Cloud Atlas

Thanks to the comments in this thread, I ordered the book. The Wachowskis are interesting filmmakers. They may do the book justice.
 
I finished reading Cloud Atlas almost a month ago. I cried once or twice during the ordeal, around the mid section and at the end. It was sad in a way, seeing how trapped everyone in the whole world is in the cycle of violence and ignorance. But it was strange that, as little as things changed between the middle story and the end, I was really uplifted by the end of it all. As if some things can actually change people for the better.
 
I finished the book last month and wasn't impressed by it - though that could be because I went into it with high hopes. It fell flat for me, I found the writing laborious at times and kind of self-indulgent, but others might really like it. We'll see what they do with the movie - I'm hoping they take the raw material and make it 'more'.
 
Cloud Atlas was one of the top pick films at the Toronto Film Festival this year, and unfortunately the initial reviews are not great. Apparently the film's a bit of a mess; really bogged down by its high aspirations, meandering, and seems to be missing a point other than to be 'neato'.

Here's a review _http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/tiff-review-cloud-atlas-is-bold-messy-disappointingly-unimaginative-20120908

I'll still be one of the first in line to see this one because I think films can often go over the heads of many critics (in fact, some of my favourite movies seem to get negative reviews from critics), but admittedly I'm less psyched about it than I was :(
 
I read Cloud Atlas and I do want to see the movie. The book format as far as storytelling goes is in a 1-2-3-4-5-6-5-4-3-2-1 style. Some of the dialogue in the book made it difficult to focus on what was going on and there is a connection between each story. While a clear connection is made in the book between Robert Frobisher and Luisa Rey, I was trying to guess if there were connections with the other characters which the movie trailer makes. Should be interesting to say the least.
 
anart said:
I finished the book last month and wasn't impressed by it - though that could be because I went into it with high hopes. It fell flat for me, I found the writing laborious at times and kind of self-indulgent, but others might really like it. We'll see what they do with the movie - I'm hoping they take the raw material and make it 'more'.
Click to expand...

I also finished the book last month and found the writing, as some of the book's critics commented, pretentious, although it wasn't so much so that I lost interest, but then I went in with no expectations one way or the other. I just wanted to see where it was going. The ending was a bit of a disappointment. It seemed as though the author just became tired of the project, stopped writing and shipped it off to the publisher.

I put off watching the trailer until after reading the book. I watched the IMDB trailer moments ago and it looks pretty good. Perhaps the Wachowski's did manage to make it 'more'. IMDB gives the film an 8.4 rating which is very high by their rating standard. But then Tree of Life was similarly highly rated, and except for some stunning photography, it nearly put me to sleep.

After finishing the book I was still a bit puzzled by the recurring comet shaped birthmark on the shoulders of the characters. It seems that it was meant to signify that they were all reincarnations of the same soul, but that was never very clear to me as there did not seem to be any other shared characteristics. Perhaps that's the way of reincarnation.
 
I found that I enjoyed Mitchell's first novel, "Ghostwritten" much more than "Cloud Atlas," although the Salon review of it reflects some of what I also felt. Even so, the stories and characters in his earlier novel remained with me much longer than those from "Cloud Atlas." (I was particularly touched by the story of the old woman running a noodle house on a sacred mountain in China. Her witnessing of multiple regime changes felt completely authentic). Here is the review of "Ghostwritten" in Salon, for those interested: _http://www.salon.com/2000/10/10/mitchell_3/
 
I read this book last winter. I enjoyed it I would say, but I didn't pick it up with any more intention
than finding a few hours pleasant diversion. Which it provided. I enjoyed the individual stories in
themselves and admired the authors ability to present them in the styles of differing genre. It was interesting
to notice that in some way the authorial voice was maintained through the shift in styles.

The characters in the stories were treated in good heart and I did not feel my emotions were being
manipulated beyond the needs of the plots. This is sort of important to me. There was a time when I would
not buy a novel without checking the back page to make sure it all ended happily.

Admittedly, I was reading the stories pretty automatically and was not expecting to notice anything
especially deep and I never did come to the conviction that any deeper themes were being actively explored.
For instance, though the stories were structured around the device of something like reincarnation, it was
not obvious to me what it was the author was suggesting might be being carried from one life/story to the
next. In a sense, for the sake of the book, I hope I was just being a bit dense. As I read I began to hope for
and missed any subtleties in the plotting that might have hinted at deeper relationships between the overt
storylines. All I noticed was the recurrent birthmark motif and that just was not a sufficient device for the author
to hang any deeper implications onto.

The theme of histories repeating, was perhaps flagged strongest by placing the first and last story on
the same Pacific atoll. Once I had realised that the two stories were in much the same physical location I wanted
the author to complete the circle by a revealing the period of the last story to be both in the future and the past of
the first. I would have found some thing like that a more satisfying last page.
 
Got to see the movie today and the storytelling was different in the movie although in the movie the connections between the characters are clearer in the movie versus the book. I enjoyed the changes in the storytelling in the movie and enjoyed the quotes from the characters regarding life. I'm glad I read the book first. Don't know if moviegoers will be confused by the different stories weaving in and out throughout the movie. Of course I like Tom Hanks and his different roles as well as Hugo Weaving and Hugh Grant. Visually beautiful in some scenes. I enjoyed the movie but I'm not sure everyone will due to the jumping around throughout the movie of the different stories.
 
I saw it today and I thought it was pretty good but also it is very long (almost 3 hours) and I felt like I had no idea what was going on in the movie for most of the time (I didn't read the book or anything about this movie). There is a constant shifting between different time periods at random which can be very disorienting and make it hard to follow what is going on at each time.

Spoilers


By the end I really didn't see how all the different time periods connected except for some minor themes like 2 people love each other through many lives, one revolutionary affected the next period etc. It wasn't too philosophical like some of their other films but there were some interesting ideas thrown in such as we are all connected through time and all our actions are important and effect each other, it is vital to "know thyself" and that this must be done by others observing you, breaking free from slavery and being food for others, also there was even a mention of Carlos Castaneda's work. I agree that people would get much more out of it if they were familiar with the book for some background on what is going on.
 
I had a chance to watch this the other night and I agree with Masamune.

I think people who have read the book would definitely have an easier time with following the movie, than those who haven't (like me). It was pretty difficult for me to follow the movie throughout jumping back and forth between the timelines. I liked the movie but think that because of the way it was made... it's hard for the viewer to feel any real attachment to any of the characters. I would like to watch it again when it comes out on DVD so I can rewind and understand it better, and maybe read the book too.

I think it was interesting though.. it's one of a kind and a bold piece of work. And you do basically get to see 6 stories for the price of one movie ticket.

Interestingly I had recently finished watching an anime called Fantastic Children which also deals with ideas of reincarnation and soul relationships that transcend time and space; and I thought the anime was a much more amazing story that Cloud Atlas. Fwiw.
 
Hi KsT1111,

Welcome to our forum. :)

We recommend all new members to post an introduction in the Newbies section telling us a bit about themselves, how they found the cass material, and how much of the work here they have read.

You can have a look through that board to see how others have done it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom