Cloud Atlas was never destined to be popular. When David Mitchell published a novel featuring six different stories set in six different time periods, nested one inside the other like Russian dolls, Hollywood said an adaptation was impossible. When the Wachowski Siblings bought the rights to the book, studios were still doubtful. Even after the film had been financed, investors backed out left and right. Nobody but the filmmakers seemed to believe that audiences could handle a movie this big .
As it turns out, the naysayers were right. Cloud Atlas flopped at the domestic box office, earning a paltry $9.6M its opening weekend against a $100M+ production budget. The film polarized critics; it barely scraped the 60% mark on Rotten Tomatoes; and it earned the wrath of many a movie-goer who found the three-hour film too long and confusing. Exploring the continuity of transmigrating souls across the centuries is not typical Hollywood fare, especially not for a Tom Hanks film. If the Wachowskis had been gunning for a new Matrix, what they seemed to get was another Speed Racer.
I adore Cloud Atlas. It’s huge, smart, ambitious, profound—everything a Hollywood film ought to be. And I’m not alone in saying so. The movie received a ten-minute standing ovation at its premiere at the Toronto Film Festival—a sign that the filmmakers had created something very special. Only later did the negative buzz begin. But those movie-goers who enjoyed Cloud Atlas didn’t just like it—they loved it, passionately. Some have even called this film a masterpiece. So who’s right?
Cloud Atlas tells six stories across six eras. Each story has its own characters, setting, and plot… and each story is a different genre . First there’s the redemption drama of Adam Ewing, the slave trader fighting for his life on the high seas. Next is the romantic tragedy of homosexual composer Robert Frobisher, set in pre-World War II England. Third up, a tight thriller about corporate wrong-doing at a nuclear power plant, starring Halle Berry as an investigative journalist in 1973. Number four is a modern-day comedy about a book publisher confined to a nursing home. Next comes a sci-fi epic taking place in 22nd century “Neo Seoul,” the star of which is a synthetic human slave. Finally, there’s the fantasy-esque tale of a post-apocalyptic future in which humanity has regressed into primitive tribes whose language is barely recognizable, with an elite few retaining the high technology of yesteryear and striving to escape the planet.
Holy interlocking stories, Batman! All of that is one film. The first act sets up the six tales in a (mostly) linear fashion, but from there forward, the brakes are off and (unlike in the book) the stories become as interwoven as threads of karma itself. One moment we’re in a car chase through 1970s San Francisco ; the next, a tension-filled composer’s mansion in 1936; then we’re soaring through the VFX-filled skies of future Korea; then it’s back to the high seas once again. Never has one movie jumped across so many settings and eras—and this isn’t even a time travel story.
And yet there’s a beautiful continuity to the whole thing. The six stories interlock like pieces of a puzzle, each one containing bits of the others. Every protagonist shares a birthmark in the shape of a comet. Sets and props are shared between the tales. Each story has a character reading a journal, book, or video from the previous era, which in turns affects the next storyline. And then there’s the “Cloud Atlas Sextet” itself, which not only forms the central story arc of 1936, but appears as a chant amongst the fabricants of Neo Seoul; as a swelling score in 1849; in a record shop in 1973; and so on. (The “Cloud Atlas Sextet” also refers to the six main characters and their connected fates.)
As dizzying as all this might sound, the storytelling is seamless . Great writing and masterful editing play a major role: the film might cut from a bursting fire hydrant to a surging sea, or from a prisoner in the future to a prisoner in the past; every cut seems imbued with meaning. ( The movie was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Film Editing.) The Wachowskis (and co-director Tom Twyker) also did an amazing job adapting the book into a screenplay, especially considering that the original novel has an entirely different structure than the film.
Another element that ties things together is the clever casting. While the characters in each time period are unique, the same actors play all the roles. In various time periods, Halle Berry plays a a young black reporter, an old Asian man, and a white Jewish woman. Ben Whishaw is not only Frobisher, but Timothy Cavendish’s freckly-faced sister-in-law. And there’s meaning implied in many of the casting choices. Hugo Weaving always plays an oppressive character such as a slave trader or a Nazi. Halle Berry is always good, gradually rising from slavery to become a savior of mankind. Tom Hanks is generally selfish, except when he meets Halle Berry and falls in love, while a similar echo occurs between Jim Sturgess and Doona Bae, whose love affair repeats in both 1849 and 2144. All of this was added by the filmmakers.
As an aside: m any critics found fault in casting actors and actresses in roles that required make-up to change their sex or race. But these casting choices are thematic, reinforcing the idea that all beings eventually get reincarnated into every race, sex, clan, and situation. Regardless of whether you believe this notion, the movie does an amazing job of expressing it; it misses the point to get caught up in political correctness here.
In short, this movie is completely unique, unlike anything that came before it. It’s perhaps no surprise that so many rotten tomatoes got thrown at the screen—audiences tend to prefer their entertainment relaxing rather than soul-searing and thought-provoking—but the greatest stories are the ones that voyage unflinchingly into the depths of the human condition. So while Cloud Atlas may never be a movie with mass appeal, I do think it will become a timeless classic, because it’s just too good to become anything else.
At the very least, Cloud Atlas will always have a special spot on my own media shelf. In this life, and the next, and maybe even the one after that.
Brad Kane writes for and about the entertainment industry. You can c heck out his website, like his page on Facebook, follow him on Twitter, or just email him at worldsofstory@gmail.com.
I loved this movie when I finally had a chance to see it. I missed it in theaters, which still upsets me. But after borrowing a copy from one of my siblings, I knew I had to own it. And the soundtrack. And the book. Ordered the whole mess of them from Amazon that day. (Still need to find a time when I’m not bogged down with school work and can actually read the book…)
All that said, it was amazing! Simply incredible. One of my favorite movies ever.
I’m also a fan of this movie. It was one of two movies that I rewatched immediately. The other was Donnie Darko.
Good article and I agree. I enjoyed the movie quite a bit but it clearly isn’t to everyone’s taste. But then, neither is Citizen Kane.
This is probably one of my favorite movies of all time. Both the book and movie are so wonderously fabulous I can’t even find the words to describe them.
(Just got the movie for my birthday four days ago! Happiest day ever.)
I really enjoyed the movie.
I was surprised by how many people couldn’t see beyond to surface of this movie, beautiful though it is, to see everything happening beneath. It is an incredible adaptation, and while I don’t know if it’s one of my top 10, it’s certainly a masterpiece.
“I enjoyed the movie quite a bit but it clearly isn’t to everyone’s taste.”
Exactly. The reviewer seems to think people who didn’t like this movie are simpletons who couldn’t understand it or timid souls who only want to watch the movie equivalent of comfort food. Offputting in a review, to say the least.
I thought it was a fantastic adaptation of a book I didn’t like very much. Beautiful, clever and ambitious, but I just couldn’t get into the stories – they all seemed to be pretending at depths that just aren’t there. Obviously others got more out of it than I did, and that’s great.
@7
I don’t see anything like that in this review. The only shot fired at people that didn’t like it was against those that put it down for the non PC casting which in this one particular case I think is justified.
