"Cloud Atlas” is a made-for-TV melodrama masquerading as a cinematic epic. It has ideas that suggest significance and magnitude, but when you boil down the movie’s themes, they’re little more than trite romantic notions. There’s nothing wrong with that, but the gap between the grand ambitions of the filmmakers and the movie they made is too wide to provide an entirely satisfying experience.
By weaving together six stories taking place across hundreds of years and suggesting the two primary characters in each one are the same two souls inhabiting different bodies, directors Lana and Andy Wachowski (“The Matrix” trilogy) and Tom Tykwer (“Run Lola Run”) created a broad canvas for their ideas. But when you consider each story alone and in the light of the others, you’re still left with two rudimentary truths: freedom is good and we’re all connected to each other.
I like these ideas. But working off the novel of the same name by David Mitchell, the directors of “Cloud Atlas” failed to achieve more depth or insight than the raw, unfettered emotions of a lovelorn teenager’s secret diary.
You’ve likely heard the story about a butterfly flapping its wings in China and stirring up a hurricane thousands of miles away. “Cloud Atlas” extends this idea across time. Even a seemingly inconsequential action will affect what happens hundreds of years later. Yet despite the cataclysmic effect of the insect’s beating wings, the human spirit is strong enough to endure the storm and find its soulmate time and again.
The relationship between soulmates takes many forms in “Cloud Atlas.” There’s the friendship that forms between a white notary and a black slave on a ship crossing the Pacific Ocean cira 1850; there’s the romance between two men in Belgium in 1931; there’s the instant attraction a journalist and a scientist feel when they meet in the ‘70s; there’s the longing a publisher in the 21st century feels for “the one that got away”; there’s the bond between a rebel and a genetically engineered woman, called a fabricant, in the slightly distant future; and there’s the love that develops between a tribesman and a member of a technologically advanced civilization in the far future.
By having the same two souls inhabit different bodies across time, the directors actually introduce a third theme: love is a universally human experience, irrespective of age, race, class, gender or sexual orientation. Again, while this notion is admirable from a humanistic point of view, it muddies the movie’s thematic waters even more. Opening their arms wide to embrace many ideas, the filmmakers failed to latch onto a single theme; this lack of focus keeps “Cloud Atlas” from finding firm ground.
One thing I really, really like about “Cloud Atlas” is the editing. Instead of telling the stories linearly, the filmmakers jump from story to story without using title cards, fadeouts or other segues to give viewers time to adjust, which gives the impression that everything is happening at once. This approach supports the theme of connectedness and helps audience to easily perceive the relationships between the different stories. So, in terms of editing, “Cloud Atlas” delivers brilliant work.
I also liked a lot of the imagery, especially the futuristic metropolis the Wachowskis created for the story about the rebel and the fabricant. There are moments when “Cloud Atlas” is beautiful to behold.
Unfortunately, the awkward ways in which the directors handled some of the film’s crucial moments undercut its ability to impact viewers. A scene in which one of the gay men kills himself as his lover approaches feels hasty, leaving me wondering why he did what he did, and a scene in which the previously quiet fabricant starts spouting pseudo-philosophy over a loud speaker as the rebels attempt to fight off governments forces is silly.
Now here’s where things get tricky: Despite everything I’ve written, “Cloud Atlas” is worth seeing. It’s a big movie about ideas rather than action, making it a bold enterprise. And for all of its schmaltz, it’s heartening in this age of post-modern cynicism to see filmmakers tell an uplifting story. I just wish they’d achieved the greatness for which they were reaching.
Rated R for violence, language, sex and drug use. Two stars out of four. Email David Laprad at dlaprad@hamiltoncountyherald.com.