Cloud Atlas - New Movie by The Wachowskis

Speed Racer got shat on by the critics yet I find it to be an entertaining/visually interesting film with an important (though perhaps heavy handed) message to kids. Not amazing, but certainly better than a lot of other stuff that is a complete formulaic rehash of stuff already done. Will check this out despite the negative reviews. Don't know much about it.

amerikan lunkheads head to kiev ukraine so they go to krypiat (bordering chernobyl) for tourism? silly, but i'm a sucker for the shaky-camera-films that hollywood shillings these days. loved it, but i have no idea what happened coz you cannot see anything

  On 10/28/2012 at 10:01 AM, Nebraska said:

 

amerikan lunkheads head to kiev ukraine so they go to krypiat (bordering chernobyl) for tourism? silly, but i'm a sucker for the shaky-camera-films that hollywood shillings these days. loved it, but i have no idea what happened coz you cannot see anything

Watched it a couple of days ago. I love scary movies but this one was terrible.

  On 10/28/2012 at 10:01 AM, Nebraska said:

 

amerikan lunkheads head to kiev ukraine so they go to krypiat (bordering chernobyl) for tourism? silly, but i'm a sucker for the shaky-camera-films that hollywood shillings these days. loved it, but i have no idea what happened coz you cannot see anything

that's such an awful movie poster.

Nobody posted this yet?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/oct/26/cloud-atlas-under-fire-yellowface?newsfeed=true

saw a free screening of Cloud Atlas Thursday night.

I don't think it's a spoiler to say that it was good in parts, bad in other parts, really bad in parts and laughably bad in most of it.

Also, the makeup was over-done and horrendous and just so happened to be in every scene.

There was a scene where Hugh Grant has so much old person makeup on his face that not only does his face not move, but he literally could barely talk. When he did talk, it sounded like he had a spoon in his mouth and a plastic bag over his face.

Also, there was way too much of white people playing korean people and korean people playing mexicans and that sort of thing. At one point, I thought Tom Hanks may have been in black-face.

Also, it was like 8 hours long.

And one more thing. Tom Hanks cannot do any kind of British, Irish or Cockney accent to save his fucking life.

FYI, If you can see it for free (like I did), it is kinda fun to watch on the big screen. Otherwise, don't waste your money.

*edit*

Copied and pasted from the "films recently watched" thread. I swear, I searched for this thread on my mobile and zero results.

  On 7/29/2012 at 9:12 AM, Hoodie said:

i dislike how this movie is described as an "epic." i think that title has to be earned.

If by "epic", they only mean "greenscreen", then yes, it's epic.

  On 10/28/2012 at 2:08 AM, Rubin Farr said:

Loved it. There will be plenty of haters.

I'm curious about it, but I would be truly blown away if it was actually "good". The Wachowskis are making it more and more obvious with each passing film that the original Matrix was something of a fluke. I think they have an impressive visual sense, but lack depth and subtlety.

I'm really curious about how the (seeming) theme of this movie could be done in any way that did not seem mawkish and absurd. I just don't believe we are all connected over time, repeating our experiences and loves over and over. Nope, not for me. I hope they manage to approach this in a surprising way that doesn't just seem soft in the head.

Edit: although I will admit that seeing Halle Berry in truly appalling "blackface" as an Asian man with a fu manchu was something I never realized I really needed to see in this life. If only she'd wear it all the time.

$9 Million opening weekend. Ouch.

  On 10/29/2012 at 2:36 PM, Rubin Farr said:

$9 Million opening weekend. Ouch.

I'm not surprised, this movie is not appealing.

I've only seen the trailer and it looked really cheesy and generic. Then I saw some reviews on youtube about how confusing and unique it apparently was and that piqued my interest. Still got no clue how this movie actually feels when seeing the whole thing. This thread helped me get some idea

  On 10/28/2012 at 9:20 AM, compson said:

Speed Racer got shat on by the critics yet I find it to be an entertaining/visually interesting film with an important (though perhaps heavy handed) message to kids. Not amazing, but certainly better than a lot of other stuff that is a complete formulaic rehash of stuff already done. Will check this out despite the negative reviews. Don't know much about it.

Agreed, except I thought Speed Racer was amazing. If the world was properly aligned spiritually and mentally, that would be considered a masterpiece/classic alongside Nightmare Before Christmas, Spiderman, Superman, Robocop, etc.

That might be enough to convince me to give Cloud Atlas a shot, even though the previews made it look mediocre.

  On 10/29/2012 at 4:50 AM, lumpenprol said:

I'm really curious about how the (seeming) theme of this movie could be done in any way that did not seem mawkish and absurd. I just don't believe we are all connected over time, repeating our experiences and loves over and over. Nope, not for me. I hope they manage to approach this in a surprising way that doesn't just seem soft in the head.

Can someone please confirm that this does not reflect the theme or content of the book, so that I can start the book without feeling terrible about paying $12 for a kindle version? My understanding is that the book features nested narratives that aren't connected by some explicit "I HAVE LOVED YOU IN EVERY PAST LIFE" narrative. Please not that. Right?

I saw a few clips of Hanks's acting in this, and if mawkish describes it fairly accurately.

I'll probably rent the movie when it's out on netflix, after I read the thing. But now I'm a little terrified. Please note that I am not trying to hate for hate's sake, but sentimentality + Hanks = not my cup of tea.

Jim Broadbent pretty much stole the movie. Let's just move Hollywood to England, aight? Fuck they took it over already.

first they take our techno, then our tranny green screen dramas

  On 7/28/2012 at 2:40 PM, BCM said:

  On 7/27/2012 at 4:57 PM, Blanket Fort Collapse said:

  On 7/27/2012 at 4:39 PM, thanks robert moses said:

Also:

Transexual Wachowski is fucking creepy.

 

she/he really fucking reminds me of someone but i can't think who...

Catherine O'Hara.

Auch... Cloud Atlas only made a little over $9 mio this weekend and its budget is $100 mio.

$100? they must be pretty pleased, so.

Looks aight.

  On 10/29/2012 at 10:06 PM, kaini said:

$100? they must be pretty pleased, so.

Damnit... but also lol

lush profit, that!

lol

  On 10/29/2012 at 6:05 PM, baph said:

  On 10/29/2012 at 4:50 AM, lumpenprol said:

I'm really curious about how the (seeming) theme of this movie could be done in any way that did not seem mawkish and absurd. I just don't believe we are all connected over time, repeating our experiences and loves over and over. Nope, not for me. I hope they manage to approach this in a surprising way that doesn't just seem soft in the head.

 

Can someone please confirm that this does not reflect the theme or content of the book, so that I can start the book without feeling terrible about paying $12 for a kindle version? My understanding is that the book features nested narratives that aren't connected by some explicit "I HAVE LOVED YOU IN EVERY PAST LIFE" narrative. Please not that. Right?

 

I didn't get that sense really at all from the book. There were some connections, but nothing about eternal love through generations.

Book is totally worth a read.

Tom Hanks, the movie. It was bad.

Good film.

A gay kiss by two characters caused the couple next to me to leave.