I didn’t get that from the review at all, tbob. Can you point to where it is that you felt Brad was trying to make this point?
As far as the movie itself goes… I watched it over two days with my 14 year old neice.
Her comment when the credits rolled summed up the “other side” for whom this movie is not to taste quite succinctly: “Well, THAT happened.” She understood perfectly what was going on, but it just wasnt for her.
Meanwhile, I teared up on about 4 different occasions (I’ve been known to tear up during both sports films and Disney films, so this is not a good indicator of quality, lol). The film stuck with me emotionally for days afterwards.
@9, @10 :
This is the line that bothers me:
This isn’t even a subtle implication – it’s an explicit statement that if you didn’t like the movie, it’s because you want something relaxing instead of thought-provoking.
There are also those who disagree with the social and political commentary on offer. It’s a movie that tries to Say Something (or several somethings), and that won’t always translate to box-office success.
@11
I have disagree. Its a generalization. They are commonly used to make points about large groups of people. They are generally true.
The only problem with using a generalization is when you try to take something that is true across a large scale and apply it to an individual. The author of the post almost certainly did not do that. The “rotten tomatoes” mentioned in your quote are a direct callback to the 60% positive score on the rotten tomatoes website–dealing with mass groups of people.
Audiences, when taken as a whole, do tend to prefer their entertainment relaxing. The author made no claims that any individuals reading this would feel the same way, nor does any seem to be implied, by my reading. The blogs author is certainly not responsible when a reader takes a generalization that is clearly applied to a large group (which is clearly signified by the use of the word audience here, coupled with the rotten tomatoes score callback) and applies it to an individual, then gets offended.
I love this movie. I had to rewatch it because I was not able to finish it the 1st time around. I think it just so amazing. My friend didn’t really like it because it confused her. I just like how everything just fit together. I also love the soundtrack which I bought. I still need to buy the book.
I completely agree. This was a fantastic, original movie. The visceral negative reaction it got was because it dared to not follow the “save the cat” formula that has homogenized Hollywood in the last decade or so.
I highly recommend both the movie and the book. And, for anyone who is interested, I also recommend “The Bridge of San Luis Rey” by Thornton Wilder, which is thematically similar and provided David Mitchell one of his primary inspirations in writing Cloud Atlas. It’s a short read, barely over 100 pages, and it’s every bit as bittersweet and inspiring as Cloud Atlas.
I have yet to read the book. It is in my queue.
I found the movie wonder-filled, gripping, and profound . . . even though I don’t buy the central premise of shared souls. (And I’m pretty dubious about souls.) Beautiful and horrifying.
I did not find it slow or hard to follow, but it was challenging. Deliberately challenging.
If there is any justice, Cloud Atlas will — like Blade Runner — be eventually be recognized for its daring and ambition.
I watched streaming from Amazon one rainy Saturday afternoon. If you think of it 4th dimensionally as the progression of the Tom Hank’s characters soul thru the wheel of time to enlightenment it all makes sense. It is a good vehicle for understanding Buddism and other similar Eastern beliefs which aren’t as linear as our Hellenic minds are accustomed to.
The review has it perfectly backward. It’s only the provincial multiplex dweller that would find the film’s theme of “We are all connected” to be profound rather than hokey.
I loved the book.
The movie, IMHO, was dismal.
The movie was great because it was both beautiful and complex. It was very interesting seeing the same actors play all characters within different timelines. I ordered the book soon after I watched the movie and also enjoyed it, though there are some interesting differences between the two.
This review reminded me that, although I missed it in theaters, I have always wanted to give this movie a try. I am home sick, probably for a few days, perhaps this is a good opportunity to do that.
As an aside: many critics found fault in casting actors and actresses in roles that required make-up to change their sex or race. But these casting choices are thematic, reinforcing the idea that all beings eventually get reincarnated into every race, sex, clan, and situation. Regardless of whether you believe this notion, the movie does an amazing job of expressing it; it misses the point to get caught up in political correctness here.
I made the time to see this movie in theaters (and I had two kids under the age of five at the time, so this was a serious effort). I liked a lot of it. I disliked a lot of it. But that one paragraph has me literally shaking with rage so that’s all I’m going to discuss.
One does not need to be acting out of “political correctness” in order to find the yellowface in this movie upsetting. I did, profoundly and viscerally, to the point where I could barely look at the screen, for two reasons.
One: my ancestry is Korean. I know what people who have Korean ancestry look like. The makeup was awful, completely unconvincing and distracting and “uncanny valley.”
Two: want to make a point about interconnectedness and reincarnation and whatever? You can still do it if you CAST MORE THAN ONE ASIAN MAIN CHARACTER. Giving the future-Korea action-romance hero role to a white dude is not equivalent to Doona Bae playing a white woman: one decreases the representation of an underrepresented group, and one does not.
The yellowface didn’t hit you where you live? Fine. You’re allowed to feel that way and like the movie. But it is a seriously dick move to claim that no-one else could possibly sincerely object.
I might have a jaded view of the world but I’m pretty sure the only reason many people do not like this film is because it requires them to engage their own brains. This isn’t mindless fun, this isn’t pure entertainment, this is literature, a modern classic, that doesn’t appeal to every person the same way. But like good literature, even if you don’t “like” it, it’s a movie that can be studied, compared to, referenced, and analyzed. I, personally, loved it! I feel like its one of those movies I can watch several times over the years and find something new to make me think.
I have to say that I had trouble staying focused on the movie when watching it in the theatre..as the author stated, it was deeper than I had planned for that day after a long week at work. However, I then rented it later when I was in a more open mood and found it fantastic.
And as another author wrote, noting the progression of character through time, and then the intertwining of destinies did impress me as a nascent follower of Buddhism. So in the end, I took in the broad expanse of what the movie was trying to convey and it overwhelmed me gently light a wave of enlightenment and it saddens me that a movie such as this may not be attempted again for years.
I totally agree…with the criticisms of the review. I think it was very simplistic and insulting. I love the book, but I found the movie dull and the stunt casting highly distracting. The script robbed the story of much of its tension, and the ‘big themes’ really seem very trite and obvious. That’s my opinion and certainly people are entitled to enjoy the movie to their hearts’ content, but this review is very self-congratultatory, as if the reviewer and the other people who ‘get it’ are onto something that many people are oblivous too. I don’t think the movie was too deep or challenging for people. I just think it was insipid (the people who understand what that word means probably get what I’m saying).
I wanted to like this film, but the fact that I was unable to understand 1 word in 10 that Tom Hanks was saying didn’t help. Constantly mumbling (why does that happen so often!) in an invented dialect – not good.
Add to that the over-frequent scene/time changes. Just as I started to get a handle on what was going on (something which never happened when Hanks was talking), it would change again. I swear some of those scenes barely lasted 30 seconds.
Dunno – maybe I’m just a big thicky. Thicky, thicky thick. I’m off to watch Terminator 2. Soooo much better than the first – whoosh! Bangbangbang! Awwww…lookit the cute kid.
