The Cloud Atlas

[peter]

WTF! This film is 2 hrs 52 mins long. Within two minutes I was completely lost - the six stories that interweave to make up the plot are indecipherable each on there own (literally - not being able to hear at least three quaters of the dialogue really did not help here). In combination they acheived levels of chaos and confusion worthy of Loki himself. I persevered. I hour into it the same actors were popping up in different time zones, in different stories and in different charachterisations. I think the three directors (yes - three) should have compared notes a bit more often because they were clearly lost too (talk about loosing the plot!). Nothing was ever explained in a way that you could follow it. The far-future story after 'the fall' demanded the actors speak (or rather mumble) an invented dialect that would have been coherent to few below the level of Champollion (or whatever his name was) in their linguistic abilities. Two hours in and there was no sign of the stories coming together, no sign of any coherence emerging within the individual tales and no charachter that you could remember what they were actually doing or why they were there. I was no further forward that I had been after two minutes so I gave up. Perhaps I'd have more luck with the book!

[Fist and Faith]

I hadn't heard of this. Just read about it. And just reading about it is a crazy experience. lol

[aTOMiC]

You are not alone Peter. My wife and I purchased Cloud Atlas sight unseen solely on the star power of the film. After watching the first hour or so I looked over at my wife and we both said, almost at the same time, "I've had enough."

-nuff said.

[peter]

I'm glad I'm not alone here aTOMic - but I'm going to recant (a bit at least). I've just read the Wikipedia entry for the novel and weirdly what I saw in the film is starting to fall into place. And it might (now I could possibly follow it) turn out to be good. The cumulative review score on 'Rotten Tomatoes was 66-70% positive. Give that wiki entry a read and see if it does not provide a framework on which to hang a second attempt at the film. I'm intrigued enough to think that maybe I'll actually do this and perhaps even try out the book first.

[Zarathustra]

Heh, and I thought it was just because I watched it drunk. Glad to here others with a similar experience. I hated this movie. We watched it to the end. It had some good points about how humanity must keep learning the same lessons over and over about bigotry in different contexts. But what a meandering, overwrought way to say it!

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I had been meaning to get this movie; I supposed I will have to make my way over to the nearest Movie Trading Company and pick up a copy.

[RaceFinisher]

What you expect has a ton to do with how much you will enjoy the film. I knew who made it and roughly what it was, or wasn't. Plus, I'd say that I do have a critic's mentality when watching films.

I expected a near Oscar worthy product, but I believe what we got here is a decent film that intertwines the different narratives in a near flawless way that I'm not sure has ever been done before.

I think, really, it's an art movie for cinema buffs. Their really isn't a plot. It's more of a jigsaw puzzle.

[dANdeLION]

You are not alone Peter. My wife and I purchased Cloud Atlas sight unseen solely on the star power of the film. After watching the first hour or so I looked over at my wife and we both said, almost at the same time, "I've had enough."

-nuff said.

You forgot to mention the part where you pawned off the DVD to me.......

[peter]

There's good, there's evil and there's business.

[Rigel]

I'm the only person I know who thoroughly loved this film

It helps a lot of you don't try to weave the narratives together. Yes, there are hooks there, but it's much more of a thematic coherence than plot continuity.

But the actors were all amazing (Halle Berry and Hugo Weaving especially), and I've about memorized the score. Plus, I like movies that make me think about them after the fact, and this one does so

[peter]

On the grounds that a few [and it is a few] people I know have seriously enjoyed this film I intend to give it another go. I may even read the book first - probably not a good idea but having 'wikid' it to give me an idea about what the film was about I was intrigued. A case of 'watch this space'.

[lucimay]

I'm the only person I know who thoroughly loved this film

It helps a lot of you don't try to weave the narratives together. Yes, there are hooks there, but it's much more of a thematic coherence than plot continuity.

But the actors were all amazing (Halle Berry and Hugo Weaving especially), and I've about memorized the score. Plus, I like movies that make me think about them after the fact, and this one does so

no rigel you are not alone. I loved it. I did think (after the first viewing) that the beginning was a bit choppy. but I've watched it at least 4 or 5 times since the first viewing. I really like it a lot. very very ambitious project, especially considering you've got 3 directors working on it.
loved the actors switching out roles. they were all very good.
I'm not a huge halle berry fan but I really loved her in this. same about tom hanks, he's not my favorite actor but I thought he did a wonderful job in all his roles.
the only thing that sort of got on my nerves was the timothy cavendish storyline. that actor drives me insane. he always plays that kind of timothy cavendish character. heh.

but I bought the film sight unseen too. and I'm not sorry I did. I really like it.
maybe I shouldn't (according to some critics and critiques) but I do.

[dANdeLION]

Alright, if Luci (and Rigel) says it's good, I'll attempt to watch it.

[peter]

Good luck with that!

[dANdeLION]

I watched it, and think it's great.

[lucimay]

I watched it, and think it's great.

YAY! so glad you liked it. when I saw you were gonna watch it I was nervous!! lol!!!!

[lucimay]

What you expect has a ton to do with how much you will enjoy the film. I knew who made it and roughly what it was, or wasn't. Plus, I'd say that I do have a critic's mentality when watching films.

I expected a near Oscar worthy product, but I believe what we got here is a decent film that intertwines the different narratives in a near flawless way that I'm not sure has ever been done before.

I think, really, it's an art movie for cinema buffs. Their really isn't a plot. It's more of a jigsaw puzzle.

oh I missed your post Race!

I expected what you expected for the same reasons (saw a couple of clips of the directors talking about it and that is what made me want to see it.) and I totally agree on what we got as well.

I disagree about plot. there are six plots but they are all the same plot which is what is clever about it. I expected it to be MORE clever but what I got was a story that was clever without trying too hard.
it was a theater piece on film. which is kinda cool.

my favorite storyline was the Robert Frobisher storyline. ben whishaw was great. also hugo weaving as Old Georgie. freakin brilliant!

[Rau Le Creuset]

Maybe i should take a second watch at this. I really found it redundant.. I think i was just angry because i couldnt take in what was going on and why it was going on. I dont think my body is ready to watch it again though. It'll have to be sometime in the not so near future.

[peter]

I watched it, and think it's great.

Can I recommend "The Tree of Life" directed by Terrence Malick.

[SerScot]

peter,

WTF! This film is 2 hrs 52 mins long. Within two minutes I was completely lost - the six stories that interweave to make up the plot are indecipherable each on there own (literally - not being able to hear at least three quaters of the dialogue really did not help here). In combination they acheived levels of chaos and confusion worthy of Loki himself. I persevered. I hour into it the same actors were popping up in different time zones, in different stories and in different charachterisations. I think the three directors (yes - three) should have compared notes a bit more often because they were clearly lost too (talk about loosing the plot!). Nothing was ever explained in a way that you could follow it. The far-future story after 'the fall' demanded the actors speak (or rather mumble) an invented dialect that would have been coherent to few below the level of Champollion (or whatever his name was) in their linguistic abilities. Two hours in and there was no sign of the stories coming together, no sign of any coherence emerging within the individual tales and no charachter that you could remember what they were actually doing or why they were there. I was no further forward that I had been after two minutes so I gave up. Perhaps I'd have more luck with the book!

I followed the film without difficulty. I also really enjoyed it.