Cloud Atlas: Brilliant to Hipsters

My expectations were too high after the previews for Cloud Atlas showcased an epic, sweeping tale that covered several centuries and alludes to a deeper connection between each era. What appears to be a film about reincarnation and love across the ages is in fact six separate short films loosely connected in that each story in sequence learns about the previous era’s story through a novel, manuscript, film, or song.  Beware of those this week that will swear it’s a masterpiece, as if they fully understood the epic disjointed tale presented; Cloud Atlas is not as it appears.

The plot covers a lot of ground as it ranges in epochs from the late 1800’s through the post apocalyptic distant future and covers several genres (romantic, period piece, sci-fi, thriller, mystery). To fully encompass the entire six story arc would yield an article of epic proportions, but in essence each main character in the stories deals with the oppression of their era (slavery, anti-Semitism, rights of the elderly, rights of clones, etc.) and ultimately must overcome multiple obstacles to reach their goals; finding love, justice, freedom, and purpose along the journey.

I don’t profess to be the most brilliant man on the planet, but I’m certainly not the most dim and my understanding of screenplay format is probably better than a majority of the populace.  A great film lifts us emotionally, carries us intellectually, and elicits a sense of finality as the closing credits roll. Cloud Atlas leaves its viewers with many questions, and for me, a slathering of unsettled frustration at my inability to answer them. Perhaps Cloud Atlas would have been better served as a premiere cable mini-series, rather than a deflated attempt to cram so many themes into a single film. Much like the television series Lost, the novel adaptation was a terrific journey in which the writers did not have a satisfying endgame in mind. In short, I felt like a monkey banging on a coconut unsure of how to crack it open to enjoy its core.

While novel adaptations seem as though they would be the simplest screenplays to write, they in actuality, are perhaps the most difficult. Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run, Perfume) along with the Wachowski’s Lana and Andy (The Matrix Trilogy, V for Vendetta, Speed Racer) have adapted the 2004 Booker Prize winning novel into a sweeping epic that fails to achieve what a novel adaptation is supposed to do; convert a long form narrative into a digestible story with a film-worthy through line. Every Hollywood flick doesn’t have to fit into the film school definition of a story, but should a screenwriter choose to bend the mold of standardized storytelling he or she must first understand that the audience’s expectations play heavily into their sense of enjoyment and ultimately satisfaction. As Cloud Atlas reached its conclusion, the “Hipsters” in the theatre clapped as if they’d just seen a hobo cellist play a classical rendition of Michael Jackson’s Thriller while wearing orange tube-socks. The rest of us looked around wondering why we weren’t in on the joke. The tragedy here isn’t that the film is unwatchable. The tragedy is that individually, each story is engrossing, well acted, and a film within itself. But as a whole, this film fails to tie the six stories together with any modicum of significance, save for the “novel” concept of each tale being discovered by its successor. I, the viewer, should not have to read the novel to understand the film, that’s the point of the screenplay. Like a smoothie with too many ingredients, Cloud Atlas is a cacophony of flavors, thus confusing the palates of its viewers.

Based on the runtime alone you’ll certainly get your money’s worth as Cloud Atlas weighs in at a whopping two hours and fifty-two minutes. The film also presents a unique movie-going experience in several other areas as well. Remarkable performances from Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Doona Bae, and Hugh Grant in multiple roles highlight a visually stunning marathon of a movie. Hugh Grant alone portrays shrewd American nuclear energy tycoon Lloyd Hooks, elderly scorned brother Denholme Cavendish, Neo-Asian drug addicted café owner Seer Rhee, and Post-Apocalyptic Hawaiian cannibal Kona Chief. Unfortunately some of the better acting work was not given a sufficient amount of time to have an impact, because as soon as a plot point of significance would occur, the film would transition to another time period and yet another story leaving us searching for a connection between everything.

Cloud Atlas dissatisfied my high expectations, but if one views the individual parts for their own merits, future viewers most likely will not be disappointed. And when a high-brow film falls flat like this, it’s uncomfortable. It has already crossed the border into pretention, but it’s hard to maintain the illusion of that pretense when the art is less than excellent. It’s definitely a film worth seeing in theatres because of the stunning visuals, great acting, and the cool ideas of what an Orwellian future would be like. But keep in mind the start time of your showing and beware the “Hipster” self-proposed intellectuals in the lobby exiting their showing smugly feigning complete understanding of the film’s “deeper meaning.” Here’s how deep the film actually goes: love exists and oppression is bad—I didn’t need three hours to figure that out.