@25 I agree. I thought the move was okay but I kept waiting for for it to deliver something more. They dedicated nearly three hours to this, it should be something profound. Sure, they’re trying to make the point that throughout history people are all the same and maybe get a little spiritual about reincarnation and eternal love, etc. Fine, that’s great. We got it after an hour or so. We figured out that these are supposed to be reincarnated souls after about 20-30 minutes. It needs to go somewhere from there, but to me it didn’t and it felt very underwhelming.
Also, as to the issue of “PC” in my opinion a theatrical production should -never- be cast based on a percieved need to have a multi-ethnic cast. You should cast based on the what is needed in the plot and the talent of the actors. Sure, Hae-Joo Chang could have been cast as a Korean actor, but that would mean the Korean actor would be playing a non Korean in at least 2 or 3 other timelines in not all 5. Logically it makes sense that they did it the way they did: 1/6 of the timelines are set in Korea and 1/6 of the main cast is Korean. Because of the premise of the film you can’t have a full cast of any one ethnic group and all or most of the main cast needs to show up as characters in every timeline. If you’re going to do this movie, you have to have actors playing across race. The only other option would be to change the plot or premise of the film.
I appreciate your advocacy of the film. But I think that some its success in your eyes, were the things that doomed it in (more) eyes. It was too long for its format, (why not split it into several films) the main idea was difficult and may not have been as deftly presented as it required, the casting for some was problematical, and while some sequences were grippeing others were dull and overly slow.
But again, this is not a review but an encomium and nothing wrong with that, as long as you can avoid the whiff of superiority, that sometimes come with advocacy.
Cloud Atlas was absolutely brilliant, whether you read it, or watched it. Brilliant beyond belief. The novel had me slack-jawed in amazement, then the film did it again.
Just brilliant.
I understand where @22 is coming from–actors using makeup to play other races can be offensive. But as @27 said, in this movie, playing characters of other races is an unavoidable consequence of having the same actors play different interconnecting characters across the world and across time. The alternative would have been to cast appropriate actors for each segment, and have some visual or behavioral cue show us the connections between the different actors. But that would have probably been all the more confusing, as many watchers could have missed those cues.In the end, I suspect that the conceit of using the same actors in different roles overshadowed an already complex plot, overwhelmed the movie, and made it so inaccessible to so many people.
I loved this movie on first watch. I didn’t get it all right away, I had to watch it a second and third time. But a puzzle like that is what marks a good book or movie. I showed it to my sister and she didn’t get it right away either, but she loved it. She always wants to watch it when she comes over for movie night.
In my opinion, anyone who doesn’t like this movie just has bad taste.
“( The movie was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Film Editing.)”
Actually, no, it wasn’t. You would think it would have been, though, right?
But no. The Academy snubbed the film entirely.
@34 – Good catch, not sure where I’d read that. The movie was indeed snubbed from the Oscar race (and the Golden Globes too, with the exception of a Best Score nomination). Thanks for the correction.
I loved this movie, book, and score, or I mean to say I have always loved it. The crescendo of Death is only a door and the way in which that moment unfolds in the climax of the film is emotionally overwhelming to me everytime I watch the film, or start to even think about it. I longed for love for a long time in my life and thought that it might not be possible, but then due to some fortunate turn of events I was given the chance to experience love and companionship that lends credence to the notion that perhaps there are plot threads to my existence that may or may not complete themselves during my actual lifetime. And that is ok, unresolved issues in my life and relationships may in some universe or some timeline be resolved, and I can use that possibility to provide hope in my own life right now when I need it to stay on track.
Peace to all of you that were touched by this film.
I suppose the most seamless way to solve the issue where asians are underreprestented in the movies, for this movie, would have been to change Neo Seoul to New New York and Hae-Joo Chan to Hank Jones. Could have been more respectful, or less, I’m not sure.
Otherwise, I love this movie. You can engage with it cerebrally or emotionally or both, and it’s four entirely different movies depending on which; it can be six separate stories with thematic resonances and references or one story taking place in six time periods at the same time; it can be one story inspiring another five times over, or a story about people and events all inspiring each other crosswise through time, depending on and drawing strength from each other with only the most indirect knowledge of the others’ existence. It makes its point with an overwhelming full-spectrum assault on the limitations of the viewer’s short term memory – that the world is fully, madly overwhelming and frightening to take in all at once – in that perfect synthesis of message and delivery that maybe only one work in a generation seems to achieve.
I usually watch movies many times. But this one I couldn’t stand to watch twice in a row, even though my friend I showed it to wanted to do that, unusually. It’s draining. It demands more, I think than any other movie made, short of pure tragedies. But if you give in, I think it’s going to stand the test of time. I think I’ll still be watching Cloud Atlas a hundred years from now. It’s more than a masterpiece, more a kin to what in terms of music I like to call an archetype. It might be the first movie of its kind.
The movie was visually appealing but exceptionally poor in its assembly and presentation to the audience. That’s why it bombed at the box office. Gush over its artsy schmaltz all you want, it really wasn’t a very good movie.
I agree. Cloud Atlas is a masterpiece. I always loved the book, yet the movie came to me unexpectedly. Music, photography, depth, acting quality, genre intertwining… In every sense, this audiovisual composition appeals, I believe, mostly to people who’s conscience goes far beyond the usual. Those who are tired of stories with linear development and overused eye catching effects will surely appreciate the true beauty, passion and message about love, loss, life and death that lie in the multidimensional core of this film. It was greatly done, and I’m sure that sensitive souls will find answers and inspiration in this masterpiece for many many years. Absolute classic.
A non-linear philosophical, if not spiritual composition. A masterpiece to some, boring, confusing to others. All in all I can compare this to music whereas a vast majority prefer a good beat and easy sing along chorus they can understand which I think everyone can enjoy once in awhile and on the other hand it takes someone cerebral to really enjoy this film and even then not all will like it, like a piece from Mozart or Picasso if you will. It’s the nature of an abstract concept, yet the genius the wachowski brothers pulled off with the matrix was largely successful for three reasons with one main theme this genre of movie couldn’t pull off which is 1. Action Kung foo great effects, visually stunning a great cast. 2. Very literal linear dialogue with open ended meaning. 3. It appeals to sci-fy, action, drama, romance and even dark humor fans… While both films are abstract and don’t give a definitive reasoning to why the movie is the way it is one call pull it off more due to having a good beat and sing along chorus if you catch my drift…cloud atlas is amazing but it will never be widely considered a success for too many obvious reasons…I personally am now going to by the book because I loved it that much.
I had not even heard about this movie when I stumbled onto it last night on one of the HBO channels. It was just starting so I settled in to watch. Wow! What an incredible experience, I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It was as if someone had painted a living picture of humanity from the beginning of time all the way into a distant future. I laughed, I cried, I was happy, I was sad. Our lives, our insecurities, our deepest motives and all of our flaws were so well presented. Also great leadership, strength and courage were displayed. I didn’t want it to end, but I was exhausted when it did. I will watch it again and again, for it truly is the atlas of my tribe, the human beings!
