Cloud Atlas - Wachowski's movie with epic story - Page 12
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Grimmyman123
Canada939 Posts
| ||
|
Iranon
United States983 Posts
On November 15 2012 12:28 BreakfastBurrito wrote: Anyways, I have one spoiler-related question about the movie (which I enjoyed overall) + Show Spoiler + Tom Hanks was at times good, at times a money hungry evil person. I thought people more or less maintained their personality over the years... Does this have to do with karma and redeeming oneself? Answer to your question: + Show Spoiler + It's not really important. For obvious* reasons Hollywood played up the whole reincarnated-souls thing, which was only important in the book as a symbol and not as a plot device. It doesn't matter if Tom Hanks A did one thing and Tom Hanks B did another thing later. What matters is that when people act, if always effects the world that comes after them, even if only in imperceptibly small ways. Everyone acts, everyone affects everything, and those effects are what make the world the way it is right now, for better or for worse. *because they assume the general public would be too dense to figure out anything subtle. To further clarify, and to answer anyone else who's wondering "what is Cloud Atlas really about?", here is the last page of the novel, which ties everything in all six stories together (again, not in terms of plot arc; the plot is almost superfluous): + Show Spoiler + My recent adventures have made me quite the philosopher, especially at night, when I hear naught but the stream grinding boulders into pebbles through an unhurried eternity. My thoughts flow thus. Scholars discern motions in history & formulate these motions into rules that govern the rises & falls of civilizations. My belief runs contrary, however. To wit: history admits no rules; only outcomes. What precipitates outcomes? Vicious acts & virtuous acts. What precipitates acts? Belief. Belief is both prize & battlefield, within the mind & in the mind’s mirror, the world. If we believe humanity is a ladder of tribes, a colosseum of confrontation, exploitation & bestiality, such a humanity is surely brought into being, & history’s Horroxes, Boer-haaves & Gooses shall prevail. You & I, the moneyed, the privileged, the fortunate, shall not fare so badly in this world, provided our luck holds. What of it if our consciences itch? Why undermine the dominance of our race, our gunships, our heritage & our legacy? Why fight the “natural” (oh, weaselly word!) order of things? Why? Because of this:—one fine day, a purely predatory world shall consume itself. Yes, the Devil shall take the hindmost until the foremost is the hindmost. In an individual, selfishness uglifies the soul; for the human species, selfishness is extinction. Is this the doom written within our nature? If we believe that humanity may transcend tooth & claw, if we believe divers races & creeds can share this world as peaceably as the orphans share their candlenut tree, if we believe leaders must be just, violence muzzled, power accountable & the riches of the Earth & its Oceans shared equitably, such a world will come to pass. I am not deceived. It is the hardest of worlds to make real. Torturous advances won over generations can be lost by a single stroke of a myopic president’s pen or a vainglorious general’s sword. A life spent shaping a world I want Jackson to inherit, not one I fear Jackson shall inherit, this strikes me as a life worth the living. Upon my return to San Francisco, I shall pledge myself to the Abolitionist cause, because I owe my life to a self-freed slave & because I must begin somewhere. I hear my father-in-law’s response: “Oho, fine, Whiggish sentiments, Adam. But don’t tell me about justice! Ride to Tennessee on an ass & convince the rednecks that they are merely whitewashed negroes & their negroes are black-washed Whites! Sail to the Old World, tell ’em their imperial slaves’ rights are as inalienable as the Queen of Belgium’s! Oh, you’ll grow hoarse, poor & gray in caucuses! You’ll be spat on, shot at, lynched, pacified with medals, spurned by backwoodsmen! Crucified! Naïve, dreaming Adam. He who would do battle with the manyheaded hydra of human nature must pay a world of pain & his family must pay it along with him! & only as you gasp your dying breath shall you understand, your life amounted to no more than one drop in a limitless ocean!” Yet what is any ocean but a multitude of drops? | ||
|
heroyi
United States1064 Posts
On November 15 2012 12:47 Grimmyman123 wrote: So how is it? Should I get out to see this one? Not a bad movie by no means. However this was a grand project and the directors were a bit overzealous. A critic called it a "beautiful mess" which is the best description. If u are the type of person who needs strong investment in characters and such then you most likely will not like it. If anything go read the book first since the six stories are very accurate but the movie has a different twist to it in comparison to the book which you can tell | ||
|
BreakfastBurrito
United States893 Posts
