Set in six different time periods ranging from the mid-19th century to the futuristic world of the 2300s, “Cloud Atlas” is not entirely history and not entirely fantasy, but entirely humanity. Based on the novel of the same name, by David Mitchell, who incidentally makes a cameo appearance in the movie, the film chronicles friendships, romances, revolutions, and a singular musical masterpiece.
This project began during the filming of “V for Vendetta,” which directors and siblings Lana and Andy Wachowski also wrote and directed. The Wachowskis worked together with German director Tom Tykwer. Visually captivating, “Cloud Atlas” is a stunning cinematic experience, with its period costumes and imaginative landscapes of the future. The visual graphics of the movie are outstanding, but that is to be expected from the directors of “The Matrix” trilogy.
A collection of Hollywood favorites accompanied by some newer faces complete the small cast chosen for this ambitious concept. The peculiarity of this cast lies in that each actor must assume at least three different roles. This is accomplished through numerous prosthetic features, including the bulbous nose that’s a personal favorite. Halle Berry puts forth a surprisingly skilled performance as the tough journalist who falls for one of Tom Hank’s character, the eccentric physician. Berry and Hanks have genuine chemistry.
Jim Sturgess, as the lawyer Adam Ewing, with David Gyasi, as self-freed slave Autua, deliver a sincere, compelling portrayal of true friendship. Unfortnunately, Hugh Grant and his awkward American accent was a poor choice and sticks out like a sore thumb.
The film may receive a nomination for “Best Original Song” for its stunning piece “Cloud Atlas,” which Tykwer helped to write. The incredible makeup designs featured in the film can be expected to receive a nomination as well. That being said, after the first few preliminary scenes, the movie quickly becomes a guessing game of “Who’s wearing the prosthetic mask?” Don’t limit the game to simple facial changes, however, because there are gender and race reversals as well. Though necessary to Mitchell’s vision of “Cloud Atlas,” the makeup distracts from the film itself.
More like a compilation of vignettes –– not all of which are compelling –– the film doesn’t quite establish the unity necessary to make it a great film. Each story line seems complete in its own right, but disconnected as a whole. There were actually two separate crews, one directed by the Wachowskis and the other by Tykwer, shooting the individual stories. This may account for the disjointed sense of plot. Either way, I left the theater with the feeling that I had just watched something epic, and yet I could not see anything monumental in the stories as a whole. Inevitably, the writers hit the problem of turning a 500-page novel into a sensitive film with a limited running time.
Seeing the film once is not enough to catch all the clever details of “Cloud Atlas,” but it also does not warrant taking the time to watch it again. Although well-acted, it simply couldn’t hurdle the obstacles like translating a made-up dialect onto the screen, and exploring the symbolism of each relationship. Without these, the film lost what the book has –– depth. A subject as intricate as the kindnesses and cruelties of mankind goes far beyond a single film, even one that lasts for two-and-a-half hours.
cblanton@hillsdale.edu