I had not even heard about this movie when I stumbled onto it last night on one of the HBO channels. It was just starting so I settled in to watch. Wow! What an incredible experience, I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It was as if someone had painted a living picture of humanity from the beginning of time all the way into a distant future. I laughed, I cried, I was happy, I was sad. Our lives, our insecurities, our deepest motives and all of our flaws were so well presented. Also great leadership, strength and courage were displayed. I didn’t want it to end, but I was exhausted when it did. I will watch it again and again, for it truly is the atlas of my tribe, the human beings!
Wow, so many people think just because they need to think about a movie for more than 10 seconds or so it MUST be a masterpiece. It isn’t difficult to understand the core premise of Cloud Atlas, and it isn’t difficult to follow each individual story. What I fail to comprehend is why this movie was written in the first place. What was the point of it, the larger story behind it all? Somewhere in the movie they say that cruelties and kindnesses span across lifetimes. But you hardly see the same souls meeting each other again to resolve their karma, unless of course they’re soulmates. To be honest, I was waiting (for three hours!!) for a bigger, more profound, message than the soppy, irritating message about soulmates that I got.
Maybe it’s because I was expecting a movie about reincarnation. But it’s not about reincarnation, it’s a movie with six rather run-of-the-mill stories about characters that just happen to be reincarnated people meeting each other again.
As for the makeup to turn white guys into Asian guys, I hated it. Not because I was offended, but because Hugo Weaving and James D’arcy make for some seriously butt-ugly Asians. Why couldn’t they have cast different actors, and I don’t know, maybe spread it out over more than one movie? Because I couldn’t even recognize half the actors in their makeup, so I missed the point of them playing different roles anyway. The film convention of having reincarnated people all be look-alikes has always irritated me, anyway, because obviously that’s not how it really works.
Another annoyance: Why do the two straight couples get to be together and be a perfect couple in at least one of their lives, but the two gay guys don’t? It seems the only lifetimes where Halle Berry and Bae Doona get their soulmates is when they incarnate as women – why not when they’re male? Or if their soulmate incarnated as a woman as well?
I also couldn’t understand Tom Hanks and Halle Berry’s mumbling, so I missed half that plot anyway. Not that I minded that much, because the end of the sixth story is seriously one of the most cowardly cop-out endings I have ever seen. So a few lucky human beings get saved from our nasty planet by aliens which we don’t see and get taken to a brand new planet. Lovely, now they can start over and poison that planet as well.
In summation, this movie was one of the biggest, most overrated disappointments of all time for me. But not because I wanted a “relaxing” movie. Because I wanted a clever movie about relationships spanning time and lives, and that’s what Cloud Atlas didn’t deliver.
What the hell. I think I’ll go watch reincarnation episodes of Xena again.
Utterly banal nonsense, a typical example of Hollywood self-indulgence, far too much money burned to enable people with no deep thoughts upstairs to look at themselves in the mirror and say “gosh I’m profound!”
The only thing atypical about this as an exercise in Hollywood self-indulgence is that wiser heads in Hollywood recognized this tripe for what it was and passed, allowing easily-impressed foreign film funds to waste their money on it…. a good example why Germany has a negligible impact on worldwide films.
I agree with the reviewer that there are six utterly run-of-the-mill plot lines that in and of themselves would never rise above C movie level. These are filmed with incredible luxury at obviously immense cost, truly technically excellent and lush filmmaking, but the result is a bit like taking a thoughtless, shallow adolescent’s diary that’s full of banal prattle and reproducing it as a hand-written manuscript on vellum that has capital letters illumnated by fine artists and bound in a gold binding. As pretty as the book may be the content is still banal prattle.
As if the Matrix sequels weren’t enough to show the world that the Wachowskis are one-hit wonders with nothing really profound going on upstairs, the Cloud Atlas will once again prove that point.
The fact that this movie was not popular just goes to show how riddled down and pathetic ‘average moviegoers’ are expected to be in hollywood’s eyes. Cloud Atlas was not only brilliantly done among special effects, soundtrack, acting and plot alike, but should have won various awards for that! No, instead we would rather see another ‘twilight’ or the next ‘tyler perry’ film, which is not funny at all by the way. People have dumbed down their expectations and manage to be satisfied with half produced films that should have had better stroylines (Iron Man 3 anyone?) I wish not to occupy such a world where movies as stunning as this are not accepted as anything less than exceptional, so perhaps a journey of my own shall begin. Maybe next time a film like this comes along, it won’t be reviewed so negitively… assuming we get such a chance for one again.
I was so happy to read that this movie received a ten minute standing ovation at the premiere. I have been baffled since the first time I watched it as to why it isn’t on everyone’s top ten list.
This movie is a daringly amazing accomplishment on so many levels. To this day, my fiance and I watch it whenever it’s on. It’s one of our favorite movies and we constantly recommend it to our friends who we think will understand it.
After watching it about ten times, my only criticism is of the post apocalyptic story line. It is my firm belief that this movie would have been a major hit without that section. It is the only part of the movie that doesn’t relate to anyone.. from the moment Susan Sarandon starts speaking gibberish to when Tom hanks starts seeing an evil imaginary green man.
But the rest of the movie more than makes up for this. Listen to Robert’s voice poetically reading love letters hinting towards suicide and just try not to tear up…
If you didn’t like this the movie, just watch it again and again until you love it…
You use the opening Domestic weekend take as proof it’s a complete flop, it isn’t, It’s worldwide take was $130 million and while that still classifies it as a flop, far more movies in 2012 didn’t even surpass their production budgets like:
DREDD
Oogieloves In The BIG Balloon Adventure
A Thousand Words
Rock of Ages
People Like Us (incredibly underrated IMO)
That’s My Boy
Premium Rush
Red Tails
I could keep going, but all of these didn’t even make it past the cost of their production budget some of those budgets were less than 20 million as well, so for Cloud Atlas to hit 130 mill was a miracle in and of itself and it certainly isn’t the BIGGEST flop of 2012, it seems like a bit of a stretch used to make an article headline instead of accurately representing the film’s performance…
This movie is one of the best movies ever made in my oppinion. What I like so much about it is the fact that it is completely unique, there is literally nothing like it! I understand why it never became popular, I’d estimate that 80% of my friends wouldn’t like it, and 50% of them would probably turn it off after the first 30 minutes had passed. That being said these persons are part of the enormous crowd of people who believe that the fast and the furious series and other movies in that genre is the best thing that has happened to hummanity. I strongly disagree. While the fast and the furious might be a fine movie for shutting off your brain and enjoying some high-end special effects, this movie constantly makes you look for connections, consider the impressions from each of the unique stories and by the time you’re done watching it you’re left breathless and absolutely amazed! It is as close to perfection as a movie can get, a true masterpiece!
its not popular because in general people are dumb and they like dumb movies :)
A three hour film with disjointed stories loosely, and seemingly, tied together by the “universal” force known as karma…. LOL. No. Just no. This is a great example of people reaching and grasping at an illusion.
In all honesty, the film (not the stories) was boring and ran one hour too long. Self-Proclaimed Intellectuals claim that the rest of us simply “didn’t get it”. I say it’s you SPI’s that are looking to make bread from rocks. Review what you watched, and not what you thought it really was.
BTW… I demanded a refund after watching this film. And guess what? Three other people followed suit. The cast did great. Shame their effort was wasted. I honestly knew the film would flop at the 43 minute mark. See why for youself.
51. So true. I felt the exact same way. I found it boring and no, that doesn’t mean I didn’t “get it”.
there is not a single original storyline or concept in the entire movie. I kept on thinking ive seen it all before. Just general mishmash of ideas, but no coherent plot. 3 hours is way too long for this. but yes, it is beautiful.
I read the book years back and was warned by a girlfriend it was a hard read, she was right! I persevered and soon was enthralled. When I saw it on the shelf at a dvd shop I could not remember at all it being at the cinemas. I am bad with faces and my husband was the one who pointed out after we warched it they were all repeat performers just goes to show how lost I was also in the movie. I was just searching the web to try and find the story of how it ever got made. Definately a classic right up there with the greats an indepth sociological perspective of iconic charater types and all round great adaptation. The sheep brained masses wouldn’t appreciate it of course.
I love film but as I imagine most people like me, of average intelligence, have found, this particular film is very hard going. I’m just halfway through and found the going SO hard that I had to take a break. And, being a little concerned that my average intelligence had suddenly somehow dropped to ‘really thick’ levels, I googled ‘Cloud Atlas – complicated’ and ended up here.
Oddly enough, despite this ‘difficulty’ angst, I’m really enjoying it. If my brain doesn’t explode by the end of the film, I’ll finish my review.
I loved the movie and I loved reading what you have to day about it; I’ve seen it many times now, and each time it reaches deep into my soul and moves me once more almost as the first time I saw it. I completely agree with you Brad Kane, in that this is a masterpiece. We live today in a world where things that are overly simplified are popular. People don’t appreciate thought anymore (or for now, i hope, believing that there will be a time when all this madness will subside) and I think the edge of what happens this day can be extrapolated to the 2144 story where any number of barbarities can be done to satisfy consumers. Hopefully we won’t need to come to that before realizing how much we can harm ourselves and others. And here i am ranting and babbling because I’m still thinking about the movie. Thanks again for your article. And i love Cloud Atlas too
I should warn you that I am part of the sheep brained masses.
This movie had nice visuals, good acting. It had some sweet messages about sticking it to the man, saying no to racism, that those who are different aren’t bad, and gays are human too.
I don’t think people who didn’t enjoy the movie didn’t get any of this, I just think the delivery was extremely boring. None of the stories were especially original.
I almost started liking the composer story, when the youngin’ and the eccentric old genius had a heart to heart, and were about to make out. But then out of nowhere, the old guy turns into a villain. Twist! He was a douche all along, we just didn’t tell you. That was just a really cheap trick. Also this twist that the young guy had a crush on the oldie kinda undermined the whole heartfelt-loveletters subplot.
Also, why couldn’t the faux-Korean guy save the slave without them falling in love? That would have been so much better, if he had rather wanted to set her free, to give her her own life. But nah, they had to make it all into a love story. Maybe they thought it would spice up an otherwise simplistic and trite sci-fi story, but it only added unnecessary cheese.
And the hobo with the top hat… Oh my Lord. Is that what you guys call deep and profound? A nasty guy telling the guy not to trust the stranger, cos she’s a different colour, yada yada. Sorry, I didn’t find this movie to be either subtle or thought-provoking.
I could go on with complaints, but… Let’s face it, none of the stories would have made really good movies in and of themselves. In my opinion, intertwining them and saying “Don’t you get it, it’s all connected! Soul mates! Consequences! Reincarnation!”, just doesn’t make the movie a masterpiece.
If any of you guys want to tell me what depths of the movie I just didn’t comprehend, please, help me out here. Explain to us simpletons.
My first viewing of the movie had me wondering what the hell was going on. The visuals and casting choices were appealing if somewhat disconnected. I realized that another viewing was necessary. My second viewing helped connect the multiple stories into the one. Definitely not a mainstream movie formula, maybe even commercially irresponsible. It took a huge risk that is understandably easy to initially condemn. However, that risk is what makes it a masterpiece. I have no doubt that this film will gather a cult following. It is thought provoking. It has visual appeal. It has quotable dialogue. It has memorable characters. It has comedy, romance, suspense, action, drama, and paradoxes. It is a rather cramped movie, but manages to juxtapose them for the singular story. Maybe not easily understood from an initial viewing, but the required subsequent viewings is what will lead it to a cult classic.
@59: You should absolutely read the novel.
Just like the buried Cloud Atlas Sextet itself, this movie won’t be receive the praise it so respectfully deserves. Such a shame.
@22. katenepveu
The thing is, those people weren’t Koreans. They were mixed race and genetically modified descendants of Koreans. And there were two main character Asian actors, not one (two women played several parts).
@18. N. Mamatas
Actually I’m going to turn it on to head. The “we are all connected” idea this is BOTH profound AND “hokey.” How do you mean, you ask? Because whether such a thing is meaningful to you or not is largely determined by brain chemistry from birth. Some are naturally more programmed to long for such long reaching existential connection and some are not. It’s similar to how a normal person feels compared to a sociopath (I am NOT calling you that lol). We tend to overestimate how much we control how we think and feel, but there is a reason some of us accel as artists and some of us accel as business people. Our brains are what they are.
Both types of people have their uses for society, and with each type their are strengths and weaknesses. For example, Einstein would be an example of a “profound” type physicist who sees connections to the big picture and thinks of such connectiveness as aesthetically pleasing. He sought to unify aspects of physics that appeared irreconcilable, and succeeded admirably in this by unifying mechanics and electromagnetic theory (relativity). However, his desire for seamless continuity greatly inhibited his ability to get on board with the later development of quantum mechanics, because it again created a dichotomy in physics, shattering the unity he felt was preferable.
But regardless, he was not in control of how he viewed the world and what is a preferable state of order, and neither are we.
Some people will always be astonished that the light from a distant star has traveled for millions of years or more to reach their eyes Others will hardly care. Some will marvel at the fact that they are literally drinking the same hydrogen and oxygen atoms in their water as the dinosaurs and early humans did. Others will be more interested in other things. Who is to say who is right?
The only thing I think I can be sure of is that we need these “hokey” people who are impressed by the patterns of the world and how they connect everything.
@58 Cioran
It isn’t about hidden depth. It’s about a couple of truisms. You are looking at the film as an art critic would, and that’s why you don’t “see what’s obvious,” as I’m sure the other side of the debate sees things.
The point of the film, the larger “truth,” is that human beings are not really in control of who they are. This is why the characters kept making the same mistakes and same choices, whether good or bad, throughout. This is why Tom Hanks kept making selfish decisions throughout.
However, the film made another equally pretentious or grandiose claim (which it is depends upon your perspective): other people can influence and even change who we are. “Our lives are not our own. We are bound to others, past and present.” Tom Hanks became less selfish every time he encountered Halle Berry’s character.
