Cloud Atlas is a visionary wonder. It is a movie that gives you so much and even at a 3 hour length, the six story lines each have their brilliance. A movie that connects in so many ways.

This multi-level film is based on the novel of the same name, which interweaves 6 stories from various time periods with actors playing multiple characters. This means elaborate makeup, as they cast Tom Hanks, Halle Berry and other cast members in as many as 6 roles. The messages of universal continuity and connectedness are hammered home as the drama and action unfolds. While it's realized with masterful skill by the Wachowskis (best known for the "Matrix" series) and Tom Tykwer ("Run Lola Run"), the slow-moving stories take up almost 3 hours. Visually, it's often spectacular (despite the sometimes embarrassing makeup), but as entertainment or inspiration it gets downright tedious.… Expand

Ambitious, featuring six stories all set in various time periods. Often times with a film like this, there is always that one storyline that is just not as good, or in the case of Cloud Atlas, 2 or 3 storylines that fail to compare to the others. That's really the main problem I had with this film, the performances, music, and visuals are all top notch, but not all the stories were that engaging, diluting the effectiveness of the major themes. I still really enjoyed the film. My favorite parts were set in Korea and the 1970s.… Expand

It's obviusly that some critics don't understand this amazing masterpiece. Cloud Atlas is one of the best movies of this year. The trama is complex but is excellent the development. The performances of Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugo Weaving, Jim Strugess, Hugh Grant and the rest of the cast are awesome. And the screenplay, uff, is excellent. Cloud Atlas is one of the most wonderful movies of this year.… Expand

A philosophical journey discussing how and why we live our lives and the ultimate repercussions of our actions on this planet. Sounds dull, you'd be dead wrong. Cloud Atlas tells many stories. In fact it tells 6 stories, each of them in different time periods, past, present and future. It follows revolutionaries in futuristic Neo Seoul, Composers in pre world war 2 Edinburgh and a group of elderly inhabitants of a dictatorial nursing home planning a jail break of sorts. Cloud Atlas isn't just adventurous and bold in its risk taking but its also informative. Cloud Atlas is an education in not just philosophy but film making and all the reasons it was created as a medium. It's the ultimate canvas where you can tell any story, no matter how ridiculous or far fetched. When I say Cloud Atlas is ridiculous it is not to ridicule it, in fact it is a compliment because it tells stories that shouldn't link and brings them together into a grand narrative that is at times naive and idealistic but never dull and always thrilling. Unlike the book the film is based on, the film cross cuts across its many tales instead of telling them in half chunks. It connects its stories through the many themes and ideas that makes the film so inspiring from love to adventure. The thing that binds these stories and makes this story jumping possible is the use of the actors in multiple stories. The actors play multiple roles through time and part of the superficial charm of the picture is spotting Tom Hanks or Hugh Grant in their many disguises or failing to spot Halle Berry as a Korean man. It's a film that is equal part fever dream and epic poem. The film unlike the book isn't so much about one life, one soul throughout the ages (although a strange birthmark seems to represent the idea of one soul throughout eternity) but about humanity, our collective consciousness through the ages instead. This film is a look into the idea of the butterfly effect, the idea that chaos theory can also be seen the other way, that one action can bring about good instead of evil for years to come. for example a self absorbed, opinionated composer (a terrific Ben Whishaw) creates a piece of music used for years to come thanks to the actions of not just him but people long into the future. However it is a film that must build to its epic conclusion and for that reason the first hour is quite dense (dense as in full, this film is never stupid) and takes some concentration. Once you understand the characters, the ideas and stories you are being presented its easy to get lost in this idealistic look at the good we can accomplish as a race and the absolute evil we can cause by just not trying or choosing yourself instead of others. Overall its a near perfect picture because of its attention to detail and its desire to show something we rarely see at the movies, a movie that celebrates stories and the hold they can have on us.… Expand

What an amazing experience watching Cloud Atlas was. The film on a visual level is astounding on so many levels. And what levels this film had. Too many critics have been saying how this film is about how we are all connected but they are mistaken. On a dramatic level I was thrilled and on a intelectual level I was engaged for three hours. When I guaranteed the Dark Knight Rises would be the best film of the year I did not know there would be as great as a film as Cloud Atlas.… Expand

Ambitious, symbolic, beautiful and utterly breathtaking; with impressive visuals, a great story arch and brilliant acting and directing, Cloud Atlas is a successful attempt to turn an "un-filmable" novel into a well-adaptated masterpiece.

