EPTCloud Atlas - Wachowski's movie with epic story - Page 15
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
nebula.
Sweden1431 Posts
| ||
|
dUTtrOACh
Canada2339 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:25 nebula. wrote: haven't read the book but this does without doubt seem interesting. Impressive list of actors aswell. You guys who recommend it why do you do that? The action is pretty good. The plot isn't bad. It's visually impressive. You get to see Hugo Weaving as a woman. | ||
|
nebula.
Sweden1431 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:48 dUTtrOACh wrote: The action is pretty good. The plot isn't bad. It's visually impressive. You get to see Hugo Weaving as a woman. DL:ing | ||
|
Byo
Canada209 Posts
Perhaps the extra character development in the book would have helped alot. Dunno if its a spoiler but + Show Spoiler + I kept thinking the story linked directly between all times, but that wasn't the case | ||
|
Snusmumriken
Sweden1717 Posts
6/10. Some beautiful scenes and acting but trying to hard many times. Tom Hanks as an englishman was just silly! And the asian woman playing mexican/english... What were they thinking? It looked absolutely ridiculous. | ||
|
RoyGBiv_13
United States1275 Posts
On January 03 2013 05:36 dUTtrOACh wrote: + Show Spoiler + This movie was pretty decent. I've never read the book, so I have no baseline comparison, but it seemed to be put together quite well. I could see people who have difficulty with English having difficulty understanding the movie, since there are some clever lines throughout and A LOT of talking. Anybody bothered &/or flustered by the movie's tendency to move between timelines is either not very bright, or easily distracted. The time-shifts were typically done at times that "made sense" from a director's perspective, or the stories may as well be told one at a time (destroying the pacing of the movie). + Show Spoiler + Aside from the actors, the sextet, the birthmark, and a string of flashbacks really seem to be the only things connecting the characters across timelines (very loosely, might I add). It's fairly obvious that there's an element of reincarnation - where the same souls tend to interact with one another despite the timelines being separated by centuries. There also seems to be a certain element of escaping captivity or fighting for freedom in some way, shape, or form. I'm not really sure how the actions of individuals were rippling across time and space, or if the actions of those in the past were even significant in the future in any way (aside from the obvious connections - the sextet, Erving's book, the letters, the preaching of the Korean clone and her cult in the future). I didn't really feel like I'd experienced much more than a 3 hour long Wachowski Bros. circle jerk about reincarnation, destiny, and a sort of "chosen one". Not really my cup of tea, but in no way a terrible movie. At least some people will think about freedom and lack of freedom a little differently due to movies like this. You really do need to slap people in the face to make such a point, though, and I'm not convinced that they got their point across to the entire audience - especially those who didn't understand wtf they saw. Most of the complaints I've read in this thread could be resolved by the viewer suspending their disbelief of reincarnation for the duration of the flick. It's not exactly cramming it down your throat, as it gives you plenty of on-screen evidence for the act of reincarnation happening in this world. + Show Spoiler + My favorite themes: the obvious love&compassion>oppression different times/places + same people = same stories, therefore people=stories My personal take-away from the flick, and an awesome one at that: The creation of a work of art such as a symphony, a book, or a movie can have profound effects on the inspiration of another, even if just 7 people in the world hear your symphony. Each story had a creation event take place - A journal, which inspired a symphony, which inspired a news article, which helped influence a movie, which had a profound effect in the creation of a religion, which then caused an oral tradition, etc... If anything, the movie is saying "The interested viewer of your art is in essence a reincarnation of you" -- awesome... | ||
|
Snusmumriken
Sweden1717 Posts
On January 03 2013 08:16 RoyGBiv_13 wrote: Most of the complaints I've read in this thread could be resolved by the viewer suspending their disbelief of reincarnation for the duration of the flick. It's not exactly cramming it down your throat, as it gives you plenty of on-screen evidence for the act of reincarnation happening in this world. + Show Spoiler + My favorite themes: the obvious love&compassion>oppression different times/places + same people = same stories, therefore people=stories My personal take-away from the flick, and an awesome one at that: The creation of a work of art such as a symphony, a book, or a movie can have profound effects on the inspiration of another, even if just 7 people in the world hear your symphony. Each story had a creation event take place - A journal, which inspired a symphony, which inspired a news article, which helped influence a movie, which had a profound effect in the creation of a religion, which then caused an oral tradition, etc... If anything, the movie is saying "The interested viewer of your art is in essence a reincarnation of you" -- awesome... its not so much reincarnation being the problem as the fact that the version of reincarantion seen in the movie is pretty much summed up in "the bad guys stay bad and good guys stay good... except Tom Hanks of course. Tom Hanks is too awesome to stay bad". Thats all fine and dandy but the movie seems to work really hard at being deep when in fact it is not, and to assume something is deep just because it is not told in a linear fasion is... not very deep. Honestly I have no idea what was so great about this film, half of the costumes looked absolutely ridiculous. The asian as... Anything except asian actually made me feel embarrased for her. Shes not fooling anyone lol. However as I said it had some moments of brilliance in it for sure. | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5711 Posts
On January 03 2013 07:48 dUTtrOACh wrote: The action is pretty good. The plot isn't bad. It's visually impressive. You get to see Hugo Weaving as a woman. And Hale Berry as a guy. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 03 2013 05:36 dUTtrOACh wrote: This movie was pretty decent. I've never read the book, so I have no baseline comparison, but it seemed to be put together quite well. I could see people who have difficulty with English having difficulty understanding the movie, since there are some clever lines throughout and A LOT of talking. Anybody bothered &/or flustered by the movie's tendency to move between timelines is either not very bright, or easily distracted. The time-shifts were typically done at times that "made sense" from a director's perspective, or the stories may as well be told one at a time (destroying the pacing of the movie). + Show Spoiler + Aside from the actors, the sextet, the birthmark, and a string of flashbacks really seem to be the only things connecting the characters across timelines (very loosely, might I add). It's fairly obvious that there's an element of reincarnation - where the same souls tend to interact with one another despite the timelines being separated by centuries. There also seems to be a certain element of escaping captivity or fighting for freedom in some way, shape, or form. I'm not really sure how the actions of individuals were rippling across time and space, or if the actions of those in the past were even significant in the future in any way (aside from the obvious connections - the sextet, Erving's book, the letters, the preaching of the Korean clone and her cult in the future). I didn't really feel like I'd experienced much more than a 3 hour long Wachowski Bros. circle jerk about reincarnation, destiny, and a sort of "chosen one". Not really my cup of tea, but in no way a terrible movie. At least some people will think about freedom and lack of freedom a little differently due to movies like this. You really do need to slap people in the face to make such a point, though, and I'm not convinced that they got their point across to the entire audience - especially those who didn't understand wtf they saw. The "spoiler" segment of your post explains how I felt after seeing the movie without reading the book pretty thoroughly. Except I knew there was more to it from the "lore" being based on a book. As I said in my earlier post, it was "good" after seeing it, but I was really stuck with that feeling that there was so much more to it that was communicated in a very subtle fashion (or maybe poorly communicated to those who did not read the book due to time constraints). I know there had to be more links between timelines, and more links between the "reincarnations", than are obvious from the first viewing of the movie. Although in response to your post I must say, the tone of your post is pretty silly. You insult others intelligence for not understanding some aspects when I'm positive there were subtle things communicated that you missed too, especially considering you interpreted most the same as I did as someone who did not read the book, and I know there were things I missed. Yes, it was probably due to being poorly communicated in the movie, but you are in the same boat as those you are insulting. | ||
|
MethodSC
United States928 Posts
One thing I'll say is, don't take this movie seriously. It's not trying to make a religious statement so just stop with the nonsense. It really hurts me to have to make this statement on TL. Anyways, I loved it, and will watch it again. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
Really liked it, beautiful movie. It felt very poetic and strong emotionally especially the last 30min or so. I recommend not really trying to decipher the plot too much, since all those arcs in the movie are more about a concept than a concrete plot linking them together. Those that want a logic and down to earth plot will be disappointed, or also if you were waiting for some deep philosophical concepts... it's not really there. As a 3h movie I could not stop watching, the fact that there are so many arcs which all are fairly interesting really kept me glued to it for the whole time. Also they are quite diversified... In the end it felt like watching multiple stories at the same time with abstract links between them. But I must say I really enjoyed the overall editing of the movie. Oh and I left wanting to know more about Sonmi era and Zachry era. These days I have a hard time finding any movie that gives me an emotional impact . This was one of them, so probably best of 2012 for me. But like I said above... won't be everybody's cup of tea. Will try the book. Edit:Here is a quote for L. Wachovski which I think pretty much sum up what I think of it: "We don’t want to say, 'We are making this to mean this.' What we find is that the most interesting art is open to a spectrum of interpretation" | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9754 Posts