Truly great film is about holding up a mirror to humanity. This film does exactly that, and argues that who we are as individuals is not something that can easily be changed. Our VANITY makes us want to believe that we are in control of who we are and what we believe, it argues, but in drifting through life with others by our side we are better able to navigate through our baser tendencies and become something better.
Is that some unknown Great Truth? No. But it certainly is A truth, if we date to admit it (even science would argue we have far less control over who we our than our vanity wants to allow). So why is this movie “deep” or “profound?” Because it looks into the mirror without fear or delusion.
@@@@@ Vic Marcell
You only proved their point. This film wasn’t about karma. Not at all. It was about three things:
1. We are who we are and despite our vanity we cannot change it and have no control over it. We can only make decisions, and 9 times out of 10 we’ll make the one we are predisposed to making.
2. In almost all cases the only way we can overcome our nature is by the synergy created by interactions with others.
3. Sometimes these interactions are not readily apparent. They can transmute both space and time.
Together these three points make up the central theme and coalesce into one: as Solomon put it, there is nothing new under the sun. The human story is one story, repeated billions of times. In the grand scheme of things none of us are special. We are slaves to our particular biochemical hardwiring. Nevertheless, that singular story has value each time it is told.
Is that a pretentious message? Maybe. But it isn’t any less true. This film is a mirror.
In fact to summarize what I’ve said above, the film itself DIRECTLY states what is about, and it is NOT some statement about karma or reincarnation. “A tiger cannot change it stripes.” That line from Tom Hanks early in the film directly tells you the single thought that encapsulates the movie.
Cloud Atlas is about the simple fact that we are who we are and cannot change it. Granted, many of you will argue that we can change who we are, but I will counter that that is nothing but vanity. We can change our BEHAVIOR from time to time, but who we are was decided long before we had the ability to consider the question, by our genetics, brain chemistry and culture we were raised in.
This is the central thesis of the film. People don’t change. Even over several generations, as the film argues. And more, the human story doesn’t change. So those of you who claimed it was pretentiously vague, I have to ask you how you missed this clear central argument of the film when it was presented rather directly in the dialogue itself: a tiger cannot change its stripes.
Jim – I appreciate your comments on Cloud Atlas – a film that I think is very important in outlining the human condition.
I have just seen this movie for the first time. When I first saw the previews, I was eager to see it, but the early reviews were not favorable so I skipped it.
Recently I have come to explore the ideas behind Cloud Atlas, apart from the movie. The movie called to me so it was time to see it.
From your opinion of the movie compared to mine, it is apparent that we see what we expect to see (something from The Matrix – another Wachowski film).
From your comments, you suggest that our individual personality and nature is set, with very little room for change, within a lifetime and even beyond, in future lives.
I disagree with this idea completely, but do so respectfully. I’m not arguing – just putting forward a contrasting view for consideration.
You say that the movie holds up a mirror to our humanity. I agree. We just disagree on the nature of humanity.
In the movie, the Tom Hanks character does say that “a tiger cannot change its stripes” as you say. I don’t think this means that the movie’s premise agrees with this. The character says this in his first incarnation and over the course of the movie, it is the Tom Hanks character that changes the most. I suggest that his belief in an unchanging character is one of the most prominent changes he makes. The Halle Berry character definitely appears to be the catalyst in this change, as you suggest.
So why would she and Tom Hanks be destined to meet each other in most of their incarnations, except that they have work to do? The work of evolving Tom Hanks is the most obvious thing that brings them together.
And at the end of the movie, the two characters are very much in love as grandparents to their family. The Tom Hanks character seems to have undergone an enormous change in his personality or essential character.
If the Tom Hanks character was so unredeemable as you suggest, why would the Halle Berry character bond with him so much in love? We all know how hard it can be to change a partner and if that partner is wanting to return to their previous or “natural” character as you suggest, it would be exhausting to try to hold them to that new personality or essence.
My other problem with your conclusion comes from my views on humanity. If you accept the premises of the movie – reincarnation of souls and those souls returning to interact with the same souls again and again, I believe it is not logical to think that souls cannot change or evolve over lifetimes.
Why would souls reincarnate and return only to act and think the same way in every life? There would be no point to existence. I am assuming that the premise of souls and reincarnation requires a God or supreme consciousness behind it all. An assumption on my part I know, but so is the assumption that consciousness is the result of materialism.
So if one accepts some kind of God or unitary consciousness, what would be the point of creating individuated consciousnesses that are stuck with an eternal nature? Surely God does not need the diversion or amusement of humans acting in the same crazy way, lifetime after lifetime.
You write: “The human story is one story, repeated billions of times. In the grand scheme of things none of us are special. We are slaves to our particular biochemical hardwiring. “
Here you seem to suggest that we are essentially robots who cannot change our programming. That makes no sense to me when you combine it with reincarnation, because reincarnation suggests a part of existence far beyond the material world. So we are much more than robots in my view.
And again, the material view of existence and consciousness does not fit with the idea of reincarnation of souls – a consciousness that survives the death of the physical body.
You go on to say: “Nevertheless, that singular story has value each time it is told.” I don’t understand what the value is of endlessly repeating the same unchangeable programming.
I’ll return to the movie and the Wachowskis. I’m a big fan of the two film makers. They have made some of my favorite movies – The Matrix, V for Vendetta, and now Cloud Atlas. I think they tackle the biggest questions for humanity in an entertaining and ambitious way. Lana and Lilly (they’ve been doing some evolving in this lifetime) are engaged with big ideas. Cloud Atlas is their most ambitious movie to date.
I don’t see any cynicism to their approach to the essential nature of humanity – or at least for the potential of humanity, if not always realized or manifested in many or most of us – at least not yet. We are all in the process of evolution.
For me, these three movies explore the power of love, connection and understanding – ultimately in the service to evolution. The movies are infused with the ideas of evolution and change, but not without challenges and factors holding characters back. Not all characters in Cloud Atlas evolve – Hugo Weaving doesn’t, but most do.
And if we really are souls that keep reincarnating on earth, even this movie spread over less than 500 years and six life episodes, would be a minuscule slice of eternity, or however long we exist as souls.
Again I am not arguing – only stating my views for consideration. I am an optimist when it comes to humanity and I see my optimism reflected in this movie and its essential premises. I wanted to present another view point after your eloquent presentation of your own thoughts on the movie.
what if i said to you reincarnation is a real cosmic phenomena and not genetic memory.how special more does this film elevate to prophetic status.all i say is i remember 4 past lives on this planet and 1 other which is off world and now known as the asteroid belt in our solar system this movie brought out the pain of remembering those lucid dreams i had at the age of 7 to twelve repeating all my deaths in those past lives some lived as a woman others as a man this is my truth
Anyone who thinks this movie is ‘complex’ is extremely simple minded.
Anyone to claim this movie is ‘thought provoking’ obviously doesn’t think very often.
Terrible, long, predictable movie.
