“Cloud Atlas” is a movie that offers a grandiose and a disappointing experience at the same time. It flirts with greatness and has much to admire, including exceptional performances from Tom Hanks, Jim Broadbent and Hugo Weaving. Their work is reason enough to recommend the film, yet when the movie ended I didn’t know what to make of it. That’s because this audacious, original piece of work is less than fully satisfying. I would never dismiss the film out of hand; it has too many unforgettable passages but I think its reach exceeds its grasp. One can applaud The Wachowski siblings for attempting something as bold as “Cloud Atlas”. But even an ambitious artist has to be judged on results, not intentions. Like David Mitchell’s 2004 novel, the movie has 6 different stories to tell that range across continents from the 19th century to the post-apocalyptic future. The idea is to show that we’re all connected in one way or another. That’s a lot to squeeze into one film if you ask me, even for a movie that runs nearly three hours.”Cloud Atlas” is truly a film in which the parts are greater than the whole. It provides a challenging, alternately rewarding and frustrating experience unlike any other I’ve encountered this year. I’m sorry I couldn’t fully embrace it. But if you’re a curious and adventurous filmgoer, I would still encourage you to see it. But you must know, going in, that you may or may not respond to the movie as a whole.
Rating: 2.5/4
Let's Talk About Movies 
Leave a reply to smallripple Cancel reply