With movies
like “Cloud Atlas,” I usually go into them expecting to be overwhelmed by the
visual spectacle and unable to understand all of what’s going on in the story.
On that level the movie does not disappoint as you kind of need a road map to tell
you who’s who and what’s what. But then again, what matters when you watch something
like this for the first time (and watching it once is not enough) is that you
get the gist of what’s going on. The gist of this story is that everything and
everyone is connected in one way or another, and once you understand that then
“Cloud Atlas” becomes a fascinating movie going experience.
Some will
say that this film is too damn ambitious, and we need to stop saying that like
it’s a bad thing. What’s wrong with being too ambitious in this day and age? It
may cause filmmakers to take a wrong step from time to time, but it also
guarantees that we will get a cinematic experience that is unlike many others.
This project brings together the Wachowski siblings who gave us “The Matrix”
trilogy and Tom Tykwer who directed the brilliantly kinetic “Run Lola Run,” and
“Cloud Atlas” represents some of the best work they have done in a while.
The film is
based on the book by David Mitchell, and it interweaves six different stories
which take place in different time periods: the Pacific Ocean circa 1850,
Zedelgem, Belgium 1931, San Francisco, California 1975, the United Kingdom in
2012, Neo Seoul (Korea) in the 22nd century, and the last story takes place on
a beautiful ocean island in a time which could be our past but might actually
be our future. Guessing which time period the island story takes place in is
one of the film’s great mysteries right up to the end.
The
characters range from a 65-year old publisher Timothy Cavendish who flees from
the associates of a jailed gangster to a genetically-engineered clone named Sonmi-451
who is freed from her servitude as a fast-food restaurant server to explore a
world which she discovers lives to exploit her kind. “Cloud Atlas” travels back
and forth through these stories, and once everything is set up the film becomes
an exploration of how the actions of individual lives impact one another in the
past, present and future. One person ends up going from being a killer in one
life to being a hero in another, and one act of kindness ripples across
centuries to inspire a revolution.
Tom Hanks,
Halle Berry, Susan Sarandon, Jim Broadbent, Hugh Grant and many other actors
here end up playing many different roles. They will be recognizable in some,
and others will only become clear when you stay through the end credits. I
can’t help but wonder how they kept track of all the different characters they
played, some which are of a gender opposite their own.
Hanks’
performances in “Cloud Atlas” go all over the map as he plays characters as
varied as a tribesman trying to rebuild his life in a post-apocalyptic world to
a doctor who looks to steal from a patient more than help him. I especially
liked his role as Isaac Sachs, a worker at a nuclear power plant in the San
Francisco story. Hanks is always so very good when he underplays a role, and
that was the one character of his I wish was expanded on a bit more. At the
same time, I do think he was miscast as Scottish gangster Dermot Hoggins which
has him doing a lot of bombastic acting for no really good reason. Where’s
Jason Statham when you need him?
Berry’s
career since her Oscar win for “Monster’s Ball” has seen a lot of peaks and
valleys, but she also does strong work here as a variety of characters. Like
Hanks, she is especially good in the San Francisco story as reporter Luisa Rey.
She also has some strong moments as Meronym, a member of a technologically
advanced civilization who may not be all she appears to be.
Jim
Broadbent, as always, is a blast to watch in each role he has as he is so delightfully
animated whether he’s playing a publisher in hiding or a composer as famous as
he is vindictive. Ben Whishaw, who we’ll soon see as Q in “Skyfall,” is
heartbreaking as Robert Frobisher whose artistic ambitions are unforgivably
shattered. And Hugo Weaving channels that Agent Smith energy from “The Matrix”
to portray a number of nasty antagonists, one of which threatens to give Nurse
Ratched from “One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest” a run for her money.
But the best
performance to be found in “Cloud Atlas” comes from Doona Bae who portrays the
engineered clone Sonmi-451. Although she is not really a human being, Bae
infuses Sonmi-451 with such a strong humanity that she makes you feel those
emotions she soon experiences. Just a look into those piercing eyes of Bae’s is
enough to melt one’s heart as Sonmi-451 finds a power no mere mortal can easily
attain, and one of her last moments onscreen speaks to a truth that no one
person or a government can ever simply wipe away.
For the
Wachowskis, “Cloud Atlas” represents a big comeback after the boring fiasco
that was “Speed Racer.” I’m also thankful that it doesn’t have the same kind of
ending that “The Matrix Revolutions” had because that would have driven me
nuts. For Twyker, the film represents a chance for us to re-evaluate him as a
filmmaker. Ever since his incredible success with “Run Lola Run,” people have
taken him to task (perhaps far more than they should have) for not making a
film that is as good as that one. But together these three have created a
visual feast which has you glued to your seat and at attention for almost three
hours (yes it’s that long, but you won’t really notice).
“Cloud Atlas”
was an independently made film, and an expensive one at that with a budget of
$100 million. It’s easy to see why no major movie studio would take the whole
thing on themselves; it has a dense narrative that goes all over the place, and
it forces the audience to pay close attention in a way most movies never demand
them to. The fact that it is not doing too well at the box office is sad
because you want audiences to embrace films like this more as they try to do
something different from the norm.
Regardless
of its flaws, “Cloud Atlas” looks to be one of the most films that will have a
long shelf life. It invites repeated viewings so you can take in new meaning s
that you didn’t see the first time around, and you will come out of it
wondering how the filmmakers put the whole thing together. This one definitely
has cult classic written all over it.
* * * ½ out of * * * *
0 comments
Post a Comment