Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: October 26, 2012
8.4
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 993 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
827
Mixed:
94
Negative:
72
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
1
catrapiJan 8, 2013
Really disliked it. Couldn't connect or relate to any of the characters. The 6 stories were a low blow and a badly made one at capitalism, but they didn't seem to connect at all. The stories were bad individually and collectively they areReally disliked it. Couldn't connect or relate to any of the characters. The 6 stories were a low blow and a badly made one at capitalism, but they didn't seem to connect at all. The stories were bad individually and collectively they are worse. It's three hours but it feels like ages. In my opinion it was also one of the worst performances made by Tom Hanks... Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
3
kris2furFeb 3, 2013
How does this movie show how one persons action changed the future? Wouldn't you need to shoot two endings for that? This movie is confusing and annoying, the only decent timeline is the Asian lady's in the takeout shop. Everything else seemsHow does this movie show how one persons action changed the future? Wouldn't you need to shoot two endings for that? This movie is confusing and annoying, the only decent timeline is the Asian lady's in the takeout shop. Everything else seems more like a filler. Oh the racist boat timelines also good. But everything else just dampens the major message of the film. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
jamesensorApr 21, 2013
Watched it and I ended up with an head ache in the end because of spending 3 hours so much concentrated to see how would the plot turn up in the end, just to face some "nice" and "profound" truths about stuff we see in so many movies. StuffWatched it and I ended up with an head ache in the end because of spending 3 hours so much concentrated to see how would the plot turn up in the end, just to face some "nice" and "profound" truths about stuff we see in so many movies. Stuff like, "believe in yourself", "never give up", etc etc. No greeeeat revealing truth or something that tied all stories. Yes, the movie starts and ends with about 4 or 6 stories, all mixed up and you just learn whats up along the way we, the viewers, are totally left in the dark. 3 hours watching a movie to see what it leads in the end. It's frustrating. I rather see Dances with Wolves enjoying all the movie and not wanting to see the end because it was a cruel one, rather than waiting 3 hours to see if what I've watched was worth the wait and find out there's nothing interesting about it. The acting was nice, nothing wrong with it. Just the plot and how it was told and its end. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
JamesCannonMay 18, 2013
Ambitious but ultimately flawed. Long stretches of near endings, six separate story lines to keep track of, and all interconnected to the freedom of human blah blah blah....The two hour mark I surrendered.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
ptbaurNov 20, 2012
When I went to see this film, I had just finished the book, and I decided to be mindful of the fact that the book is so uniquely structured and long, and as most people stated before the movie came out, "virtually unfilmable." So let me startWhen I went to see this film, I had just finished the book, and I decided to be mindful of the fact that the book is so uniquely structured and long, and as most people stated before the movie came out, "virtually unfilmable." So let me start with the good: I have to applaud the filmmakers for their ambitious attempts and I don't consider the film and utter failure, however: they made some fundamentally bad decisions, starting with the cast. It's not that I hate the actors they chose (I have neutral-to-generally-positive feelings towards most of them), it's how they chose to cast them for multiple roles: they were trying to instill the idea of reincarnation, which I think they conveyed just fine in their many many overdone narrative monologues. I also found the choice to cast actors for multiple parts of such different races distasteful: I hear people talking about the film deserving best make-up awards, but I did not, for a moment, believe that any of the characters looked like the race they were supposed to be portraying. The attempts were unsuccessful and frankly, to me (a European-Asian-American), genuinely offensive. The actors themselves, were neither terrible nor great. The intercutting of the different scenes was, for the most part, clever, and probably the best way they could have translated the structure of the novel into filmic language. There are also immense plot changes that I won't even bother to get into, because they alone are not my biggest gripe with the film. Its biggest flaw is that it robs the book of its ideology and turns what is a very complex narrative into what is in comparison, a banal film about interwoven love stories. David Mitchell expressed his full support for the film, but if I were him, I would be appalled at the overromanticized diluted three-hour mess the filmmakers turned a great novel into.
If you enjoyed the movie as is, without the book, I can understand. However, consider reading the book. To me, it felt that when I watched the movie, I really only glimpsed the tip of the iceberg: there is so much more to the book and it's worth a read to get a better understanding and much more fleshed-out version of each nested story, not to mention some VITAL themes that were left out of the movie altogether.
Expand
7 of 19 users found this helpful712
All this user's reviews
0
thaistickDec 21, 2012
I have walked out on 3 movies in 46 years. 1. Eyes wide shut. If youve seen it you understand whether you want to admit it or not.
2. Earnest Goes to Camp ( Drive in theater. I was 18 She was done with her business and I was done with mine.
I have walked out on 3 movies in 46 years. 1. Eyes wide shut. If youve seen it you understand whether you want to admit it or not.
2. Earnest Goes to Camp ( Drive in theater. I was 18 She was done with her business and I was done with mine. We left the show)
3. This miserable piece of crap. Cloud Atlas. WTF? Only movie I've ever asked for my my money back.
Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
0
dudleydog77Feb 10, 2013
