Posts Tagged ‘rating

14
Aug
19

Award Shows Are Bogus ver. 081419

***

I’ve been fairly certain for a while. But, now, I am convinced; award shows are complete crap, utter rubbish, excessively expensive lies designed to look glamorous at the expense of souls.

All participants…all of those members of the “foreign press”…are either naïve or devious scum. Now, some of that naïve scum could redeem itself; there’s still hope. But, those who run the machines are surely black as sin or the thickest roots in an underground railroad to decide, like some Hunger Games contest, which celebrities and “little people” (the faceless crew members who outnumber the big names and slave over the projects of those who call themselves producers) get food and care for the year and who gets to fight over the scraps and eat shit. The lucky ones get their names attached to the next box-office big ticket while the bottom of the food chain gets to show of their bodies and talk stupid in the films that come out at the end of summer, when “kids” go back to school and no one gives a flying fook what they watch.

Now, breathe. And, let me shed a little light on the shape of this crap…or, rather, what supports my stomach-turning, fury-stoking feelings.

Every year, there’s that “best picture” film that takes one big award and another…and another…and gets so much buzz from all those cracked camera-toting tabloid freak shows who put every famous and not-so-famous face on the spot with stupid questions, testing them to see if they crack and say anything different from their last interview, anything negative about the people they recently knew as part of the crew. Everybody is “amazing.” Every experience is something good for the resume, even if the person secretly loathed or struggled through it. Every director is uniquely talented. Every interview is to make sure the next job goes smoothly and to collect a check; so don’t expect anyone to answer openly and honestly, even if you’re straight-shooting, expected-to-cuss Samuel L. Jackson.

So, why do we even do interviews?! It’s not for the fans. It’s for promotion…more and more promotion. An interview is a talking movie poster which can’t say anything about what happens in the movie, due to contractual threats that pretty much shackle all who partake in making the expensive torture package that actors refuse to watch because they struggled through it; they didn’t enjoy it. An interview is just a painful showcase of faces who habitually look down when they feel the urge to lie, to hold in the vomit and glaze over what they’d like to say. Hey! Look who’s in the movie! And, they’re talking without reading a script! How amazing…like watching animals behind glass in a zoo.

If you really enjoyed making something, wouldn’t you want to look at it, again? Or, do you go crazy because you find a mistake and realize you can’t correct it? Your hard work is now someone else’s baby, and you have no control. So, all your effort amounts to what someone makes of it. That’s rather cruel punishment in its own way and not respectful to the creative soul.

And, I have sampled a number of these “amazing” films. Not one has earned 5 out of 5 stars with me; they’re all lucky if they get a 3. I saw The English Patient, Schindler’s List, The Hurt Locker and, just recently, The Shape of Water. Oh, there was SO much buzz about The Shape of Water, not too long ago. And, I remember the high praise the rare FEMALE director got for The Hurt Locker. Of all the films I just mentioned, I guess The Hurt Locker was the best…but that’s not saying much. When you put Average Joe in a pageant with four corpses beaten to a bloody pulp, of course Average Joe is going to look good and smell all the sweeter. It’s like that one girl in school who gathers a cluster of less pretty girls around her so she stands out as the pretty one; it’s like some status tactic used by schools of fish.

Now, let me come right out and say I did not see these films in the theater for a good reason; I had my doubts from the start. And, again, it took just one lousy lie of a rental to sully my belief in all the award talk. But, I keep hope alive, and I…I guess maybe I’m a little naïve, too, yet, to give these other “hits” a chance. I want to see what makes them so great.

So, let’s talk about my latest mistake, The Shape of Water. Oh, how the director got lauded with praise and looked so sweet and innocent on stage, giving his grand speech and kudos to all who let him make such a…gruesome, rude and lewd film. If I may be so frank, it’s as if he was extremely horny and hungry while watching the old Creature from the Black Lagoon, late at night, and then had the nerve to think making a remake with more nudity and foul language was a great idea. What a damn creative fool.