As if Speed Racer wasn’t enough, the Wachowskis were able to convince Warner to fork over hundreds of millions of dollars to embark upon the mission of Cloud Atlas, an impossibly ambitious adaptation of David Mitchell’s novel that spans space, time, and all varieties of viewer patience. Any film that focuses on cyborgs and spacecraft will appeal to a certain sci-fi demographic, but Cloud Aud Atlas is ironically enough all over the map, just as interested in secret early 20th century gay affairs as it is in robotic ethics. It’s fascinating to watch simply because the Wachowskis (along with co-director Tom Tykwer) swing so wide they can’t possibly pull it off. Enlisting A-listers like Tom Hanks and Halle Berry to play multiple parts some of which involve Cro-Magnon growling and grunting and putting their effects team to work with gusto, Cloud Atlas quickly becomes fascinatingly big for its britches. This is kitchen-sink filmmaking at its most audacious: it can’t be argued that Cloud Atlas goes out of its way to do everything it can to connect with those tolerant enough to stomach it. There are cavemen and Farrah Fawcett-Majors haircuts, futuristic automatons with delusions of grandeur, gruff musicians and the suicidal boys who love them, airplane explosions, ultra-vivid car crashes again, Cloud Atlas has a lot of dramatic real estate to offer. Yet while its vastly ambitious intentions of representing the implicit entropy of the universe are uniquely inventive, the whole thing feels like an expensive, convoluted mess. But sometimes grandiose missteps like Cloud Atlas end up being ingenious time wasters. On Blu-ray, experiencing the Wachowski/Tykwer vision frequently prompts viewers to ask themselves, ‘Who green-lit this?’ Any movie with Tom Hanks’ name above the title is bound to sell a ticket or two, but fantasizing about Warner brass seeing the final print of this kaleidoscopic rubbish is too delicious to resist. Let’s leave it at this: Cloud Atlas is a mess, but few movies from 2012 were this jaw-droppingly stupefying.… Expand

If the source novel from David Mitchell is claimed to be "the most impossible one to be adapted to a feature film", the true grit behind the director trio alone merits some accolade. But the critical box-office feedback firmly suggests they will never retrieve the gargantuan budget (over 100,000,000$ for production and nothing else), while being under the barrage of divisive reviews from the critics, an ominous pre-watch hunch could never be dissolved until I finally watched it on the super-big screen (not as large as an IMAX) in the cinema, and I must confess it comes out far "stunning" than I had expected.

Graphically bountiful visual stunts of 6 inter-linked stories which stretch across different eras (from primitive tribe to a clone-ed future world) certainly has paid off its lengthy running time, 172 minutes passed by fleetingly with more anticipation was still hanging there when the ending credits inconveniently started to roll. CLOUD ATLAS is a cleverly designed omnibus, using same actors playing multiple roles in different sub-stories, consistently establishes a sense of reincarnation and an almost sacred disposition to influence a more elusive and conscience-contingent point-of-view into its viewer… Expand

