanity and a narrative of hope, an appreciation of art and a glimmer of redemption for a self-destructive race. That is what I got out of it, but the book is so complex that multiple interpretations are possible and there is always the chance that people will not take anything from it at all. That’s the nature of any form of art. Where the film fails to be a successful adaption of the novel on that deeper level for me, it more than succeeds in distilling a common thread from it, structuring the complex…
Having read the book only after seeing the trailer a few months ago, I was never in the camp that thought the book should/could never be turned into a film. I read the book with an almost insurmountable amount of hype behind it, but it met those expectations handily. The film has been hyped even more than the book, with good reason! The book is epic and dramatic, spanning vast amounts of time and space. Even though it has one of the most interesting and impressive narrative structures of all time, the narrative is secondary in importance to the themes holding the disparate characters and circumstances together. How do you turn such a book into a movie without failing miserably?…
It has some flaws but this film its CRIMINALLY UNDERRATED. Surprisingly this is one of the most unique experiences I´d ever had with a film, and at the same time its one of the most complicated plots I have ever seen in the terms of narrative but its brilliant at the same time. Its a movie that really makes you think in order to fully understand whats going on.
The Wachowski siblings have always been ambitious filmmakers even if they have overreached themselves on more than a few occasions. Cloud Atlas is undoubtedly their most ambitious project to date both thematically and logistically. Three directors, six interweaving stories and a big budget independent production dealing with existential questions: At worst it is career suicide, at best filmmakers’ folly.
Although David Mitchell’s original novel deals with the concept of storytelling it never seemed a natural fit for the silver screen. It is simply too dense and sprawling to be considered commercially viable. Therefore it took filmmakers with the vision and financial clout to bring this adaptation into the world. For all its faults, and it does have many, it is…
More distracted by the makeup and accents than the first time around, still engulfed in nearly all of the 6 stories.
Plots were really convoluted and confusing and could have been shaved down.
Definitely a modern sci-fi flick with all the stunning effects.
Loved the smart use of cuts between storylines.
It has a very interesting premise and some good ideas, but it's complicated and messy.
Here is a movie that I wish I loved, but just could never fully get into. A true epic, Cloud Atlas is a three-hour film that tells six loosely connected stories that span from the 1800s to the 2300s. Its stories range from period pieces to post-apocalyptic science fiction. In a sense, I am reminded of Darren Aronofsky's wonderful The Fountain, yet I loved that film but found myself left somewhat cold by Cloud Atlas.
I suppose constant comparisons to The Fountain throughout my review are inevitable, since to some, it will make no sense why I love one film and not the other. At half the length and half the stories, The Fountain is much better paced and each…
intertwining of short films with clashing genres somehow delivers a modern classic.
the story can't be done justice in a short review but I must just say. do not be scared by the long run time and 'complex' plot. it is perfectly paced and well written.
the missing half stars came down to poor acting from hanks and berry (british actors were all great) and my dislike for the hard sci-fi timeline
Interesting to see how their lives interweaved and seeing how they evolved as people over time.
A truly ambitious undertaking that many won't comprehend. Even Time magazine didn't get it since it was their worst film of 2012 and all The Huffington Post could focus on was Jim Sturgess and Hugo Weaving's Asian transformation. I'll admit that it looked weird, but it made sense to me. There's a big chance your favorite YouTube personality didn't get it either, though that's not surprising when the most popular ones typically share the same opinions. One of the most common complaints I've heard about was the length of the film and it honestly didn't feel that long to me. Titanic felt long as hell, but I made it through that. I'll be the first to admit that this isn't…
I've "liked" this film even if I'm going to give it a rather mixed review: I admire the undeniable skill and technical proficiency evident here even though the individual narrative segments vary widely in quality--as do the performances. Tom Hanks is mostly bad here, though to be fair he's not the kind of actor that should be putting on accents and face tattoos in the first place; Berry is ... fine, I guess, though she doesn't contribute anything wholly memorable. I think Ben Whishaw comes off better than anyone else, but that's also probably a function of being in one of the more successful stories.
Ultimately, though, I have to come back to the way this is assembled. The original…
Peeping Tom, Night of the Hunter and a whole host of older films were ignored or given bad reviews upon…
Apologies for the rather clumsy and drab title, I was going to call it Pure Cinema but that isn't quite…