shockingly bad, confusing and seriously disappointing. i fell asleep several times I was that bored. I expected great things but after seeing Django Unchained last week (a fantastic movie that has you gripped throughout) I felt it necessaryshockingly bad, confusing and seriously disappointing. i fell asleep several times I was that bored. I expected great things but after seeing Django Unchained last week (a fantastic movie that has you gripped throughout) I felt it necessary to comment on this. I would have walked out but my fiance wanted to see it through. Glad I got free tickets or I would have been even more disappointed. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
0
dougaussieApr 28, 2014
6 crappy stories chopped up, wasted 15 bucks on the DVD, I would not buy this DVD for $1, if there was time in my life I wish I could get back it would be watching this load of garbage. The actors were wasted and uninspiring, the dialogue6 crappy stories chopped up, wasted 15 bucks on the DVD, I would not buy this DVD for $1, if there was time in my life I wish I could get back it would be watching this load of garbage. The actors were wasted and uninspiring, the dialogue was drivel. I had my finger on the fast forward for most of the movie it was that bad. I thought less of these actors after seeing the movie, I can only guess they all needed something to do on their weekends or needed to buy a new car or two. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
3
EludiumQ36Mar 9, 2013
"Cloud Atlas" was ambitious and could've been done right, but the Wachowskis just weren't up to it, rare miss. First, they didn't have to use the same six subplots in the source material, they could've substituted far more interesting stories"Cloud Atlas" was ambitious and could've been done right, but the Wachowskis just weren't up to it, rare miss. First, they didn't have to use the same six subplots in the source material, they could've substituted far more interesting stories instead. Second, the subplot jump-editing style is fine for two, maybe three stories but not six, it's too confusing to follow. Third, it seems juvenile with its pop-psych platitudes, more suitable for tweens than for film-experienced adults. Finally, it's a series of gag love stories, and the public should've been warned far more clearly. Yes, chix love this stuff but sci-fi guys hoping for mind-twisting action, bitter disappointment. Expand
5 of 16 users found this helpful511
All this user's reviews
3
metamotivcriticDec 9, 2012
A rather major (though not entire) misfire. The ostensible reason for switching back and forth among stories is that viewers could not follow the presentation in David Mitchell's original book where the stories are suspended in the middle andA rather major (though not entire) misfire. The ostensible reason for switching back and forth among stories is that viewers could not follow the presentation in David Mitchell's original book where the stories are suspended in the middle and picked up hundreds of pages later, as well as to develop the "transmigration of souls" theme (which is also reinforced by the casting of the same actors in all six stories). The problem with this approach (apart from the fact that the reincarnation idea is neither essential nor clearly developed in the book) is that the integrity or coherence (and hence effectiveness) of each of the stories is sacrificed in the process. It's hard for me to believe that anyone who has not read the book could possibly follow each of the stories as presented in the movie.( the stories could have been presented in serial order without interruption, or in an interconnected way that was perfected by, say, Robert Altman.) But over and beyond this, the degree to which each story is fractured and the speed with which the directors move back and forth among stories is completely unnecessary for their cinematic conceit.. In addition, much of the storytelling here, unlike Mitchell's book, is almost cartoonish in its exaggeration; and the Wachowkis' turning of the Somni-451 story into a Matrix/Star Wars epic is totally unforgivable for anyone who claims to have an appreciation of the novel. (The Somni-451 and the post-apocalyptic Hawaii stories are, admittedly, the weakest part of that novel--which is itself a bit overrated, in my opinion--but they certainly deserve a better translation than they receive here.) The attraction of Cloud Atlas as a novel is the way in which Mitchell presents six different stories in six different literary styles recalling or imitating six different literary genres. This feature is completely (and unnecessarily) obscured by the movie. What an expensive shame! Expand
2 of 7 users found this helpful25
All this user's reviews
0
Briancl25Nov 16, 2012
This movie tries so hard to be emotional by cramming in as many characters and story lines as possible, without ever making the audience care. Everyone that says it is so great, is in denial. This movie will not win any awards. I guaranteeThis movie tries so hard to be emotional by cramming in as many characters and story lines as possible, without ever making the audience care. Everyone that says it is so great, is in denial. This movie will not win any awards. I guarantee it. I have never walked out before the end of a movie until I saw this. Terrible. Expand
2 of 7 users found this helpful25
All this user's reviews
1
Trev29Jul 21, 2013
One of the most incoherent horrid movies ever. A complete disaster from start to finish. Story was unbearable, emotion was nonexistent, and everything in between make this movie terrible. Some might say it is a one of a kind movie; I say itOne of the most incoherent horrid movies ever. A complete disaster from start to finish. Story was unbearable, emotion was nonexistent, and everything in between make this movie terrible. Some might say it is a one of a kind movie; I say it is pure stupidly. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
2
riferrariJan 11, 2013
Quick summary of Cloud Atlas: a movie that ties 6 stories together, they all suck, so it's necessary to keep them alternating in order to avoid a lot of focus in an specific one, otherwise anyone would notice it's innumerous flaws. Also, whyQuick summary of Cloud Atlas: a movie that ties 6 stories together, they all suck, so it's necessary to keep them alternating in order to avoid a lot of focus in an specific one, otherwise anyone would notice it's innumerous flaws. Also, why does Cloud Atlas tries to teach you "life lessons"? It's ridiculous, it's like the writer though his philosophy was the only truth so he has to put in the movie things like "you have to help the others", "afterlife exists", etc. That is pointless, what about this: anyone believes in whatever they want and period. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
1
yhibikiOct 29, 2012
Cloud Atlas is attempting to be an intellectual film, and had the storytelling devices been different, maybe it would have succeeded. Unfortunately, the movie was too long, too badly cut, to create a coherent whole.