On November 15 2012 12:45 heroyi wrote: + Show Spoiler + I don't recall him being evil in that sense which story was that in? The story plot and mechanic is similar to karma. It's trying to show how actions can ripple through and affect others in time. If you pay attention you can see how everyone's event affected one another like the old man biopic adventure(trapped in nursing home which turned into a "film" seen with Tom Hanks starring in it which is shown by the other clone) affecting somni (questioning her life and stopped acting like a drone) which affect the revolution leading to the post apocalyptic tribe state of the future. Most of the easter eggs found help link everyone together(only one unsure is how the journal of the Pacific lawyer in the eighteen century affected the gay composer) . Interesting story despite it deviating away far from the actual theme of the book + Show Spoiler + Mainly how he was a murderous greedy doctor in one but turned into a much more reasonable man during the post apocalyptic time period, and was a nice scientist in the 70s, etc. I get that the movie is about karma and affecting people/yourself past your own life The reason I bring it up is because Hugo Weaving and Halle Berry both more or less maintained the same archetype. Weaving was a fucking dick, and Berry was a pretty good/inquisitive person no matter what time period she was in. Hanks is the only one to "switch sides" between the generally accepted moral good and evil I think | ||
|
ZapRoffo
United States5544 Posts
A question to even chew on (movie and/or book) is + Show Spoiler + are all the stories necessarily supposed to have happened/be the truth? Remember for example, we get each past story in diary/book/movie/letter form experienced by someone in the future. Or can characters' "souls" be seen in or projected onto stories of the past which they and we aren't even sure happened in the real movie world. Or the even the reverse. The future characters are dreamed up by the past ones, in Adam Ewing's delirium/Frobisher or the old composer's dreams/etc. | ||
|
BreakfastBurrito
United States893 Posts
On November 15 2012 14:03 ZapRoffo wrote: I'm pretty sure in the movie the continuity of actors isn't supposed to be a literal representation of a path of reincarnated souls or anything like that. It's just supposed to be a thematic reinforcement, like here's one way we add to the feeling of interconnected stories. A question to even chew on (movie and/or book) is + Show Spoiler + are all the stories necessarily supposed to have happened/be the truth? Remember for example, we get each past story in diary/book/movie/letter form experienced by someone in the future. Or can characters' "souls" be seen in or projected onto stories of the past which they and we aren't even sure happened in the real movie world. Thanks, that makes sense | ||
|
ChinaRestaurant
Austria324 Posts
Frobisher blew his brains out :/, I didnt get to that part in the book yet^^ | ||
|
Maxd11
United States680 Posts
| ||
|
Zooper31
United States5711 Posts
On November 21 2012 08:04 Maxd11 wrote: Got the dvd in the mail the other day. I can't wait until I have time over thanksgiving break to watch it! How the heck do you have a DVD alrdy? Isn't it still in some theaters? | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15358 Posts
On October 28 2012 15:58 itkovian wrote: Just watched it with some friends. I enjoyed it a lot. The six stories all maintained my attention throughout, and they were all uniquely interesting. The ties between the stories were neat, but if you don't pick up on them while watching its not the biggest problem, since each story can thrive on its own independently. Actually, I was thinking about it just now, and it took me a few minutes to figure out how the modern-day/old-person-escape story fit in with the rest. And i'm still not quite sure, but I think the nuclear plant owner was the same person as the old man's brother? Can someone answer this? It's the one connection I am still missing too. I meant I am missing the connection between the 1973 murder mystery and the 2012 publisher in nut house stories. | ||
|
Waxangel
United States33503 Posts
On November 22 2012 00:48 zatic wrote: Can someone answer this? It's the one connection I am still missing too. I meant I am missing the connection between the 1973 murder mystery and the 2012 publisher in nut house stories. The kid halle who hangs out with halle berry shows signs he likes writing murder mysteries - you see a scene where the 2000's publisher receives a book submission that the grown up kid wrote about halle berry's ordeal from the 1970's | ||
|
Maxd11
United States680 Posts
On November 21 2012 13:45 Zooper31 wrote: How the heck do you have a DVD alrdy? Isn't it still in some theaters? I have a family member in the director's guild or something like that so he gets to vote on best director ect. studios that want his vote send movies some that are still in theaters and some that haven't even come to theaters yet. The penalties for pirating them are (much) worse than that for movies that are already on dvd though. | ||
|
kochanfe
Micronesia1338 Posts
| ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
On November 15 2012 12:47 Grimmyman123 wrote: So how is it? Should I get out to see this one? An excellent movie in my opinion. The multiple story lines really did add every element to the movie. Drama, action, humor...it was a complete emotional experience. The actual filming and design were amazing as well. My only complaint: TOO DAMN LONG! I really do not have the attention span for a 3 hour movie. | ||
|
HaRuHi
1220 Posts
On November 15 2012 13:47 BreakfastBurrito wrote: + Show Spoiler + Mainly how he was a murderous greedy doctor in one but turned into a much more reasonable man during the post apocalyptic time period, and was a nice scientist in the 70s, etc. I get that the movie is about karma and affecting people/yourself past your own life The reason I bring it up is because Hugo Weaving and Halle Berry both more or less maintained the same archetype. Weaving was a fucking dick, and Berry was a pretty good/inquisitive person no matter what time period she was in. Hanks is the only one to "switch sides" between the generally accepted moral good and evil I think+ Show Spoiler + That was the one thing that really destroyed the movie for me. So hanks is first this greedy doctor. Then the greedy hotelmanager, where, by his greed he actually does something nice. Then he works for one of the most evil corporations, but for a brief moment is even more eager to get into halle berry's pants and therefor helps to prevent the death of many. Because love starts to make him a better person. Then he is that really simple criminal, which points out how simple of a soul he possesses. Then in the future, the button he finds again from one of his past lifes almost rips of his face, and when he finally lets go of the button(his greed) he gets into halle's pants...yeah. Also, hugh grant actually goes through a transformation aswell, he continiously becomes more evil. Pretty sure Agent smith is not to take too seriously, as in the end he literally become the personification of fear. He is more like someone who helps other characters to develope. | ||
|
Doppelganger
488 Posts
On November 22 2012 02:25 HaRuHi wrote: + Show Spoiler + That was the one thing that really destroyed the movie for me. So hanks is first this greedy doctor. Then the greedy hotelmanager, where, by his greed he actually does something nice. Then he works for one of the most evil corporations, but for a brief moment is even more eager to get into halle berry's pants and therefor helps to prevent the death of many. Because love starts to make him a better person. Then he is that really simple criminal, which points out how simple of a soul he possesses. Then in the future, the button he finds again from one of his past lifes almost rips of his face, and when he finally lets go of the button(his greed) he gets into halle's pants...yeah. Also, hugh grant actually goes through a transformation aswell, he continiously becomes more evil. Pretty sure Agent smith is not to take too seriously, as in the end he literally become the personification of fear. He is more like someone who helps other characters to develope. + Show Spoiler + I think "Agent Smith" embodies some negative principle in all stories. From Slavery, Fascism (I am not sure if he really loved the Jewish women here, that would be the only conflict we see in him), Murder, the unjust and uncaring System (I would say two times), to "The Devil" of the tribes people/ Fear. The most interesting thing here is that at the end he only exists in the mind of another person because this questions for me if he was ever a soul or just a negative principle that found a soul/body that it shaped. Damn I just noticed how the tribes people in the post apocalyptic world and the slaves in the beginning have both extensive facial tattoos establishing yet another connection. Loved the film so much to think about. | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15358 Posts
| ||
|
itkovian
United States1763 Posts
On November 22 2012 01:04 Waxangel wrote: The kid halle who hangs out with halle berry shows signs he likes writing murder mysteries - you see a scene where the 2000's publisher receives a book submission that the grown up kid wrote about halle berry's ordeal from the 1970's Oh, nice, I never noticed that. Makes me wonder how many more little things like that I missed. I'll probably pick up on a lot more when I watch it a second time. I did a search to find out more, and I discovered that most of the actors had a lot more roles than I realized. Some of them are pretty minor which explains why I missed them the first time. Also, a funny thing, I guess the mansion where the composer lived in the 1930's was eventually converted into the nursing home the publisher ended up in later. | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15358 Posts
| ||
|
APPSCI
United States51 Posts
| ||
| ||
The reason I bring it up is because Hugo Weaving and Halle Berry both more or less maintained the same archetype. Weaving was a fucking dick, and Berry was a pretty good/inquisitive person no matter what time period she was in. Hanks is the only one to "switch sides" between the generally accepted moral good and evil I think