What you might feel after watching thiz movie? You may be confused, you may be disappointed or if you watch closely enough, you may find a hidden philosophy inside. Thiz movie has six stories with six different time periods, from little island in South Pacific to the post-apocalyptic Hawaiian Islands, from the primitive year 1849 to far in the future 2321. The stories come from any direction and finally meet at one point. The story is meant to be connected to one another, however, don’t be surprised if you eventually find that the connection is very minor. In point of fact, you may miss the connection if you’re not careful. “Cloud Atlas” is the latest project from Tom Tykwer and The Wachowskis, starring Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Jim Broadbent, Ben Winshaw, James D’Arcy, Susan Sarandon, Hugh Grant, Doona Bae and Xun Zhou. All Actors have more than one role during different time periods. As a matter of fact, some Actors are so buried underneath their makeup that we could hardly recognize them. To make things even worse, some of them are seemingly drawn into comical performances such as Hugo Weaving, James D’Arcy, Susan Sarandon and Hugh Grant. The better performances come from Tom Hanks, Halle Berry and Ben Winshaw. And the scene stealer is definitely Doona Bae who depicts a genetically-engineered clone named Sonmi-451. Doona Bae delivers a complex and inspiring character. On the directorial side, Tom Tykwer carries out 1936’s, 1973’s and 2012’s segment. On the other side, Andi and Lana (used to be Larry) Wachowski handle 1849’s, 2144’s and 2321’s segment. Personally, I prefer Wachowskis’ direction. They can keep up the pace of their stories and prevent it from being boring. It reminds us of how good The Wachowskis really are when depicting futuristic tales, just like what they did in “The Matrix” (1999). On the other hand, even though I love the previous Tom Tykwer’s works such as “Run Lola Run” (1998), but thiz time, he seems to have put anything one-dimensional. In other words, Tom Tykwer’s direction is boring. If it’s not because of the intriguing futuristic tale of Sonmi-451 which is directed by The Wachowskis, thiz movie will undoubtedly become an unnecessary B-Class movie. In the end, thiz is something bigger than you think. It’s all about a belief in the universality of mankind. Basically, there is no difference between countries, races and even genders, where white can become black, black can become white and white can become Asian. We are all one, we are all the same, learning and strive for a better condition. Visit My Blog on JONNY'S MOVEE http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com… Expand

A three-hour investment to watch a film that has generated ridiculously bad reviews from most of the major critics is such a risky decision especially when the film has also failed at the box-office meaning that not even the audiences have liked the film. BUT! Cloud Atlas is much more than that. This is not a child's play to incorporate six different storylines in a single film especially when they all are so complex and their interrelation seems nearly impossible at times. Hats off to the Wachowski Brothers and Tom Tykwer for their tremendous effort by making a film whose novel is already complicated but the way they have executed the entire film is marvelous. I don't have words to describe how impressed I am with their work on this film, it is utterly excellent. Honestly, at first, the film seemed like a disappointment to me, I was trying so hard to figure out what does all of it mean which was preventing me from the main purpose i.e. enjoying the film. But gradually, throughout these three hours, I started understanding what is going on and it finally started making a LITTLE sense. Of course, everyone has their own interpretations about the film but the real and common one is that "everything is connected, your past may affect your present as well as your future." This can be thought of like that every individual's actions in a particular storyline affects the actions of other individuals in the different storylines. It can be seen like a phase in a human life, in which a person is bad at first, then he realizes that he is doing wrong and then in the end, he finally stands up for what is right. But this explanation doesn't fit all the individuals' stories like Hugo Weaving, he is evil in all of the storylines and maybe it's because his soul never realizes that it is doing wrong. Neither does it fit Tom Hanks' stories because he is a bad, greedy guy in the first storyline and then he becomes a good person and after that he becomes a bad person again and then finally, in the last stoyline, he becomes a good person, which doesn't make any sense. The more you try to figure out the plot of the film and interpret it in different ways, the more you start finding different explanations of how it could be possible. The film's brilliant (and far more complicated than I first thought) storyline is supported by phenomenal performances by the entire cast members. Every single one of them has played his/her roles wonderfully and that is also supported by the factor of beautiful make-up and styling to completely adapt them in their respective roles in different storylines. It completely blows you away, you can't even recognize that there are the same individuals in all of the storylines. Visual effects are great and so is the cinematography. Screenplay is really clever, because I have been reading that it varies from the novel and inverts the ending of all the storylines and it still has been incorporated properly and doesn't seem wrong. I might not read the novel because if I do, I'd be confused again and I don't want that. This is really not an all-audiences film, most of the people are not liking it because of the complications in the storylines and the confusing narrative but what it actually demands is your complete concentration because without it, you cannot understand what the real message and the purpose of this film really is, what exactly are the Wachowski Brothers trying to deliver to us, why did they choose to make this movie. All of the questions are answered if you watch the movie with complete attention and remember everything from the beginning until the end, it is really important. Cloud Atlas is easily one of the most complicated and daring films I have ever watched in my life. From the rough idea, you can guess that it would fail miserably but the Wachowski Brothers still made it for us because it is necessary to remind everyone what the real power of filmmaking is!… Expand

Possibly the greatest but certainly the most ambitious film of the year. Watching it for the first time I knew i was in for a movie that would require and invite repeated viewings. Absolutely breathtaking. Every is storyline is spectacular and gets enough screen-time in the near-3-hour timespan. The only complaint, albeit a very minor one, is that the casting decisions are sometimes a little distracting.… Expand

I love the Wachowski Bros., but they should've made another movie after a 4-year absence since 2009's critical and commercial disappointment which is "Ninja Assassin." I saw the movie this weekend and it was supposed to be 3 hours, but 2 and a half hours? Well, I got a mixed feeling about Cloud Atlas. Some reviews were good, others having difficulty on why the action almost takes it to new heights. I knew it was a disappointment for both Tom Hanks and Halle Berry since it can't match any of the Matrix success. But I'll just have to wait for a rental.… Expand

It has been interesting to see the great divide among critics on this film. I have to say I can understand anyone who either hates or loves this film. This is because I fall in the middle in so many areas. This film is divided into 6 distinct parts with most of the actors playing a different character in each section. This is both the problem and everything that is right with this movie. There are 4 sections of this film where the story is extremely intriguing, the acting is spot on and there is a nice emotional hook at the climax of the story arc. There is one time period that I wish would have been left out of the movie all together. I believe it is meant to be the comedy relief of the film. Unfortunately it doesn't get any laughs, has 3 or 4 characters that are reprehensible, and doesn't seem to be needed to tie the other stories together. There is also one story line that sums up the way I feel about the movie quite nicely. The plot in it is not particular interesting, but it does have one of the better characters in the movie in it, and is very necessary to tie together some of the other time periods. Much has been made about the makeup in this movie and again I see what a lot of people have found disturbing about some of these makeup jobs, there are 4 that are really poorly done and can take you out of the movie. While I was watching this film I had mixed emotions as well. For probably the first hour I was wondering if I would ever be interested in any of these characters and at times was quite bored. Then the movie picks up steam and I became quite intrigued by what was happening. By the third act I was hooked by the 3 or 4 of the story lines, and the payoff in each was very good. I do have to add my favorite parts of this film come in the direction. The way that the time periods are cut together and the transition devices they use are phenomenal. The score for this film is also fantastic. The way this film is put together and the quality of a couple of the time periods will have me revisiting this film in the future.… Expand

Sprawling, and incredibly cast, Cloud Atlas is a film that surely has divided everyone who has seen it. Is it another self indulgent effort from the Watchowski Siblings, or a Masterpiece? Based on what is considered as an unfilmable novel, Cloud Atlas starts of as a project of such high risk, that the Watchowskis have difficulties finding the right investors. Why not? It is an Art Film with a Blockbuster budget. At its heart though, it is one of the more contemplative film that they have made since the Matrix, using every trick in the book a film that pushes the envelope so far, that it flops miserably. Only time will tell whether it joins the pantheon of 'visionary', 'much beyond its time' film making such as 'Blade Runner'. The question is will anyone give the Watchowskis', one of the most daring visionary film makers of their generation, another set of budgets after two flops in succession?… Expand

