At the end of last month, I took a trip down memory lane, as +Johanna Scott-Bennett and I went to Huntingdon Cineworld to see Cloud Atlas (it wasn't showing at Cambridge Cineworld and the travel cost was less than two tickets at Vue).
It's a film that's had a very mixed critical reception, but I liked it a lot. The performances are all excellent; even Halle Berry was good, and having not seen Monster's Ball, that is something I have never seen before. The transformations through the ages were astonishing (especially Hugh Grant as a neo-savage cannibal); Tom Hanks - who, Academy Award and all, tends to play a variation of Tom Hanks in most of his films - was on especially fine form.
There's been some controversy, as you'd expect, over the use of Caucasian (and Black) actors made-up for Asian roles in order to maintain the continuity of casting. I suspect that it would have been more jarring to me if I hadn't automatically parsed them as Vulcan (and if I hadn't been reeling from Tom Hanks' Mockney gangster and 'Jim Broadbent' roles.)
I also wonder whether the make-up was really necessary given the futuristic setting. This is Neo Seoul in 2044 and there's no real reason that the population would be 100% ethnic Korean, especially as the racism in the segment is 'real' vs cloned. I also note that there is far less brouhaha about the black and Asian actors who are made up to play white characters.
But anyway, I enjoyed the film. I liked the central premise of a dharma history stretching into the future, and its themes of hope and enduring love; the power of selflessness and the consuming nature of self-interest. I found the performances, as noted, excellent, and despite the use of six entirely different styles and genres - 19th century historical, 1930s period drama, 1970s detective thriller (almost blacksploitation), contemporary-set Ealing-style dark comedy, dystopian SF action, and post-Apocalyptic adventure - the transitions never seemed jarring, and the integration of the earlier stories is managed superbly. I also liked the fact that they mixed things up with the cast, so that the same actors weren't always playing the same kind of roles; apart from Hugo Weaving and Hugh Grant, of course, who are apparently all the villains in history and in one case at least, the Devil.
I will add a review to Iconomicon when I've read the book.
The site Scene Stealers provided this fine infographic of the transformations and themes. I don't agree 100% with the analysis, but this does show the changing faces.
There's been some controversy, as you'd expect, over the use of Caucasian (and Black) actors made-up for Asian roles in order to maintain the continuity of casting. I suspect that it would have been more jarring to me if I hadn't automatically parsed them as Vulcan (and if I hadn't been reeling from Tom Hanks' Mockney gangster and 'Jim Broadbent' roles.)
I also wonder whether the make-up was really necessary given the futuristic setting. This is Neo Seoul in 2044 and there's no real reason that the population would be 100% ethnic Korean, especially as the racism in the segment is 'real' vs cloned. I also note that there is far less brouhaha about the black and Asian actors who are made up to play white characters.
But anyway, I enjoyed the film. I liked the central premise of a dharma history stretching into the future, and its themes of hope and enduring love; the power of selflessness and the consuming nature of self-interest. I found the performances, as noted, excellent, and despite the use of six entirely different styles and genres - 19th century historical, 1930s period drama, 1970s detective thriller (almost blacksploitation), contemporary-set Ealing-style dark comedy, dystopian SF action, and post-Apocalyptic adventure - the transitions never seemed jarring, and the integration of the earlier stories is managed superbly. I also liked the fact that they mixed things up with the cast, so that the same actors weren't always playing the same kind of roles; apart from Hugo Weaving and Hugh Grant, of course, who are apparently all the villains in history and in one case at least, the Devil.
I will add a review to Iconomicon when I've read the book.
The site Scene Stealers provided this fine infographic of the transformations and themes. I don't agree 100% with the analysis, but this does show the changing faces.
No comments:
Post a Comment