An American lawyer in the 1800s who befriends a slave. An English musician in the 1930s who agrees to assist an aging composer. An investigative journalist in the 1970s who uncovers a huge conspiracy involving a nuclear reactor. An amoral book publisher in 2012 on the run from gangsters. A fabricant in Neo Seoul circa 2144 leading a rebellion against an oppressive government . A tribesman in a post apocalyptic Hawaii overcoming personal demons to assist a beautiful woman and overcome an army of cannibals. Six very different stories. Six very different genres. One epic movie. This is what makes Cloud Atlas so ambitious. Quite simply, nothing like it has ever been made. While these six stories may seem completely different and without any actual connection, the are all strung together not by a storyline but an idea: Can the actions of impact others for years to come? The Wachowskis and Tom Tkywer examine that question in one of the best films of the year.
Clocking in at nearly three hours, there is no denying that Cloud Atlas is a lengthy film. That being said, I did not feel the three hours once. The film moves by at a fairly quick pace, without any scenes that feel tacked on or unimportant. In fact, every scene feels important and central to the primary theme of the film. Whether it be an intense action sequence or a quiet moment, each moment feels significant and, often, powerful. Also, while I'm sure some of the detractors of the film will argue that the stories are not completely connected, I would beg to differ. The Wachowskis and Tkywer made the distinct decision to not display the stories in a linear format and, instead, cut back and forth between the six different stories. This may feel overwhelming or confusing, but by looking past the story being told on screen viewers will see the film's actual stories: Of a man (Tom Hanks) who evolves from a despicable human being into a selfless hero, and the woman (Halle Berry) who inspires him to change his way. Of a couple (Jim Sturges and Doona Bae) who constantly try to protect the men and women on the fringes of society. And of the people on the fringes of society due to race or sexual orientation (David Gyasi and Ben Whisaw) trying to find independence. As one of Berry's six characters, Luisa Rey, says in the trailer "I'm trying to figure out why we keep making the same mistakes." That question, and many others, are the real story of Cloud Atlas. The rest is just the tool used to tell it.
But to tell such a story writers and directors must employ top notch editing skills and show true talent behind the camera. These three directors are more than up for the challenge and, again, displaying the stories simultaneously proved to be a wonderful decision. Each story works well on their own, but seeing a suspenseful moment on a slave ship in the 1800s intercut with an futuristic shootout gives an exhilarating feeling, that all too rare emotion that what we are watching is truly unique and unlike anything we've ever seen before. This intercutting also packs the biggest emotional punch. Seeing Berry and Hanks attempt to find love throughout the timeline makes it all the more better when they do and all the more sadder when they do not.
Now, the make up for the film, to be honest, is terrible. There is just no way to deny it. Was it intentional? I don't think so, but I'd be willing to hear some arguments about that. But, to be honest, I didn't mind all too much. Sure it's a bit distracting when Jim Sturges has to play a Korean but looks like a British man telling a racist joke, and when Hugo Weaving plays a malicious nurse in 2012 he doesn't look like a woman but a man in drag. And, the rare times the make up does look convincing, such as when Halle Berry plays a white woman in the 1930s, the effect wears off the second you realize that you are, in fact, looking at Halle Berry. Yet, I stopped caring about that due to the strength of the performances behind the makeup. The actors behind the makeup really sell the performance. Did I, even once, believe that Jim Sturges was actually a freedom fighting Korean? Or that Hugo Weaving was a Nurse Ratched-esque villain? Yes, I did, and not because of the makeup. The acting is, simply, one of a kind. Nobody here really seems like a weakest link, but if I had to highlight a few key actors, I'd say that Hanks, Jim Broadbent, Ben Whisaw and Doona Bae deliver the strongest performances. Bae gives one of my favorite performances of the year as Sonmi-451, and I hope she manages to break out into American films soon. Broadbent, who is great at playing over the top (see: Moulin Rouge!) finds a nice balance between realism and exaggeration while playing publisher Timothy Cavendish, and also steals scenes as the villainous Vyvyan Ayrs. Whisaw, who also delivers a solid performance in Skyfall, does a great job as Frobisher, one of the more dramatic and depressing characters in the film. And Hanks is simply a marvel. The fact that Hanks has built his reputation on being a 'nice guy' in almost all of his pictures, seeing him play a villain is shocking but a reminder of how talented he really is. Then, when he transforms into a hero, we are reminded how much we love him as 'the nice guy.'
Will everybody love Cloud Atlas? The middling box office results seem to say no, but I'd be willing to bet that, let's say, twenty years from now it will build up a reputation a la Blade Runner. A film this ambitious isn't goint to set the world on fire right away, and that's fine. I'm just happy to have the Wachowskis back in my life. Bound and The Matrix are both wonderful films, and Cloud Atlas can now join that list. And, in a way, the Wachowskis are bigger than ever. Lana Wachowski has become an icon for transgenders in Hollywood, and has become a true inspiration (have you seen her speech at the Visibility Awards? It's incredible!). Their next film also has two of the biggest movie stars working today, Channing Tatum and Mila Kunis, attached. Despite the film's status as a box office disaster (which is a shame considering the $100 million budget was paid, out of pocket, by the three directors) those two aren't going anywhere. And, I didn't forget about Tom Twyker. I haven't seen a film of his, but I certainly plan on it now. Right now, the film may be viewed as a financial disaster and a film that divided most critics. I say it's a visually stunning, beautiful epic with big ideas blockbusters should incorporate more often. I also say that the film is bound to be viewed in a much more positive light as the year's go by. And, lastly, I say that the film is one of the very best I've seen this year. Go see it, you might be impressed or, at the very least, treated to something you've never seen before.
No comments:
Post a Comment