Sally Hawkins is the poster woman for the demure, docile, closet freak. Thank goodness she didn’t go on some murderous rampage; that would have really ruined the part. All crap aside, she gave the film an ounce of redemption…well, aside from what she had to do in the first half-hour. Seriously, del Toro, excessive nudity…excessive because it had NOTHING to do with the story. Nada. You didn’t get a close up of her scars until the one guy examined her. No; you just had her get naked, over and over, again, for your personal amusement.

And, what was with the other sex scene? Why didn’t you go one step or two steps further? Why not have the gay artist–with his foul mouth and obsessive dialogue–take advantage of the pie guy? Come on, throw in some finger this and f-that while they indulge in some gay sex. Or, why couldn’t Octavia Spencer get naked with her husband? Why can’t black and gay folks get fair sex play? Booo! No, I’m just kidding. But, really, why include any sex other than what was the focus of the film? There only had to be one sex scene, and you spoiled it before they got in the tub.

I would not be surprised if you ended up in court with all the other poor and stupid men who are getting grilled for indecent actions. I would not be surprised if something popped out of your closet. Why can’t you keep certain lewd thoughts to yourself? And, why did you have to make the film so graphic when it could have been a much nicer and just as exotic love story?

You went down some Stephen King, Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino side street and drove through Frank Miller’s neighborhood. You took Splash and turned it into Sin City. Oh, sure the ending is bittersweet and finally happy; but I ate a ton of shit before I could even try to smile; so the whole experience left me queasy. You poured acid on my whipped cream sundae. You’re not the worst film maker out there…but The Shape of Water had better not be your opus. I’d like the water to wash it out of my memory so I can fantasize, again. Your “big hit” is a giant seagull dropping, not something I could comfortably watch more than once. It has little to no replay value; I’d snip off just the final ten minutes and call it a lovely short film that encompasses the best of the story…which pretty much makes the movie another Citizen Kane; just spare us the horrific two-plus hours and tell us it was your childhood sled.

You want my humble rating? Would that do anything for you? I’d give The Shape of Water 1 out of 5 stars, overall. I’d give Sally Hawkins 4 stars for being a beautiful, caring freak who thankfully didn’t do anything too gross or wrong to make me hate her; and I feel sorry for her, for having to expose herself the way she did. I’d give cinematography 3 stars, maybe 4, because the movie did have a decent colored noir quality to it; it suited a Dick Tracy sort of story. But, Octavia Spencer pretty much reprised her roll in The Help; so what can I rave about that? One black woman in an otherwise white world? And, the story? I already said; it’s The Creature from the Black Lagoon in modern 3-DUH, Dolby foul mouth, bloody Sunday whack-a-vision. You get no points for creativity other than visual artistry, period. You are just another big name with all of the latest tools in your kit, and when given the chance to build a sand castle, you played with mud pies. When you had the chance to focus on a Cinderella story, you chose to screw the docile doe in the dark room; you put the horny jerk in the same cage with the last unicorn (and thank goodness *that* didn’t happen). [And, FYI, oddities eating cats went out with Alf…and it wasn’t any funnier then, either…but it was suggested, not on camera.]

But, ya all come back now and watch my masterpiece, again, ya hear? This is a family show…not. It definitely earns its R rating, unlike some films that only get an R because of one lousy little cross of the line. I’d say The Shape of Water even edges an X rating…because there was more flashing of boob and overt sex than most R-rated films I’ve seen.

Here’s a brief lesson in the school of suggestion: Sex, nudity and gore can be veiled and still convey the message.
1) When Sally’s character takes a bath or shower, we could see her silhouette behind a shower curtain, and we’d still know she’s naked. Or, you could have her enter the bathroom and cut to her already covered in soap suds; no need to expose the actress or any body double you may have used…which would only make the whole effort even more stupid and pointless.

When I was in school, my English/writing teachers would draw red circles around portions of stories that didn’t contribute to the plot or characters and took away from the overall enjoyment. What you included (which turned me off and made me ill) was definitely not key to anything; I am sure most viewers would be aware of a person needing to get naked for a bath or having sex with a wife…or were you afraid people might think the creep’s marriage was void of sex?…hey, that might have made that other scene with the cleaning lady better; ya know?

2) A rather pointless sex scene could be conveyed with sounds and/or two flirty people slipping into a room together; ya don’t have to show the woman exposing herself and the cruel, creepy, FBI-ish, White-Collar-Bizarro guy throttling her on the bed!

[How to curb/replace the excessive foul and lewd language is another matter…I’d just omit it. It didn’t make the love story any prettier. It just lumped your enchanting crapper-piece with the likes of Superbad and…I can’t think of any other crappers at the moment…thank goodness they are washed from memory. I’ve seen movies with rape scenes that were just as creepy/unsettling but more suggestive than overt.]

3) When your feature creature wants to eat another animal… Couldn’t you have shown the creature holding the cat and then cut away to an audio clip of someone crunching celery. Then, when the owner returns, have him look down and recoil in horror…and we’d get it! We’d know why he’s horrified. Ya don’t have to show all the bits and blood. Bleh!

Can you imagine some steamy love story where the man makes the woman bleed in the you-know-what area and one or both lovers develop a scarring STD after they have their sweaty fun? [Ya know what; that just gave me a crazy idea for a sexual alien comedy that would still be far cleaner than your mess.] Would you enjoy that movie as much as a more suggestive one without the unfortunate side effects of some realities? There’s a line between realistic and horrifying reality…and you sure cross it, mister, but not for the benefit of the viewers…unless you want to scare people away from love fantasies and support eating disorders…because I could have developed one had I kept my eyes glued on the screen and not used the fast-forward button.

At this rate, I could lose my appetite for film, altogether, before I am old enough to be a cripple stuck in a wheelchair in front of some TV with a bunch of other elder folks losing their minds to medication abuse. Just think…what’s the use in going into movie-making, aspiring to create some soul-satisfying masterpiece when the whole industry is one more mine field of twisted metal, of warping your dreams into nightmares and slave labor? People are dying and committing suicide for some reason. And, it doesn’t surprise me when I try to grasp what all goes into this industry and the infuriating cover-ups that get splashed all over TV screens, even when some creative soul dies tragically.

Losing my appetite for film would be a serious crime against nature, against my creative soul. The water is so polluted, even I am having a hard time writing/creating anything spectacular; but, then again, I work alone, most of the time. I don’t have a clue what it’s like to be surrounded by teammates who can actually work together to make something run like clockwork and make people wonder what the budget must have been to create such a spectacle.

So, I must remind myself not to pay a lick of attention to award shows. Or, at least, I must go to bed before that final fifteen minutes into overtime when we viewers are supposed to be holding our breaths for the big reveal, the final envelope of crap. I must write them off and stick to the trailers that work for me.

Sell me a good trailer, and I’ll give you a chance. And, if you lie to me…..well, let’s just say my response will be…amazing, amazing crying crazy amazing. You’ll certainly find me writing you off my interest list. And, I have ways of swaying the masses. Not that it matters much when the majority seems to be losing all sense of creativity, as if they’ve become so numb from countless abusive images that they no longer have the brain cells to produce anything remotely as good as the stories they refuse to let go, stories from so long ago, they’ve been dragged behind cars for decades, tossing through one remake after another like tin cans on strings.

You know who the real losers are here (aside from creative souls)? The movie theaters and good people who appreciate them. All of the modern technology this world pushes for and all of the crappy, expensive films that get made…bump out all of the wonderful places that one could say feel like a second home. The day when someone decides to shut down the last movie theater in favor of some microscopic internet service station (ding! ding! goes the air tube keeping you couch potatoes alive), I’m sure to cry or have a considerably furious stomach upset because it will be like a nuclear bomb going off and destroying some serene tourist attraction. [Don’t get me started on the horrors of nuclear power pursuits.]

There wouldn’t be any concern for piracy if people didn’t introduce devices that could do such a thing. And, if movie theaters could afford better security without making visitors feel violated like other venues that practically X-ray you when you walk through, if people still cared, maybe thieves wouldn’t get away with what they still do, even after the days of VHS and the most primitive of camcorders. I don’t know why anyone cares about bootlegging, lately…because I am not sure what films are really worth stealing. Or, is that why so many films suck and twist the original story material?…is that why Michael Bay mangled Transformers?…because too many pirates were trying to make a buck off other people’s work? So, since the dawn of film piracy, everyone in the industry just started pumping out their worst, not their best? We settled into dependency upon whatever the latest technology is and putting up poster children as feature stars? Are we selling good stories or the latest model of movie camera you can only get at exclusive electronics stores?…on sale this week until tomorrow…flash sale!

And, breathe. I…don’t know how to wrap this up. The stench is just pouring out of me. So, I leave it as it is, like a broken garbage bag. I had to air it out, though, so I didn’t die from the stink in silence. Now, you know, and knowing is half the battle.

29
Mar
16

Free Loser Rating

*****

Setting: We open with a young man named Ted staring at his cell phone screen in a suburban kitchen early in the morning. His back rests against a sunlit window. An island near his bar stool is littered with breakfast components: a bowl, a spoon, boxes of cereal, a bowl of fruit.

His older brother Kip stops by the family home to do laundry. Seeing the younger sibling wasting time, Kip feels the need to spare Ted from a miserable adulthood.

Kip: So…whatchya doin’, bro?

Ted: Hmm? Oh. I’m just scrolling through feeds about people I know. Well, people I’ve added to my Fbook collection. I’ve never actually met any of them.

Kip: [Sigh] Ted. You don’t want to be a loser all your life. Do you?

A daydream sequence unfolds in Ted’s mind, featuring various ways he could wind up a loser. [We can hammer those out, later, or cut the sequence, entirely.] Bothered by his older brother’s choice of words, Ted temporarily lowers the phone and throws Kip a scornful look.

Ted: What?! I’m not a–

Kip: Teeeed? You are. Don’t believe me? Just go to www.whataloser.com and get your loser rating. It’s totally free.”

Ted hastily thumbs the address into his phone, initially misspelling the name and winding up on a porn site which screws with his WiFi speed while he makes the correction and avoids further criticism from his brother. Ted inputs all of the essential personal data required for proper identity theft and is relieved to see a flashing display confirm he is not a loser. He smiles while showing the screen to Kip.

Ted: See, Kip? I’m not a loser, after all.

Kip is busy scanning the contents of the refrigerator. He hasn’t eaten a decent meal in days. Closing the refrigerator door, Kip turns and frowns in disbelief. He has been trumped.

Kip: Yeah. Well, you’re still a loser in my book.

Ted: And, that’s why we never hang out together.

Both brothers laugh in a muffled, corny, TV sitcom way as the image freezes.

Announcer: Don’t be a loser. Go to www.whataloser.com and get your free loser rating today!

Disclaimer: Use of www.whataloser.com is not free and has nothing to do with actually determining your social status. Some fees and charges may apply. What is the difference between a charge and a fee? It does not matter. We will charge you as we please for taking the bait. And, your personal information will be used to annoy you and drain your bank accounts. Congratulations, you complete loser, for being duped by our televised scam.

11
Feb
14

Dragon Inn Theater and Dragon Tattoo, Too–My Recent DVD Views Review

Among the lot from my most recent stop to rent DVDs, I just finished watching “G.I. Joe:  Retaliation”, “Goodbye, Dragon Inn” and “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” (the original Swedish version).  Here are my thoughts:

G.I. Joe:  Retaliation

Synopsis:  The Joe team gets ambushed after locking away Cobra Commander and Destro, and the remaining members of both teams duke it out over a nuclear weapons scare.  New faces abound with some new nifty technology tricks (namely Firefly’s homing explosives which look like…wait for it…fireflies).

The gritty combat action and Cobra plots were better than in the first film.  [However, the fight scenes with Snake Eyes were not any better.]  Though relieved not to see so much goofy computer animation, cinematography didn’t impress me as much this time.  I still don’t quite understand the need to wipe out the G.I. Joe team, change CC and oust Destro (supposedly the original cast who apparently did not care to do another film in the series?).  But then, film makers did the same thing with Mortal Kombat, and we all know how that went.  No third movie was made.

Bruce Willis (Joe) was amusing.  Adrianne P. (Lady Jaye) and Elodie Y. (Jinx) were beautiful.  And, Firefly was brilliant (aside from the corny boat chase near the end).  But, considering the cast changes and the sad end? to Zartan, the poo quickly piled up on this one.  I can only hope–if there is a third movie–it’s a major improvement with some of the original cast.  [I’m looking at you, Joseph Gordon-Levitt (the original CC) and Sienna Miller (a great Baroness minus the earrings).]

TGI a rental.

Goodbye, Dragon Inn

Synopsis:  In case you’re completely clueless (as I was until I stumbled upon it), this looks like an independent/film festival (small screen) film about a small movie theater running a martial arts film on its closing night (before demolition or reconstruction due to its crumbling condition and lack of staff).  Only a limping female ticket clerk and a young male projectionist (who doesn’t appear until the last third of the 80 minute movie) manage the theater.  A tourist escapes the rain outside and discovers an assortment of fellow wanderers who seem less interested in the movie and lost in themselves.  In the end, there is a hint of unfulfilled romance and a fitting song.

I get the feeling the creator/s of this film wanted to capture a favorite theater the way they experienced it before the place was shut down and took advantage of permitted access to film the various corridors and mysterious storage areas (which are never explained).  I did a similar take on the closing of a place I previously worked.  My camera wasn’t of the same quality, but my footage amounted to as much without the cast of characters supplied quietly into this film.  And, when I composed a montage/music video with my footage, I did some editing to make it more interesting.  This, on the other hand, is more like raw footage on quality film and a virtual movie theater experience.  You can sit behind someone for a few minutes and see what that feels like.  And, the moments are quite random (without much continuity).

There is very little dialogue.  In fact, the majority of talk is handled by the film within the film which provides subtitles.  And, while the camera shots and angles are decent, there are long, lagging clips that could easily put some to sleep.  This is beyond a “sleeper” yet it inspired me to write something and think about working with the crew to re-create the film with more content.  It’s a good concept.  But, unless my DVD player was missing some special features, the overall product was significantly lacking.

Definitely a late night rental you watch with that special someone when you can’t get to the theater and want to drift asleep together.

 

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009 Swedish original film)

Synopsis:  A reporter loses his job and gets a minor prison sentence after digging up dirt on a corrupt wealthy businessman.  In his hiatus from work, he is hired by another wealthy man to solve the mystery of his missing “daughter” (Harriet)…but not solve the mystery (as Mr. Vanger says).  Meanwhile, a 24 year-old, unorthodox (punk) computer hacker working for another publication digs into the reporter’s case and ends up working with him (in more ways than one) to resolve Harriet’s disappearance.  Rated R for good reason.

In short, the story is decent–but not very unique–with its share of dramatic cuts and music.  The characters are abundant and fairly interesting…but their development is lacking.  [This may just be another “You need to read the book” thing about another one of these book-to-film projects.]  The key moment that triggered this negative thought is when the reporter and his young hacker assistant decide to have a spontaneous sex scene.  Like other “murder” mysteries I’ve been reading as of late, these sex scenes are the worst kind of surprises completely misplaced (unless you consider the young woman’s actions from a therapist’s point-of-view).  Other than the intimate exchanges, the hacker and reporter DO make a somewhat refreshing team.  But, their lack of depth makes them less valued than the average RPG  video game characters.

