Allow Me to Point You in the Direction of "Cloud Atlas"

I had read about 60 percent of “Cloud Atlas” before seeing the film based on said book, written by David Mitchell. I believe reading what I read of the book helped me to follow what was going on in the film. It is difficult for me to imagine watching this film without prior knowledge of the characters and events of the book. The film, directed by Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski, and Lana Wachowski, is a wonderment of imagery and storytelling, though, by the end of the film, the point of the film seemed, unless I am much shallower than I think, to be quite a simple one.

Our lives connect with those of other people in the past and will connect to other people in the future. These connections may be perfectly random, not necessarily familial connections, but connections to people we may know of because of a random mention of a name or discovery of something said person did or wrote. “Cloud Atlas” would be a great film to discuss over numerous cups of coffee and try to comprehend what it all means. At the same time, however, the point of the film, as I mentioned, does not appear to be too terribly deep, but I do not imply in saying that, that the point of the film is simplistic. “Cloud Atlas” is very successful in that it weaves together six stories from six different time periods and connects them through the fact that the characters in the stories intertwine throughout the course of time, whether it be through chance or through reincarnation, however, I do not think the point of the film is that reincarnation exists. I suppose it could be surmised that this is the point of the film, however, it did not appear to be so. I believe the point of the film is that the lives of others, even if those others exist many years before us or many years after us, effect us in some way. It is a complex film and the meaning of it can be debated, which is one of the strengths of the film. Again, I try to imagine what it would have been like to watch the film without having read more than half of the book and I wonder if my grasp of the film would have been weaker without prior knowledge of the plot of the book.

The stories in the film are intercut with each other throughout the course of the 175 minute running time. The film goes back and forth from one story to the other. The six stories take place in 1849, 1936, 1973, 2012, 2144, and “106 Years After the Fall.” Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Susan Sarandon, and Hugh Grant play multiple roles in the film, all of which are performed very well by all. There is some fantastic makeup work in the film, some of which should be nominated for an Oscar, however, I believe the reception of the film will be lukewarm in the end, so it seems that a film such as “Cloud Atlas” will be ignored come nomination time, even for awards that have nothing to do with story or comprehension of the film. At the end of the film, all of the actors are shown in brief shots as the characters they played. I admit to being surprised a few times at who played what characters. I was surprised to find out who played a Kona warrior in the "106 Years After the Fall" story. "Tom Hanks was recognizable in all of his roles, however, and he did a wonderful job at playing all of them.

In the same way, Halle Berry was fantastic in her many roles. All of the performances, the many characters played by each actor, are very well done. The only character miscast was Tom Hanks as Zachry, the, as presented in the book, young Hawaiian man who appears in the story that takes place “106 Years After the Fall.” Though Hanks'performance as Zachry is good, in the book, this is clearly a young Hawaiian man, something Hanks is not. Sometimes I enjoy films that are not easily comprehended, but, at the same time, are not so perplexing that I lose interest. “Cloud Atlas” skillfully weaves it’s stories together in a very well-edited and well-paced way. Again, I believe having read a good deal of the book allowed me to follow the stories and never get lost in the proceedings. I would still recommend the film to those who have not read the book, which I imagine would be quite a few people. The film reminded me of films like “Grand Canyon,” (1992),a film which featured the lives of several people being intertwined with the purpose of trying to make a connection involving a meeting at the Grand Canyon. For a different reason, Wim Wenders’ “Until the End of the World” (1991) also comes to mind as I think about “Cloud Atlas.” Wenders’ film told a straight-forward narrative, however, it was also slowly paced sci-fi film, the uncut version of the film running a long, but never boring 280 minutes. Both “Grand Canyon” and “Until the End of the World” are challenging films, challenging in the sense that they require patience on the part of the viewer, not because they were poorly made, but because the themes of both films are somewhat ethereal and not simplistic screenplays. “Cloud Atlas” has more in common with “Until the End of the World,” however, they are clearly different kinds of films. What does this write-up about “Cloud Atlas” mean? Did I like the film? Did I like the book? Isn’t everything in life up for debate, up for discussion? Aren’t all of our lives intertwined in some way? Isn’t there some composer from the past or clone from the future that we are connected to in some way? It is all difficult to say, however, it is easy to say that I greatly enjoyed the film, “Cloud Atlas.” The performances are great, the pacing is brisk without being too fast or too forced. The set design, throughout the film, is awesome to look at. The stories and the thread that I do not pretend to fully comprehend at this point, are interesting and not at all pretentious, as it easily could have taken a pretentious turn, but never does so. I purposefully did not read any reviews for “Cloud Atlas” before I saw the film or before I wrote this thrilling and impeccably well-written write-up about it. I suspect the film was not met with a terribly warm reception as it seems like a film that may be too difficult to digest. I can see the words “confusing,” “mess,” and “ too long,” being used to describe the film. Because I predict this kind of reception does not mean I agree. Perhaps reading most of the book did help me embrace the film and welcome it into my brain. I liked the film so much that I would not be adverse to seeing it again soon and buying the blu-ray when it is released. I enjoy challenging sci-fi films that do not have an air of pretentiousness. Such unpretentious sci-fi films include the aforementioned “Until the End of the World,” the original Russian version of “Solaris,” “Blade Runner,” and “Prometheus.” Though Cloud Atlas may not be classified as sci-fi, I feel it belongs in that genre. I did not find any of the six stories or sets of characters to be dull, however, the story of the Korean clones in the year 2144 was my favorite, though this story contains the most action movie scenes, incorporating sci-fi gunfire, but thankfully these scenes are brief and do not bog down the film.

Doona Bae is excellent as the clone, Sonmi-451 and Jim Sturgess is good as Hae-Joo Chang, Sonmi-451’s protector. Jim Broadbent is also very good in the story of Timothy Cavendish, an elderly gentleman who writes a book about the murder of a book critic, only to be sent to a less than favorable fate through various circumstances. I recommend “Cloud Atlas” highly. It is not my favorite film of the year, however, it is well worth 175 minutes of your time if you choose to map out a time to see it.