Just rewatched this movie again yesterday. Almost feel like watching it again today. I can’t say how much I love this movie. The first time I watched it, some three or four years ago now, I watched it again the next day. Watched it a third time a few days later with my best friend. It will make you laugh, it will definitely make you cry, and it will have you on the edge of your seat… sometimes all at once! Few movies have such a powerful message or are packed with so much detail and allegory. Watching it once is simply not enough because you will honestly miss a lot the first time, and the second time, and the third time. Like I said, I watched it yesterday again for the nth time, and I still found something I never noticed before in it. Absolutely beautiful, a masterpiece for the ages undoubtedly.
OK based on the comments and review, I am going to have to *shudder* re-watch this movie. When I saw it I thought it was tedious and obvious. I thought the dialog was terrible (when I hear “cogg”, “far far” or “true true” I feel ill). To me, the movie was an ill-conceived mess and I was embarrassed for the actors. But that’s NOT the flavor of the comments here.
I love foreign films, complex plots, and sci fi including time-travel… I should have loved this movie.
I have on rare occasion hated a movie and on re-watching loved it. It would be amazing if that turns out to be the case here. Wish me luck. I feel like I’m off to the dentist, re-watching this thing.
Just watched Cloud Atlas today. Watched it in 2 halves during the day (didn’t realize quite how long it was) – quite honestly, it had me scratching my head for the majority of the movie – there is no single story thread that really connects the viewer with what is being told in the story. What is the story “really about?” – Even now, having finished the movie I am still asking the same question. Clearly there were different story lines being followed. I didn’t know how many until I tried to recap. I believe it was 6 which would make sense since the music referenced in a couple of the story lines is called the “Cloud Atlas Sextet” – a movement of six parts, and as I listened carefully, the whole movie score was different variations of this theme.
Clearly I am going to have to watch this again to try and make some sense out of it, as right now I feel like i have watched 6 completely different stories that were thrown together into a movie. I could not see any correlation between them other than the recurring same actors playing different characters. I did have a chuckle to myself when they cast a Caucasian to play an Asian which didn’t look too good I must say.
I would not say this was a bad movie – although I don’t think it will ever get on my top 10 – yet it does have repeat watchability if only to better understand on a 2nd or 3rd watching as to what its all about – and even then I may still not get it, which ironically may have been the author’s / directors’ intent all along – to keep you guessing, since a lot of implications are philosophical during the movie.
I had started this movie on TV a few months ago, but was getting confused. A few days ago, home alone and not feeling well, I gave it another chance, and this time got caught up in it as I started to see how all the threads fit together, and enjoyed it all the way through. A very challenging, but very rewarding, and very moving, experience.
I found this movie way too long and way too confusing. I fail to see how it is thought provoking or a master piece. I see how the stories connect and all I can say is, “Who cares?”. I really like Tom Hanks as an actor but he mumbled the whole way through this movie, not matter what character he was playing. I bought this as a DVD movie and thankfully only paid $5 for it, and when I was finished watching it, I put it into the garbage as I would not even donate it to charity
Well it wasn’t The Lord of the Rings that’s for sure. A typically progressive movie where the statement is …Give us your money and STFU. You have no right to expect entertainment.
The first time I watched Cloud Atlas was with my dad. We were both bored and were channel surfing when we came across Cloud Atlas. At the time, we knew nothing about it. It had just started and we thought why not? We had no idea want we were getting ourselves into. It was dizzying, breath-taking, and while we were utterly confused through the first quarter it’s also why we were so intrigued. Like puzzle or mystery needing to be solved. After watching we immediately went on amazon and bought it just to watch again.
I can also see why so many didn’t like it. It’s long and confusing and is asking a lot for people to sit down and be patient for some they might now even enjoy. It isn’t even a matter of intelligence. My mother is one of the smartest people I know and she didn’t care for it. Then again, my dad and I are more interested in human nature and how people evolve and affect one another. In the end though it remains one of my all time favorite film.
The people were not ready for “Cloud Atlas”. Like ” Blade Runner “, it will take time. Cloud Atlas is a profound and significant work of art.
While watching this movie for a second time, I began to truly appreciate the complex interweaving of story plot and variations of theme. I can see why this movie did poorly, too complex for many moviegoers brought up on Madea and the Fast and Furious Franchises. But it is also highly rated by a select group of viewers that seek more depth in their movies.
On a more personal note, I saw an interesting coincidence for me (in the scene where the young and older composers are dining with a visitor and the older composers daughter??, I noticed they were dining on Beresford Wedgwood China , this happens to be my wife’s and my china we chose for our wedding in 1993. It happened to catch my eye and I froze the screen to confirm. Life is full of many coincidences.
I just watched “Cloud Atlas” for the second time. Bought a DVD at Walmat on sale. This film might be the best film made in this rather sad century. It feels a bit like “Blade Runner”, another brilliant and creative film. The first time I saw “Cloud Atlas”, I was a bit confused – the jumping story lines were disconcerting. But that is part of the genius of the story, and provides part of its creative, effective, emotional resonance. As I watched it a second time, after a gap of several years, I am surprised how much of it I remembered – scene for scene – from the first viewing. It grabs you, and holds you, but this time, it all seemed to flow smoothly. Cinema audiences have become numbed, and most films attempt to exploit every human weakness to command attention and capture profit. But the empty flatulence of most modern films is so evident and tiresome, one just wants to give up on cinema, and just go back to reading physical books made from paper – and listen to some nice analog music played on a black vinyl disk. Except when something new like “Cloud Atlas” comes along. It has as much wild action as one could want, but it also challenges you to think about the essence of one’s life, and our true purpose. Does what we do actually matter? Does it make any difference at all? The graveyard lies before each of us, as the final destination. We transit from the womb, squeezed out of our mother’s birth canal into this strange universe, only to leave it a few years later, probably feeling we have left most of what we wanted to do, undone. This crazy Cloud Atlas film makes the case for transitive connectivity across lifetimes – small crimes and acts of kindness reach across the centuries, and define an unfolding pattern of reality – a fully-connected di-graph of human linkages unfolding to become an astonishing, magical, unbelievable tapestry. We generally cannot stand back and see this. Our lives and our machinery of perception simply prevent this. Plus, most people are … well, you fill in the blank with your own descriptor. So, it is a fine and good thing for a film to deal with this topic, and weave a complex story across the sweep of our recent times. I truly detest drama’s which trace the lives of families. And I am weary of big action films, and long love sagas. But “Cloud Atlas” is just an amazingly clever imaginary film. Watching it a second time, I completely loved it. It challenges one. In the words of the Oracle of the Valley: “Don’t slit that throat!” It is probably your own. Cloud Atlas makes the case for how the past is linked to the future by our actions – even if (especially if) we cannot see it at the time. It is a wonderful, clever, original film, and it is the best work I have seen in years.
This movie is completely underrated, I dnt understand til this day why “professional” critics gave it poor ratings. …. even if u dnt believe in reincarnation or spirtual connection (which I dnt believe in but it’s fun to think bout)… again, even if u dnt believe in that, there r soooo many other straight to the point and subtle messages throughout the film that should touch the soul…. how history repeats itself, how death can bring creation and creation brings death, the rights of slaves, women, even synthetic beings who bleed feel,, wat is right and wrong and with those choices, oh how they can weigh on u….. a life with regrets or action, the list can go on… so much did I see from this movie to inspire and refresh my pyche from this mudane world, that i feel misplaced as to y so many critics and other ppl dnt …. “c it”….