The main issue I have
Cloud Atlas is attempting to be an intellectual film, and had the storytelling devices been different, maybe it would have succeeded. Unfortunately, the movie was too long, too badly cut, to create a coherent whole.

The main issue I have with the film is the fact that before any of the storylines can really get going, the movie cuts to a different storyline altogether. Every time I thought I might start getting interested, all the momentum and tension the scene had going for it would be dispersed when once again I was treated to another section. It didn't help that at times, the six different storylines didn't feel stylistically linked. The three chronologically earliest pieces have a serious tone and seem very grounded in reality; then we have the nursing home bit, which is far too comedic to match with any of the other pieces; finally there are the two futuristic sci-fi ones, which once again feel like a departure from the earlier, more "realistic" settings. And all the explosions felt out of place--Cloud Atlas is not, after all, supposed to be a summer-blockbuster action thriller.

And yet despite all the attempts to add tension, the movie is just flat out boring because of the horrible pacing. There were several moments when I thought for sure the movie would be over, but no, it continued for another hour.

I might have appreciated the six storylines individually; smushed together, they detracted from each other and made me not care about any of them.
Expand
4 of 18 users found this helpful414
All this user's reviews
0
ProteusOct 26, 2012
Incoherent. Had about 40 places where it could have ended. Worst movie of the year. Just lost 3 hours of my life never to retrieve. Beware the same fate.
14 of 70 users found this helpful1456
All this user's reviews
1
moe07728Oct 31, 2012
If the six stories were disentangled and laid out separately, it would be clear that none of them has much depth or surprise... Very hard to follow! Plot was not developed well and I feel like the whole movie is about all the special effects,If the six stories were disentangled and laid out separately, it would be clear that none of them has much depth or surprise... Very hard to follow! Plot was not developed well and I feel like the whole movie is about all the special effects, CGI and costumes.. DO NOT WASTE time or money watching this movie. Expand
3 of 15 users found this helpful312
All this user's reviews
1
makrtik2Nov 14, 2012
My wife had read the book and thought the book to be excellent. However, we both thought the movie had little if any any value on any level. It was pretentious, gratuitously violent at every turn, and came off as a murky vapid redundant stewMy wife had read the book and thought the book to be excellent. However, we both thought the movie had little if any any value on any level. It was pretentious, gratuitously violent at every turn, and came off as a murky vapid redundant stew of ludicrously trite pseudo-intellectual bunk. If you want something new, exceptional, with depth and quality, go see A Late Quartet before it's gone from theaters. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
0
andytimberNov 18, 2012
There is so much wrong with this sludge of a "movie" that 5000 characters will simply not suffice to mention all the stupidities & failures. So I'll make it short: SECOND.WORST.MOVIE.EVER. (Tree fo Life is still holding the No. 1 position)There is so much wrong with this sludge of a "movie" that 5000 characters will simply not suffice to mention all the stupidities & failures. So I'll make it short: SECOND.WORST.MOVIE.EVER. (Tree fo Life is still holding the No. 1 position) Banging your head against the wall for 3 hours will be less of a torture than sitting through this abomination. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
2
OroiaelNov 14, 2012
My wife picked this movie....that's the last time I let her do that. If this movie wins even one Oscar I might boycott movies. This movie is like that one kid in school who tries way way way too hard. Awkward and ultimately tragic. The onlyMy wife picked this movie....that's the last time I let her do that. If this movie wins even one Oscar I might boycott movies. This movie is like that one kid in school who tries way way way too hard. Awkward and ultimately tragic. The only reason I'm not giving this the lowest score possible is because it has Halle Berry. Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
0
L4ZAROct 29, 2012
This is the first review I've written on a movie. I actually went out of my way to make an account and write this review so no one else has to waste 3 hours of their life on this epic piece of garbage. This is the SECOND WORST movie I haveThis is the first review I've written on a movie. I actually went out of my way to make an account and write this review so no one else has to waste 3 hours of their life on this epic piece of garbage. This is the SECOND WORST movie I have ever seen in my life, the first being Gigli (rated 2.4/10 on imdb).

