Did anyone see this movie? I love the title, it just rolls off my tongue....
My wife & I saw it on the IMAX screen last night and it was fabulous. I really liked the way the stories wove in & out of one another. I was a particular fan of the dialect in the "Big Island" sequence.
This is a movie I'll need to go see again to really catch all the extra bits of goodness.
BTW, something that could be distracting in this movie is the tendency to play "where's Waldo" with the actors in all the crazy make-up in each story. If you find yourself doing that, it does take away from your paying attention to the story.
OT: Cloud Atlas
Moderator: JohnMayo
Re: OT: Cloud Atlas
I really enjoyed this movie, and like yourself, I'll have to see it again so I can catch all the concepts and messages the movie had. It's a pretty dense film.BobBretall wrote:
BTW, something that could be distracting in this movie is the tendency to play "where's Waldo" with the actors in all the crazy make-up in each story. If you find yourself doing that, it does take away from your paying attention to the story.
I got very caught up with the "Where's Waldo" moments which I think caused me break my concentration and to miss bits of the movie.
-
- Master Reviewer
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:44 pm
[quote="Gilgabob"The length was a drawback to many people (2hr 43 min).[/quote]
People who can't sit through a long movie should not go to them. Movie lengths are public knowledge. If length was an issue, that's the easy thing to state for some underlying problem.
For my own part, the 2:43 flew by. It felt not particularly longer than any other good movie....I was totally engaged the entire time. But it's a movie where you have to pay attention, something not everyone wants to do. If you just want to sit and have images bombard you with your brain off, then this would probably come out seeming like a "beautiful fiasco" because you'd be missing a lot of the richness of the film.
People who can't sit through a long movie should not go to them. Movie lengths are public knowledge. If length was an issue, that's the easy thing to state for some underlying problem.
For my own part, the 2:43 flew by. It felt not particularly longer than any other good movie....I was totally engaged the entire time. But it's a movie where you have to pay attention, something not everyone wants to do. If you just want to sit and have images bombard you with your brain off, then this would probably come out seeming like a "beautiful fiasco" because you'd be missing a lot of the richness of the film.
-
- Master Reviewer
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:44 pm
I had not read the book and I followed the movie just fine.Burrell wrote:Has anyone read the book? I want to see the movie, but I wonder if it would be easier to grasp if you had read the book ahead of time. Or would that ruin the movie experience?
I'm planning to read the book now that I've seen the movie, though.
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:45 am
- Location: New York
- Contact: