Topic: Cloud Atlas
I have a tendency to fix your typos.
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Such a fantastic film. My favorite of last year.
Dorkman, I agree with your tweet, it probably is about time I get around to this one.
I enjoyed this movie. I turned it off after the first 20 minutes the first time because it was boring me. I sat down and watched it a second time letting it explain itself to me. And I rather enjoyed it immensely during the second viewing. I'll be getting this one on Blu Ray. I know what I saw in this movie. I tend to think that this is the kind of movie that holds up a mirror to you so you see what you bring to the movie in a way.
Can we just quickly talk about the god-awful menu that the Blu-Ray and DVD comes with?
Because holy shit, that is heinous. It's like they downloaded the trial version of some shady DVD-maker program and just used all the default settings.
Warner Brothers has used that menu alot the past year.
Last edited by Snail (2013-06-11 03:35:13)
Static Blu Ray menus are the worst! What's the point of having the technology to make animated menus and just sticking a still photo on there? Ugh. It stinks of laziness and not actually giving a fuck.
Warner Brothers has used that menu alot the past year.
Posting as I listen through. While Tykwer hasn't done much lately that US viewers would know, he did direct one of my favorite gun-fights of the last decade.
Unfortunately it was in an otherwise completely forgettable movie, but goddamn that set-piece is classic Mctiernan/John Woo awesomeness.
When I saw that menu on The Hobbit, I really thought that I bought the wrong disc, because the day before I saw the exact same thing on TDKR
But it looks like Warner is just going back to its roots. Their earliest DVDs had this:
Jeebus. The whole time I was watching this I was wondering "How in the HELL did they get away with shooting all this at the Guggenheim Museum?"
So I looked it up, and the answer is even more amazing than I thought - that's not the Guggenheim, it's a studio set re-creation of the Guggenheim. Wow.
Universal blu ray movies seem to be the worst, they're not even bothering with telling you what the icons are these days.
Last edited by Owen_Ward (2013-06-11 22:59:42)
So I saw this movie in theatres when it first came out with my sister. I was actually looking forward to it for awhile and was surprised at how empty the theatre was. I loved it a lot despite not understanding any of the dialogue during the after apocalypse story. My sister liked it a lot too, she cried during the end but she cries at everything so it wasn't a huge deal. Then I saw it again a month or so later with my girlfriend at a cheap $3 dollar theatre. And I also saw it at a residence movie night back at university. So I really thought I could keep along just by listening to the commentary (without having to watch the movie side by side). But as hard as I tried I really couldn't lol.
I'm glad to see you guys liked this movie, I thought it was one of the best movies I'd ever seen after I watched it. I think the fact that there was so much in it made it a lot more interesting to me, and I didn't have much problem following along the first time. Although I did get a lot out of it the second and third times I watched it. I've also read the book and I prefer the movie tbh. The book just didn't have the same impact on me.
"Who is us in the past?.... Pavlich!" -Teague
AH!
I love you guys.
FUN FACT: Tom Tykwer and I share the same birthday, May 23rd.
Great, great episode guys. Perhaps I'll give the movie another shot when it drops below $10. I still maintain its much more admirable of an achievement than it is an actually successful one. And I don't think its a case of the movie being too smart or highbrow, as you guys suggest. I think it has the opposite problem of being waaay too on the nose dialogue-wise. In fact, a lot of my problems with V for Vendetta are mirrored here, I think I just really dislike the way the Wachowski's write dialogue, and I think having to compress these stories as much as they do does their writing no favors. Speed Racer is a similar thing too come to think of it, great editing and story structure choices, but way over-indulgent and too long for its own good. If they had someone to rein them in a bit and polish their work, they could be the visionary's you say they are, but for me they're more miss than hit.
Ultimately, I absolutely see the brilliant editing and mirroring they're doing throughout, but I can't get on board because I keep rolling my eyes every 5 minutes at each of these stories. Its interesting academically, its an impressive accomplishment, I'm glad it got made, but I think the movie deserves a lot of the criticism it's gotten, and I doubt it'll end up being a cult classic in the long run.
I'm glad I listened to this commentary. Made me think about the subtleties of this movie more than I had. When I saw it, I went in knowing nothing but trusting the filmmaking pedigree. I spent the first hour waiting to get a handle on things and playing spot the Hanx. When things started coming together, I enjoyed finding the causality between eras, and after a while, it became clear to me as a series of stories of noble people standing against oppression in various forms across history.
Then there was another hour of movie, and I sat through the message that oppression is bad five more times. I GET IT, MOVIE, SLAVERY IS ALWAYS BAD.
I can appreciate better after this commentary that there is a subtlety in the variation of storytelling techniques, but when one of those techniques is just to tell you what they're trying to say, they kinda sacrifice their claims of subtlety.
Your milage may vary, and I liked them showing how art can inspire people across eras. It's a powerful idea, that ideas in the end are all we leave behind and that sometimes one story can change the world, but I don't think this is necessarily one of those stories.
Great episode! Love, love that movie.
I've liked the phrase "race bending" when actors play other ethnic groups than their own. So when I looked it up listening to the commentary I found this:
http://www.racebending.com/v4/
And boy do they have a word or two to say about Cloud Atlas.
http://www.racebending.com/v4/?s=Cloud+Atlas
p.s. I don't think I like that phrase anymore.
Great episode! Love, love that movie.
I've liked the phrase "race bending" when actors play other ethnic groups than their own. So when I looked it up listening to the commentary I found this:
http://www.racebending.com/v4/
And boy do they have a word or two to say about Cloud Atlas.
http://www.racebending.com/v4/?s=Cloud+Atlas
p.s. I don't think I like that phrase anymore.
I'm liking it less now myself.
I liked what Dorkman said about it during the episode. It does seem like these criticisms tend to come from people who are reacting to the general idea of actors being made-up to portray characters of another ethnicity. The analysis linked above is by someone who clearly paid close attention to the film but still managed to sell short the motivations for why the choice was made. The film's conceit of reincarnation—the whole idea of the actors playing "souls, not characters"—and how all that funnels into the story's themes really does amount to a special case. Given what the film's trying to do, all the make-up jobs are necessary. I don't see a viable workaround. If the actors aren't made-up to play all those characters, you don't have the same movie. Obviously people are free reject that premise and say that the choice was not justified. But even still, Cloud Atlas shouldn't get tossed into the same bucket as Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Not the same ballpark.
Last edited by Rob (2013-06-12 21:23:16)
Holy shit, we have a Pavlich! Where you been, man?
Sorry I've been absent from the boards. I love it here. Unfortunately, my Mother and I recently discovered she has Ovarian Cancer, so we've been dealing with that. They drained 7 liters of fluid from her and found a bunch of small growths in her abdomen and one big one that's 12 centimeters wide. She has to have a hysterectomy done to take care of the large mass, and then chemotherapy to handle the rest. She's currently going through the slow (could take up to 120 days) process of getting Disability and Medicaid. She was scheduled to go into surgery on the 19th, until the hospital called today wanting her to come up with $6,000 (out of $12,000) or she couldn't do it. Turns out, the Doctor was going to do the surgery FOR FREE, and it's the HOSPITAL that want all that money just to use the room (she'd be recovering for around 4 days). The Doctor referred her to another hospital (she's friends with the Oncologists there, so she's vouched for them), so we'll see what happens.
So, that's happened.
Anyway, Cloud Atlas. I've not seen the film. I'm very curious to check it out. I'm a big Tom Tykwer fan (even though I've not liked much of his stuff. The stuff I do like, I fucking love). I guess I feel basically the same way about The Wachowskis, too. I'm surprised that when Dorkman talked about his love for them, he failed to mention their first film, Bound. Also, Teague was asking about the score for Cloud Atlas. Tom Tykwer, Reinhold Heil and Johnny Klimek are the guys that make up Pale 3, who have composed the music for Run Lola Run, The Princess and The Warrior and more.
ETA: Sorry, Dorkman. Listening as I write. Glad to hear you guys DID talk about Bound. I dig that movie.
Last edited by johnpavlich (2013-06-13 03:08:28)
Dude, sorry to read about your mum. Hope she gets better as soon as possible
Cancer is a bastard.
Last edited by Jimmy B (2013-06-13 04:39:37)
AshDigital wrote:Great episode! Love, love that movie.
I've liked the phrase "race bending" when actors play other ethnic groups than their own. So when I looked it up listening to the commentary I found this:
http://www.racebending.com/v4/
And boy do they have a word or two to say about Cloud Atlas.
http://www.racebending.com/v4/?s=Cloud+Atlas
p.s. I don't think I like that phrase anymore.
I'm liking it less now myself.
I liked what Dorkman said about it during the episode. It does seem like these criticisms tend to come from people who are reacting to the general idea of actors being made-up to portray characters of another ethnicity. The analysis linked above is by someone who clearly paid close attention to the film but still managed to sell short the motivations for why the choice was made. The film's conceit of reincarnation—the whole idea of the actors playing "souls, not characters"—and how all that funnels into the story's themes really does amount to a special case. Given what the film's trying to do, all the make-up jobs are necessary. I don't see a viable workaround. If the actors aren't made-up to play all those characters, you don't have the same movie. Obviously people are free reject that premise and say that the choice was not justified. But even still, Cloud Atlas shouldn't get tossed into the same bucket as Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Not the same ballpark.
I am having a tough time with the phrase too. I seems to be coming up more and more in movies, and that website, among others, is leading the charge. I've seen a couple of different articles by them and left them with the feeling of
Now what?
Also, Cloud Atlas.
Yeah, I feel like part of the reason we sometimes see such overreaching is, frankly, it's something that will tend to happen anytime someone makes umbrage-taking their occupation. Just to be clear: I'm not lamenting people doing that; it's a kind of media criticism, and I think that's generally a good thing. Moreover, I share the concern about presentations of race in film and racial disparities in casting. It warrants serious discussion, and filmmakers and audiences should think hard about it. I'm just pointing out that when you become a full-time watchdog for things that are offensive, being in that position of constant vigilance can actually lead you to misread things sometimes, to miss the forest for the trees. Someone who watches films actively looking for content that would be offensive to [insert group] will inevitably overstate the case here and there, "spot" things that are innocent or (as in the case of Cloud Atlas) misread what the artist is actually doing and why. If I did that kind of work, I doubt I would have a perfect batting average.
The other thing is the sheer volume of "race-bending" in Cloud Atlas. Imagine you're someone whose whole job is to call-out race-bending in movies and analyze the liabilities of it. Even if you comprehend perfectly why it's artistically justified in CA, you're still going to write a huge piece about the film because the bending is wall-to-wall. It's like, if everyone knows me as the guy who spots dwarves in movies, when The Wizard of Oz comes out, I gotta say something.
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.