TLDR: UNLESS YOU READ THE BOOK, DO NOT BOTHER WATCHING THE MOVIE

This movie is so incoherent, I wasted 1.5hrs just being introduced to all of the various characters, hoping that their pointless lives would somehow connect and make sense. In the end you're left with several pointless protagonists, from different points in time, in different planets/universes/w.e. I will hate Tom Hanks forever ever after watching this piece of garbage.
Expand
7 of 39 users found this helpful732
All this user's reviews
2
PRT940Oct 26, 2012
An overly-long mess of a movie. Dialog that is either too low/unintelligible to hear, or in a "future-dialect" that can only barely be understood. For some reason, the same actors play multiple different roles in the various differentAn overly-long mess of a movie. Dialog that is either too low/unintelligible to hear, or in a "future-dialect" that can only barely be understood. For some reason, the same actors play multiple different roles in the various different storylines. At no time did I feel I understood what was going on, or what the point of it all was. Maybe you had to have read the book. The best part of the movie for me was the popcorn. I want those 3 hours of my life back. Expand
5 of 30 users found this helpful525
All this user's reviews
0
CaestusAug 17, 2013
Don´1 know, what this movie was all about. Boring and potracted.
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
0
BobboJan 9, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. One: Hugo Weaving and yellowface don't mix. Two: all the religions in the world is supplanted by a hot-chic-asian-submissive-cloned-prostitute-prophetess with nothing substantial to say other than, "be excellent to each other," minus the, "party on dudes." Three: the Irish doctor Tom Hanks plays is ironically exactly what Tom Hanks looks like without makeup and plastic surgery, he's magically delicious! Four: There are more flashbacks and flashforwards in this one movie than I have seen in a lifetime. Five: If this is reincarnation than Karma is broken. Six: Oh I get the Soylent Green line now, a little "foreshadowing" thing going on there; hint hint wink wink. Seven: WTF?! Expand
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
3
GreatMartinOct 26, 2012
Last year the movie
3 of 20 users found this helpful317
All this user's reviews
0
greygooseJul 9, 2013
I knew this was going to be bad. But I didn't know it was going to be THAT bad. Turned it off after 20 minutes. Seeing Tom Hanks pop up in a bunch of different roles was just too distracting.
1 of 9 users found this helpful18
All this user's reviews
0
imaxed2Nov 4, 2012
Cloud Atlas is one of the biggest pieces of unadulterated crap that Hollywood has released in a number of years, and god only know they had there share of Sh-t. Its all over the board. There are a number of books that should never be broughtCloud Atlas is one of the biggest pieces of unadulterated crap that Hollywood has released in a number of years, and god only know they had there share of Sh-t. Its all over the board. There are a number of books that should never be brought to film and this "pure puke of a movie is one of them.The writers should be stoned!! Expand
2 of 21 users found this helpful219
All this user's reviews
2
BaLauraDec 30, 2012
too much for nothing... the trend of overfictioning philosophical meanings of life and mankind - inception and few others got it right, but not this one.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
3
AlienSpaceBatsJan 25, 2014
Incoherent, dull, lacks a narrative and characterization. Nothing spectacular visually, baffling - no, embarrassing decision to use prosthetics to make western actors look Asian. A few interesting ideas, but ultimately; six supposedly linkedIncoherent, dull, lacks a narrative and characterization. Nothing spectacular visually, baffling - no, embarrassing decision to use prosthetics to make western actors look Asian. A few interesting ideas, but ultimately; six supposedly linked sub-par stories. In one respect the film was faithful to the book: terribly boring and overblown. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