On January 02 2013 08:43 heroyi wrote: and then if you realize at the end of the movie how the father (Hugo) stated how all of the small actions by the lawyer (who now became a abolitionist) will amount to nothing and his generations will be disregarded and mocked. Despite all of this, the lawyer simply stated that "...but what is an ocean but a multitude of drops?" That quote right there just rings inside me so loudly. Greed and "evil" will win the short term battles but in the long run kindness, love and virtues will win it all in the end. To me this also brings to mind the idea that we create the universe that we live in a how we perceive that universe, by making choices, and that every single choice we make will forever change, and define the universe we perceive. To the people saying that its a bad movie, i wonder whether you are right or not. I keep hearing things like 'bad script, bad acting' etc. but nothing during the movie really broke my immersion in it. I thoroughly enjoyed it from start to finish. Of course even if you tell me the script is bad, i will tell you that your definition of the movie is subjective, so you watch it on your own terms. Personally i enjoy movies where i don't really get the point (or feel i have missed something), especially when things are revealed through rewatching. I can see why some people would see that as a downside, but i like it. My favourite thing about the movie is the pacing. It is very relentless, which gives it an even more odd kind of feeling. The constant action seems to give everything a really intense feel, even though it sometimes seems to detract from the message of the movie. edit: i would compare this movie heavily to 'the fountain' by darren afaronfsky. That movie is also one which divides audiences, but if you enjoyed this, the fountain has many of the same features. 3 stories, a spiritual message, hidden meanings and symbols etc. and beautiful imagery. + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
EngrishTeacher
Canada1109 Posts
Highly recommended. Have to be honest in that I gave up trying to connect the different timelines half-way through the movie, however the emotional payoff at the end rewards those trying to closely follow the plot. Question: although I'm a native speaker, I had a bit of trouble understanding the dialogue from the 2300s timeline without subtitles, anyone else feel the same way? | ||
|
Mentalizor
Denmark1596 Posts
On January 05 2013 12:12 EngrishTeacher wrote: Blew my mind. Highly recommended. Have to be honest in that I gave up trying to connect the different timelines half-way through the movie, however the emotional payoff at the end rewards those trying to closely follow the plot. Question: although I'm a native speaker, I had a bit of trouble understanding the dialogue from the 2300s timeline without subtitles, anyone else feel the same way? Not born in an english speaking country - however we all speak english without effort... I HAD to get the subtitles - or else I wouldn't be able to understand 50%+ of what they were saying in that timeline | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5711 Posts
On January 05 2013 12:12 EngrishTeacher wrote: Blew my mind. Highly recommended. Have to be honest in that I gave up trying to connect the different timelines half-way through the movie, however the emotional payoff at the end rewards those trying to closely follow the plot. Question: although I'm a native speaker, I had a bit of trouble understanding the dialogue from the 2300s timeline without subtitles, anyone else feel the same way? I think they meant it to be that way. Though the second time I watched the movie I understood alot more than my first time. You only need to know the main words, which the movie lets through to be heard to know what they are talking about. | ||
|
Matoo-
Canada1397 Posts
| ||
|
magicmUnky
Australia280 Posts
| ||
|
Daray
6006 Posts
| ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
The book is an absolute must, by the way. One of the best things I've ever read, especially in terms of language used. | ||
|
Nevermind86
Somalia429 Posts
On July 27 2012 03:43 TehPrime wrote: Dare I say, this movie will triumph over Dark Knight Rises for movie of 2012. This quote right here made me watch this movie AND HERE IS WHAT I THINK ABOUT IT PLZ READ, this is important that you click what I have to say but I put it in spoiler anyways: + Show Spoiler + Thanks god, thanks, thanks, thanks, thanks god and isohunt that I fucking PIRATED this movie because it's such garbage that I would have been pretty pissed off if I actually paid to watch this trash that deserves being DELETED FROM the internet, actually I'm pissed off because those 5 and a half hours that lasts this film will not be comming back and I could have used all that time for more productive things like watching porn or a few dozen dota games... really, let's see: -It takes about 45 minutes to introduce all the sub-plots -They don't make sense -Every 5 minutes the characters have to say the most shallow quotes that will be forgotten in the next 5 seconds because of how cheesy it is, not only that but everything slows down so that the characters can say it in a very low voice something that apparently is terribly intellectual. -After about 4 hours the movie starts to make sense but you're probably very sleepy like I was and then you realize what was it all about: Some bullshit anti-slavery theme and "natural order of things" which means that slavery will never end or something but when this seems to be coherent they ruin it with new age religion bullshit like karma, reincarnation and another life to meet again your loved ones. -Then at the end you get more cheesy quotes so intellectual they can only be understood by Noam Chomsky or Socrates but not really it's just trash. -Then the final scene some snob lawyer quits all his fucking huge wealth to help slaves, yea right like those kind of people existed. And even if they did they wouldn't throw so many dumb quotes every 30 seconds. This is by far the worst movie I've ever seen, anybody that likes it needs to develop a taste and be castrated just in case, I though the worst movie of the last decade was green lantern and I saw that one just to laugh at how bad it was but really it wasn't so bad because I laughed many times, that's why I gave that one a rating of 2/10 in my private scale that nobody cares about, 2/10 for so bad it's good, this one gets 1/10 I've never disliked a movie with such passion it's just terribly awfully fucking bad and represents everything wrong with hollywood and their lack of ideas, only watch this trash if you feel like wasting 6 hours of your life. | ||
| ||