Also, the usual suspects–a large enough family seeking money from their elders–are almost glazed over and diminished by a few graphic (though not quite graphic enough for the next letter rating, X) scenes which seem included purely for “realistic” shock value.  Justice is not exactly served.  [Even jail seems…WiFi pleasant?]  And, we are left wondering what the sequels could possibly entail (while I think leaving Harriet missing until the next “chapter” would have been a smarter ending).  [I fast forwarded through most of the violent sex which would have been discomforting to watch in the theater.  And, in my personal opinion, the girl should have stopped when she played the video for the cops to find.]

Is it poor writing if I figure out who the killer within the first few minutes he/she is mentioned?  Or, am I just a great detective/guesser?

I will likewise view the sequels and skim through/over the American version of the first film in time.  But, save the ticket price and rent/borrow these for popcorn thrillers with someone you trust to sit next to you.

 

The Girl Who Played with Fire (TGWTDT part 2)

Synopsis:  After solving a missing person’s case as a dynamic, intimate and yet distanced personally duo, Lisbeth and Mikael must work together to clear her name from a murder charge tied to her former guardian (who she cannot leave alone after he assaulted her).  The murder leads to ghosts from Lisbeth’s past which drag her friends into the fire before the girl (technically a woman in her twenties) gets some (more) revenge.

The second installment of the story is slightly less disturbing than the first.  In this one, the sex is purely consensual.  Yet, is it necessary?  Not really.  Even if Miriam Wu (Yasmine) is an attractive nude, the nudity is not key to the story.  Thus I think it could be veiled.  The fire comes into play as we learn a bit of Lisbeth’s personal history and uncover some faces from the past who surprisingly reappear.

In the first movie, there was extensive PC hacking and (internet) research as well as active interaction between (main) characters (even if they were far apart).  There was also a large family that briefly appeared as suspects.  The sequel lacks some of the active “enjoyment” of the research/investigation and involves friends of Lisbeth in perils that remind me of a cheesy 80’s martial arts film.  It didn’t really grab me until the last twenty or thirty minutes when Lisbeth’s family came into the picture.  Her friend, the reporter from Millenium, seemed of less significance until the end, too.

In short, you could see this one and skip the first if you want to avoid the most graphic violence/sex (though the DVD Lisbeth makes reappears in every segment/film).  But, you might miss a few small details and introductions.

 

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets’ Nest (TGWTDT part 3)

Synopsis:  Lisbeth’s past leaves her battered in a hospital with her father not far away and looking to rub her out.  Instead, someone from his secret organization kills him and misses a shot at Lisbeth before a major investigation into that organization and the crimes committed with/against Lisbeth unfolds.  Mikael must make some “tough” choices to protect those he values.  And, Lisbeth must decide, once more, how far she will take her thirst for vengeance while clearing her name in court.

I’d almost give the same advice for the third film that I gave for the second if not for the key details about Lisbeth’s father and family in that previous sequel.  The last quarter of that film sets us up for this film.  [The part played by Lisbeth’s friends in part two seems to have no impact whatsoever on this third chapter.]  And, here we have a hospital scene that turns into a lengthy court trial injected with Mikael action until Lisbeth is free to do as she pleases in the final minutes.  As with the first film, the “rap up” disappoints me a bit.  This sequel was meatier (had more content/research) than the last but wasn’t much more entertaining.  At least, it was void of sexual abuse/content (aside from the brief reappearance of the rape DVD) and thus could have dropped the R rating if not for a few other odd bits of violence (one of which was a bit silly/unbelievable near the end).

As a whole, the trilogy feels more “episodic” and could be seen on TV as part of a larger series.  It’s refreshing to see such different characters working together with modern technology.  But, the “cases” needing resolution were nothing new, and the R-rated tidbits were pointless other than to justify Lisbeth’s abuse and sexual nature/comfort.  I’d be tempted to work with someone (since the author is technically deceased) on sequels/further adventures of Lisbeth/Mikael.  But, before I judge too much, I am going to suggest reading the books (which I have not yet) to compare stories.  As I said with my review of the first film, these movies might just be “cliff notes” of a more detailed story we should be reading first.

 

The Incredible Burt Wonderstone

Synopsis:  Steve Carell plays a troubled, aging magician who was once a bullied boy before he became an outdated spectacle of an ever-changing craft.  He works with his long-time friend Anton (Steve Buscemi) and female assistant Jane (the lovely Olivia Wilde) who replaces countless other blonde bimbos the inconsiderate and highly waxed magician hires (and sleeps with).  And, he repeatedly clashes with a self-torture artist named Steve Gray (played by Jim Carrey).  The late James Gandolfini plays a hotel “big cheese” who seems to hold the fate of these magicians in his wealthy hands.  Down on his luck, Burt must remember why he became a magician with the help of his mentor Rance (Alan Arkin) and the reappearing Jane (Wilde) before he loses his friend (Buscemi) forever.  Meanwhile, Steve Gray (Carrey) attempts to humiliate Burt at every turn as he seeks the hotel magician throne.

Carell is a lucky man to work so closely with such lovely women (considering he’s married).  As he did with Anne Hathaway in “Get Smart”, he has some amusing intimacy with Jane (Wilde) which could have gone far worse (raunchy) than it did.  My guess is Olivia took this job to expand her unusual range of characters/roles.

In short, I laughed sufficiently and would have enjoyed this in a theater with the right company.  There are a few disturbing moments (including the ending which has that “so wrong” feeling though it strikes me as still slightly funny) and cheesy tidbits which get washed over by the sheer unsettling demeanor of Carell in character (who has never looked scarier).  Wonderstone rivals Carell’s Evan character from “Bruce Almighty” who was a stiff jerk of a news anchor, climbing the corporate ladder while stealing Bruce’s (Carrey’s) thunder.

 

Cloud Atlas

Synopsis:  A number of famous (and some not so famous) faces question the possibility of deja vu as they cross paths in past, present and futuristic lives which repeatedly test love and truth.  In each time period featured, two characters (not always who you’d expect) are soul mates, at least one person helps the soul mates and another one or more create obstacles for those soul mates to conquer.  Each loving pair tries to achieve some grand revelation of truth to satisfy their souls against all odds.  And, each achieves some measure of success as well as hardship/failure.  Throughout the series of lives and events, a piece of music–written (as we see it) by a young bisexual man–acts like a cosmic string that binds these people together.

It’s a bit difficult to grasp from the start.  The worst aspect might be how the time periods shift so often and at random.  You just about figure out what’s happening in one place and get jetted off to another with the same actors in different roles.  Certain time periods have languages that require some thought to process (particularly the far future time period).  But, after the first thirty minutes or so, you (hopefully) start to see where events are going and how these lives connect and intersect.  One connection I found particularly interesting involves Jim Broadbent playing the naive “victim” chasing an old flame in one story while playing the cunning “thief”/”villain” in another.  In the latter, we find the young pianist who writes the “Cloud Atlas Sextet” and becomes Broadbent’s victim, and, in the former, the same young man plays the wife of Broadbent’s (character’s) brother who (spoiler) foolishly slept with the other brother.  If you made sense of that much, you’re off to a good start.

Since it required watching twice to better understand some of what was being said and happening, I’d recommend this as a rental with plenty of brain food (snacks) and, ideally, some company of the opposite sex.

 




Unknown's avatar

Archives


Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started