oblique15Nov 16, 2013
If your looking for a relaxing movie that will help you fall asleep, you have found the movie you are looking for.This movie has a few thing that kept my interest, but I feel like they could have done it in a much better style.I had to fastIf your looking for a relaxing movie that will help you fall asleep, you have found the movie you are looking for.This movie has a few thing that kept my interest, but I feel like they could have done it in a much better style.I had to fast forward through the last hour. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
3
dyshpoMar 3, 2014
Over rated this be . Can a movie have more pretension and blatant killing of subplots that are sub par . Reincarnation is a gradually change of betterment that you , other people or the world effect you . Actors gave some great personaOver rated this be . Can a movie have more pretension and blatant killing of subplots that are sub par . Reincarnation is a gradually change of betterment that you , other people or the world effect you . Actors gave some great persona changes and performances but the story was jacked and camera work was terrible . Also boring and full of hot air . Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
dokisameFeb 22, 2015
Cloud Atlas conveys a great message, and it is surely complicated, but when you use something as powerful as "karma" as a plot device, the message get lost. Karma is like "deus ex machina", and should only be used for comedy.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
GmorkJan 3, 2015
.............WARNING............WARNING..............ATROCIOUS MOVIES ALERT..............ATROCIOUS MOVIES ALERT. BEYOND STUPID. i cant even.... oh man.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
horizonbtsMar 21, 2015
I picked up this movie to rent, thank God I didn't pay to go see it at the movies! What a hot mess, hard to follow, and you will totally try to lose your mind watching the whole thing. You can tell by my ratings on other movies I usuallyI picked up this movie to rent, thank God I didn't pay to go see it at the movies! What a hot mess, hard to follow, and you will totally try to lose your mind watching the whole thing. You can tell by my ratings on other movies I usually give an honest effort the benefit of doubt, not on this one. Should really have given it a O as I see no redeeming value in the movie and an actor of such great movies like Tom Hanks, it is beyond me why he would do such a movie!! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
TheBlacksmithJun 30, 2015
Strikingly dull and incoherent. The movie moves through stories in order to hide the fact that if you were to see each storyline in sequence, the "mystery" or "surprises" would be as inane and as easy to spot as the "twist" in the SixthStrikingly dull and incoherent. The movie moves through stories in order to hide the fact that if you were to see each storyline in sequence, the "mystery" or "surprises" would be as inane and as easy to spot as the "twist" in the Sixth Sense.
If you haven't seen this pile of crap, do not bother.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
BarbudezJul 20, 2015
Los Wachowsky sin duda alguna, han perdido el norte hace mucho tiempo, y si pensaron que con esta película iban a recuperarse, lo llevan claro. Si con 'Matrix' dieron el pelotazo y se fostiaron con 'M. Reloaded' y 'M. Revolutions', luego conLos Wachowsky sin duda alguna, han perdido el norte hace mucho tiempo, y si pensaron que con esta película iban a recuperarse, lo llevan claro. Si con 'Matrix' dieron el pelotazo y se fostiaron con 'M. Reloaded' y 'M. Revolutions', luego con 'Speed Racer' se hundieron más aún, con ésta, se han tirado a un pozo sin fondo.

Mucha gente tildó a los hermanos estos de GENIOS, VISIONARIOS con 'Matrix'. 'Matrix' está bien, pero una obra revolucionaria, no. Simplemente un refrito de la ciencia ficción distópica y cine de Hong Kong bien vendido, yo dije cuando vi 'Matrix', que eso de genios nada de nada, copypastear no es ser genios, luego con las secuelas me dieron la razón, 2 otakus flipados de la vida, pues ahora se las dan de profundos y metafísicos...¡venga! ¡No se lo creen ni ellos!

Quiero decir que el libro NO me lo he leído, así que solo voy a opinar como película, no como adaptación. 'El Atlas de las nubes', es un verdadero caos y una monstruosa y desproporcionada película, imaginad que cogéis 6 películas mediocres y las metéis en una misma película, pero al ver que son casi 8 horas de película, empezáis a recortar y recortar hasta dejarla en 3 horas, la trama....¿trama?, ojalá, simplemente es un montón de películas concentradas y montadas en una sola, que presuntamente las historias están relacionadas por cosas meramente banales o que no tienen ningún significado aparente, en otras palabras MCGUFFINS (un libro, unas marcas de nacimiento, un botón), que como buenos mcguffins, ni se dignan en explicártelos.

Las historias como he dicho, son un conjunto de historias conclusivas, de películas mediocres, que algunas carecen de lógica y sentido, ya que NO explican absolutamente nada. Las tramas, son de historias totalmente aleatorias, una historia en 1858 con un abogado y un negro en un barco, 1 gay que le compone una sonata a un viejo chocho que tiene la melodía en su cabeza en los años 30, otra es una periodista que intenta destapar unos tíos que quieren provocar un Chernobyl (¿¿??), una china clonada que se convierte en una mesías en un Seul cyberpunk , un editor que huye de unos matones y le encierran en un asilo (la parte mas divertida, por cierto) y por ultimo una especie de planeta de los simios con Tom Hanks de protagonista.

Luego nos encontramos a los mismos actores en los segmentos de la película caracterizados de unas maneras demenciales y estrambóticas que parecen de la hora chanante, todos los actores se convierten en chinos, hasta los negros, al pobre Hugo Weaving le convierten en una enfermera cabrona de un asilo de ancianos, ¡¡en SPOCK!! y en un Leprechaun, y a Tom Hanks le caracterizan de tropecientos mil viejos, a Halle Berry la convierten en un chino ciborg, en una judía blanca y.... ¡¡a Hugh Grant en un URUK HAI!!

Lo único que se salva de la película, por eso tiene (un somier y no 0), es que visualmente es espectacular, muy buenos efectos especiales, lo que me hace pensar, que esta película me recuerda demasiado a 'Sucker Punch!', muchos efectos especiales, combates increíbles, pero 0 en guión, y a esta película le sucede exactamente eso.

La conclusión, la película es un verdadero desastre, caótica, infumable, alargada hasta el hastío y seguramente, esta es la típica película que los gafapastas y hipsters del todo a 100, que por ver una película de Kitano en su vida, la alabaran y dirán que es maravillosa y un montón de sinónimos pomposos y vacíos, porque no consiguen entender que mierdas le han contado.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
mohamad91hkAug 26, 2016
3 hours, 6 stories and different times are blended in this tedious movie, it was better for the director to keep this story in the book, I didn't enjoy in this movie but I feel confused and trying to figure out what's going on?!.
there are a
3 hours, 6 stories and different times are blended in this tedious movie, it was better for the director to keep this story in the book, I didn't enjoy in this movie but I feel confused and trying to figure out what's going on?!.
there are a lot of deep meanings in this movie, but firstly I need to enjoy in movie then i will think about deep meanings. this movie lacks enjoyable factor, I think the movie doesn't deserve time to watch