I love this movie. It’s a movie I can watch many times and each watching embraces a different theme from intrigue with the breadth of characters played by the six main actors, to the social themes so eloquently explored to the evolutionary themes of civilization. It saddens me that so many film critics can be so influenced by pop culture that they are unable to recognize brilliance when it’s Right in front of them. The diversity of the acting, costume design, make up, film editing and screen play put this film into a class of its own.
I will never tire of this film. It’s brilliant.
@68. Thank you. Perfectly stated. I read these reviews to find my kind of people. Folks aware of the need for an evolution in human consciousness and Cloud Atlas’s contribution to that process.
I seldom rate any movie a perfect ten. In fact, I have rated only one other movie, I can think of, that high. As a novelist and student of cinematography, I hope that carries at least a sliver of weight.
Cloud Atlas will quite likely be a movie that in fifty or a hundred years is looked back on and considered decades ahead of its time. I think one of the reasons it didn’t do well in theaters or mainstream society is that it boldly challenges the norm and anyone who chooses to be ignorant of spirituality. Cloud Atlas connects to perhaps the deepest level of consciousness. Since society in most parts of the world thrives on superficial and materialistic ‘now’-not-forever mentalities, CA doesn’t exactly make a lot of people feel good about themselves—or their long-term existences. Let’s not get confused: there are loads of great individuals out there, but there needs to be more.
Glad I found this article. It’s nice to see there has been a constant flow of replies for five years now. My novel, After Pigs Fly, was written a couple of years before I got to watch Cloud Atlas, but I am astounded of how similar my thematic vision is to David Mitchell’s.
To make it short, I’m with the people who didn’t care for the movie — because it seemingly tried too hard to be meaningful and interconnected. But if you just played each storyline in a row, without all the editing cuts, the story’s themselves were only marginal, and whatever overall story arc there was supposed be from1849 to 2344 almost disappears.
But one thing I must have missed, and please someone help me out here so I don’t have to watch it again…how did the Earth go bad? Some of it was global warming, but there was also radiation some how. I thought the 1973 Big Oil conspiracy would be behind it, but apparently not. Then there was fusion power in the future, but that’s a good thing if we ever get there. Where in the ever lovin’ interconnected karma-filled world did we screw up and have to evacuate the planet?
This movie should have come out with “MPAA rating AVG IQ+”, i.e. the audience requires IQ above average to understand otherwise it will hurts your brain.
Joking aside, being a buddhist helped me understand the movie in the very first viewing but I still watch it from time to time. This is one of the best movie evermade.
I completely agree with everything stated in this article. I just rewatched the movie and “masterpiece” is the word that comes to mind. I am sorry for the Korean woman that made a comment about being offended by the makeup because I feel like she did not understand what was happening in Neo-Seoul. This was a futuristic society where every race blended together, so the makeup she was discussing to make people look Korean was not supposed to be a modern-day Korean person. The main General was Korean and black. Jim Sturgess was Korean and white. But neither one was a first generation mix. They said they were only seven states in the world and there was mass flooding, so I imagine all of the world’s population gathered into specific areas, creating this melting pot of physical features. I felt like they did a great job of imagining what future people will look like. The world is more connected than ever now and we will continue to be.
Cloud Atlas is my all time favorite movie!!! I watched it 4 times at the big screen in the movie theaters and i was blown away by its strong message, beautiful direction, wonderful actors and not to forget breathtaking soundtrack! This is the kind of movie and one of these moments in your life that create a deep impact and keep you thinking about your actions and decisions! My whole life i thought there must be more than what we can see, hear, feel and smell! Finally somebody filled these thoughts with life. I really think that the message of the movie, that everything is connected and influence eachother in the past, present and future isn’t understand by human mankind right now but will be in the future and change our understanding of the universe completely.
’97?
The first time I watched this movie, years ago when it first came out on DVD, I hated it. It frustrated me to no end, annoyed me beyond words, and ultimately made me feel like a complete moron. Me! A self-proclaimed open-minded spiritualist who has long believed in reincarnation and the ongoing fight for true freedom for all.
I watched it again a year later and still it pissed me off. Sure, I made sense of a few more aspects, but the bigger picture kept completely flying over my head as my mind stumbled over the confusing details. The following year, I watched it again like some mad woman driven insane from being bested by an incomprehensible movie. Nothing.
And then I watched it this afternoon, years later still, having gone through everything I’ve gone through since my last maddening attempt. And it hit me so hard it left a mark on my soul for good. Tears are still flowing down my cheeks as the various meanings of this movie continue to hit me like waves pounding against long forgotten cliff walls.
It took so many attempts, throughout several years, for me to finally understand the breadth of Cloud Atlas. I’m glad I never gave up, for this movie has moved me to new heights in new lands on worlds I’ve yet to dream of.
For me, the most memorable lines from this movie, are, “Our lives are not our own. We are bound to others”. I guess those two short lines just resonate with me, because of the life I’ve lived.
Cloud Atlas… one of the most ambitious movies ever made, not for everyone, but one I thought was never meant to be successful, it’s just too demanding of an audience that as a whole tends to like its movies less so… the film’s interweaving of stories across lifetimes deals with the origins of religion, the continuity of consciousness and self actualization.
One could say, like Avatar, it includes many story elements found in other films and through missing the forest for the trees, people were unable to fully appreciate the nuances, details and threads tying all six stories together… it is one I would recommend everyone watch again, second viewings tend to lower personal expectation and allow one to simply see what a story is trying to tell them.
This is a pure mess of a movie. I did get what it was trying to convey and wish the condescending reviewers on here would stop blaming the public for not liking this awful movie. Blame the constant switching between storylines and periods moving over and back so often you lose interest in the characters regardless of which storyline. This was probably a bad idea for a movie anyway but bad editing made it even worse. Then there is the terrible make up, awful mumbling. A three hour disaster of a movie. Don’t waste your time and money on it.
This movie is destined to be a cult favorite. Defiantly not a hang out and hang ten relaxing bedtime story. Be ready to invest in the deeper recesses of your brain. The script is absolutely mind blowing even if they get a little too artsy with the pidgin English used in the post apocalyptic thread. If you like putting a puzzle together instead of someone handing you the pieces as you go along (yes, the first quarter of the movie is harder than most puzzles are) – if you like the rich tapestry of a colorful picture that starts to evolve as you mentally click in the right the right pieces – if you like a hauntingly beautiful score of music playing in the background as you work this puzzle – if you like the satisfaction of completing this puzzle many times over, discovering innumerable nuances each time, you will appreciate the pure quality of this piece of art.
How, I missed this epic journey into six different lives/times all interwoven with masterful acting by masterful actors back in 2012 is an oversight that myself and, I predict, many others will correct in the future. Like the black slave, Autua that connected his piecing gaze onto Adam Ewing for a fierce instant during his whipping, effectively altering Adam, we are held frozen by the gaze and depth of this movie, perhaps altering us. It is time to reweave this epic into the future as the movie itself does.