Cloud Atlas

[bklynred]

Agreed. He doesn't melt into characters the way some actors can (DDLewis being one of my obvious choices). I think his Irish character blip at least got the biggest gasp out of the audience. I also thought the ship journals story lingered too long... and the makeup on Hanks was ri-DIC-ulous there. I wouldn't trust a doc like that to treat a cold.

I did like some smaller moments, like Hanks <<<and the blue buttons--one of which saved his life after the fall. >>>

But as usual, I was grumpy with HB always being in distress. She's constantly lauded for being rescued, imo. But as long as she looks good in jeans, it doesn't seem to matter. Meh.

I thought Hugh Grant was a good villain. He was made for his 70s role. And I found him convincing <<<as a cannibal as well (an example of good makeup).>>>

I'm gonna rank this up there with The Fountain in terms of movies trying too hard to be artsy.

[Deleted]

Nov 1, 2012 22:27:14 GMT -4 bklynred said:

I thought Hugh Grant was a good villain. He was made for his 70s role. And I found him convincing <<<as a cannibal as well (an example of good makeup).>>>

I'm gonna rank this up there with The Fountain in terms of movies trying to hard to be artsy.

No kidding...I had no idea he was the lead cannibal until the credits rolled. And awful old man make-up aside, I thought he was awesome in the 2012 bit.

The Fountain is an apt comparison I think. I liked that one too though, despite it's messiness.

[LAX]

When I think that each central character is a reincarnated version of the previous one, how is it possible for Timothy's story to be 2012? He's in his 60s, he most certainly would have been alive during Luisa's time during the 1970s so their lives would have overlapped.

HG, i too was awed by the transition from the flooding of New Seoul to Luisa's car crashing and flooding. Outstanding work.

[sjankis630]

i went out to see this on election night and was one of 5 people sitting in a very large IMAX theater, but I knew that I would probably not appreciate this if I waited to see it on DVD and sat in my basement watching it (all 2hrs 40 min ) on my 32 inch tube TV eating some popcorn.
I am glad I saw it though.
I have to agree with the people saying the actors playing across races seemed a little weird. I especially thought the Korean actress looked ridiculous during the abolitionist scene.
I have to admit the "spot the actor this time" parts with the actors playing several different parts started out fun but got a little distracting.
I thought Tom Hanks did fine in the lead roles on most of his parts. I least liked the Old folks home story - I read it as a straight up farce - but for that story Tom's horribly displayed accent and character fit into the part nicely since I took nothing seriously. Do Scots hate the British that much?
I most liked the 2144 Neo Seoul story the best as I thought it had more emotional impact overall.
I liked the 1931 story for the music parts, but for some reason I could not feel anywhere near the weight of what the character was forced to do in the end. I just didn't get that part - I understand why he felt he had to do it - I just didn't buy it from everything I saw from his character. He was a hustler after all used to life on the run.
With this film's "flop" I think we are witnessing the slow breakdown of Tom Hank's career at this point. I mean he is still very talented, but a lot of his latest movies - the last 5 years - have been flops money wise. I wonder how much goodwill he has left?
Halle Berry's career has been in freefall for years now, although I thought she did fine here. I particularly liked her character in the Luisa Rey story and would probably not mind seeing that one as full movie.
Actually I would not have minded seeing all of the other stories as full length movies save for the Timothy Cavendish story. It was just too weird for me and really did not hold my attention that well.
I did think that Jim Broadbent gave one of the better performances though as Vyvyan Ayrs the composer. He had some great work there and I have been a fan ever since Topsy-Turvey (was that really way back in 1999?)
All around I thought this an enjoyable experience and lament that for a lot of people who passed this by - whether for poor ads or a hurricane - will never really give this movie its due.

[Margo]

I saw it two weeks ago and understood about 30% of the dialogue. I'm considering seeing it again in a theater down the street after having finished the book (go read it if you haven't; it's better!).

It didn't completely work like the reviewers and you guys say, but it was worth the ticket price and felt shorter than its running time. It was enjoyable in how different it seemed from typical films.

[Deleted]

The dialog made a lot more sense to me after I read the book, particularly the After the Fall sections.

[jynni]

Finally saw this the other night and still don't know what I think about it. Probably cause I spent most of the movie trying to figure out wtf was going on rather than actually "watching" it. I haven't read the book so didn't know a single thing about the plot. For reference, I didn't find Inception hard to follow at all but I was over halfway through this movie before I figured out the stories were somehow supposed to be related. I feel like I should watch it again but don't really feel like sitting through it again as I couldn't get emotionally invested in any of the stories except the composer one.

I will probably read the book though. I get the impression the book is much better.

[Deleted]

The book is A LOT better. I highly recommend it.

[bklynred]

I want How Did This Get Made? (Paul Scheer's podcast) to do this movie sooo bad, but it may be too complicated to really dissect. I know my thoughts are colored by Halle Berry's acting, which is non-acting for me.