Last year the movie

If this film does one things it's show off what state-of-the-art make-up artistry can do: a select all-star cast plays a ton of different characters across six different timelines which are all interwoven and interconnected. The plot (and film) is meant to be epic -it does look it- but it doesn't feel like that to me. Somehow dispite all the exellent VFX, make-up, acting and poetry-like dialogue it fails to connect emotionally. It is however commendable that they at least try to engage the audience with a more complex story than say robots and screaming teenagers, but the utter failure of this movie at the boxoffice doesn't bode well for the more intellectual type of scifi entertainment -even if it doesn't fire on all cylinders like this one. Even if you might end up hating it I would recommend spending the 3 hours coz it might be a long time before we see something similar again :/… Expand

The movie was nothing special. It was 40 minutes longer than it supposed to be. The stories (and the story as a whole) was cliché ridden and very predictable. The "meaning" or "message" of the movie could be told in 20 minutes. I did not like how the directors cast their actors to different sexes, races. I think it was very distracting at some points. I did not like that some stories were too "funny" (retirement home storyline) and some stories were very dark in tone (Neo-Seoul storyline). I didn't feel the stories were coherent enough. Maybe with less directors it could have been a better movie. Overall average.… Expand

This movie was so amazing . I love the screenplay and visual effects. They did a good job with adapting the story into a great movie. The directing for the movie is superb. The story is a grat blend of genres. The movie might be a little to arty for but for the ones that enjoy movie that tell the story from the style of directing and visual effects , you will love the movie. I live all the characters to the movie, this is my pick for movie of 2012. It is a very risky movie to shoot and it should have more buzz than it has now. The score to the movie was .outstanding .… Expand

Cloud Atlas is a cornily enthralling sci-fi. It seems to be like cramming the entire plot into 1. It's more like a pulpy middle brow trip. Its strange but cool

The Wachowski Siblings and Tom Tykwer join forces, and they deliver their best work since The Matrix and Run Lola Run, respectively. Cloud Atlas was quite an undertaking that tackles 6 different storylines from 6 different timelines; some of which hosts different genres - ranging from dark comedy to broad sci-fi action. Each story contains the reincarnate of all the main characters, which spans race and gender. And thanks to the divisive make-up designs, the actors were able to cross these demographics and respectively play their reincarnates (or past lives). This was such a creative move made by the directors and I do applaud them for that. I question the degree of connection between a few of these story arcs; but the film was made with so much structural complexity and such grandiosity, it… Expand

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 only reason I'm not giving this the lowest score possible is because it has Halle Berry.

"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

I haven't had this much fun at the movies in a long, long time. I mean, this film is absolutely ridiculous. There are a million storylines, actors playing multiple characters (of different races), it spans hundreds of years... and it all somehow works, at least for me. The storylines were fleshed out, the actors embody each of their characters with remarkable skill... If nothing else, "Cloud Atlas" is one of the most ambitious films ever made, and possibly one of the greatest. Of course, it all depends on whether or not you can accept the utter ridiculousness that comes with a narrative of this scope, but if you can, it's a ton of intelligent, crazy fun.… Expand

If I had written this review right after I walked out of the theater, I might've given it somewhere around a 3. The story isn't very coherent, and you get the impression that it takes itself way too seriously. The messages and themes are also not very subtle. However, the longer I think about this movie, the more I appreciate it. It does a very good job at showing how powerful certain decisions can be for the future. It has strong emotional power during several scenes, and it definitely makes you think. As a movie fan, I've been growing tired of seeing so many similar movies, no matter the genre or style. Action movies, emotional dramas, and comedies, mostly seem to each blend in with the other movies of their genre, so it was nice to see something unlike any other movie. It is thoroughly entertaining, and while you might get the immediate impression that it is pretentious, self-indulgent, and not deep or intelligent enough to back that pretentiousness up, just let it gestate it your head, and I think you will come to appreciate it for what it has to offer.… Expand

Genres can be a constriction on a film, letting itself be restricted by boundaries set by the type of film it is. It is more often than not, the movies that defy their genre which intrigue and

Cloud Atlas -- I don't get it. While I was mesmerized by many breathtaking scenes and actor's playing different roles, I just didn't get the point of the whole story. None of the stories made me care. I found myself trying to figure out which actor was behind some heavy make up.

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 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