P.S. Sorry for my poor language
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
AngusBarbudezSep 14, 2016
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Los Wachowsky sin duda alguna, han perdido el norte hace mucho tiempo, y si pensaron que con esta película iban a recuperarse, lo llevan claro. Si con 'Matrix' dieron el pelotazo y se fostiaron con 'M. Reloaded' y 'M. Revolutions', luego con 'Speed Racer' se hundieron más aún, con ésta, se han tirado a un pozo sin fondo.

Mucha gente tildó a los hermanos estos de GENIOS, VISIONARIOS con 'Matrix'. 'Matrix' está bien, pero una obra revolucionaria, no. Simplemente un refrito de la ciencia ficción distópica y cine de Hong Kong bien vendido, yo dije cuando vi 'Matrix', que eso de genios nada de nada, copypastear no es ser genios, luego con las secuelas me dieron la razón, 2 otakus flipados de la vida, pues ahora se las dan de profundos y metafísicos...¡venga! ¡No se lo creen ni ellos!

Quiero decir que el libro NO me lo he leído, así que solo voy a opinar como película, no como adaptación. 'El Atlas de las nubes', es un verdadero caos y una monstruosa y desproporcionada película, imaginad que cogéis 6 películas mediocres y las metéis en una misma película, pero al ver que son casi 8 horas de película, empezáis a recortar y recortar hasta dejarla en 3 horas, la trama....¿trama?, ojalá, simplemente es un montón de películas concentradas y montadas en una sola, que presuntamente las historias están relacionadas por cosas meramente banales o que no tienen ningún significado aparente, en otras palabras MCGUFFINS (un libro, unas marcas de nacimiento, un botón), que como buenos mcguffins, ni se dignan en explicártelos.

Las historias como he dicho, son un conjunto de historias conclusivas, de películas mediocres, que algunas carecen de lógica y sentido, ya que NO explican absolutamente nada. Las tramas, son de historias totalmente aleatorias, una historia en 1858 con un abogado y un negro en un barco, 1 gay que le compone una sonata a un viejo chocho que tiene la melodía en su cabeza en los años 30, otra es una periodista que intenta destapar unos tíos que quieren provocar un Chernobyl (¿¿??), una china clonada que se convierte en una mesías en un Seul cyberpunk , un editor que huye de unos matones y le encierran en un asilo (la parte mas divertida, por cierto) y por ultimo una especie de planeta de los simios con Tom Hanks de protagonista.

Luego nos encontramos a los mismos actores en los segmentos de la película caracterizados de unas maneras demenciales y estrambóticas que parecen de la hora chanante, todos los actores se convierten en chinos, hasta los negros, al pobre Hugo Weaving le convierten en una enfermera cabrona de un asilo de ancianos, ¡¡en SPOCK!! y en un Leprechaun, y a Tom Hanks le caracterizan de tropecientos mil viejos, a Halle Berry la convierten en un chino ciborg, en una judía blanca y.... ¡¡a Hugh Grant en un URUK HAI!!

Lo único que se salva de la película,es que visualmente es espectacular, muy buenos efectos especiales, lo que me hace pensar, que esta película me recuerda demasiado a 'Sucker Punch!', muchos efectos especiales, combates increíbles, pero 0 en guión, y a esta película le sucede exactamente eso.

La conclusión, la película es un verdadero desastre, caótica, infumable, alargada hasta el hastío y seguramente, esta es la típica película que los gafapastas y hipsters del todo a 100, que por ver una película de Kitano en su vida, la alabaran y dirán que es maravillosa y un montón de sinónimos pomposos y vacíos, porque no consiguen entender que mierdas le han contado.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
drewtheredguardSep 8, 2016
Horrible plot, acting, and theme. The idea behind it seemed airy-fairy and new-agey. Could have been so much more epic. I see what they tried to do but just missed the mark, by a lot-shot.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews