Cloud Atlas


Action / Drama / Mystery / Sci-Fi

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 66%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 66%
IMDb Rating 7.4 10 353849


Uploaded By: OTTO
December 24, 2012 at 02:42 PM



Tom Hanks as Dr. Henry Goose / Hotel Manager / Isaac Sachs / Dermot Hoggins / Cavendish Look-a-Like Actor / Zachry
William Salyers as Rausch
Martin Wuttke as Mr. Boerhaave / Guard / Leary the Healer
David Gyasi as Autua / Lester Rey / Duophysite
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
1.20 GB
English 2.0
23.976 fps
2 hr 52 min
P/S 3 / 29
2.30 GB
English 2.0
23.976 fps
2 hr 52 min
P/S 13 / 87

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by MartinHafer 7 / 10

It's one of the most unique films I've ever seen.

At nearly three hours long AND with a strange and difficult to comprehend plot, I can see exactly why "Cloud Atlas" lost a ton of money. In the States, it only brought in about $27,000,000---yet cost $100,000,000 to make. Much of the high cost is undoubtedly due to the cast--as the film boasts some famous and high-paid actors (including Tom Hanks and Halle Berry). It's a shame really, as the film does have some nice thing to offer...though overall, it was a problematic film to watch.

The film consists of many different stories that all occur many different times in history (both in the past and very distant future). And, instead of being told in sequence, they are interlaced throughout the film. Why and what these plots all have to do with each other is something the audience is left to discover or create within themselves. However, many will get frustrated because for some time, the film doesn't give you a lot of clues at to what it all means.

Despite being confusing and hard to grasp, the film has several things I loved. The stars of the film all play multiple roles and you'll see many of them in many stories. This provides the actors a chance to show off their talents--especially because many times they need to effect accents and/or play the opposite gender!! Yes, most of the main cast members play men AND women. Now this never would have worked if the acting was bad and the makeup was bad--but they really shine in this film. I was blown away by the makeup and thought several of the female characters were women when they weren't--it was that convincing. Additionally, while I was a bit cold about the overall film, I did appreciate how novel the movie was--very, very unique.

So how might I have wanted the movie to be instead? Well, the many stories frustrated me because some of them were really, really compelling--and seeing only bits and pieces of them was annoying. I really wanted to see the whole story of many of the stories and could have seen the filmmakers making four or five films instead of just one. I particularly liked the stories about the replicant as well as the one where Hanks played a thug author (his acting was really nice here).

My advice is that this film demands a viewer who is very, very patient, content with ambiguity and who wants to see a nice experimental film-- warts and all. Worth seeing but odd to say the least.

NOTE: Parents, this film is NOT appropriate for kids. It clearly earns its R rating for some extremely graphic violence and sex. While the sex is sometimes steamy, the violence is what troubles me most for anyone crazy enough to let kids watch this one.

Reviewed by Leofwine_draca 3 / 10


I watched CLOUD ATLAS more out of mild interest than anything else. I'm aware that it's based on a lengthy novel by the British author David Mitchell, but I tend to avoid most modern 'literary' stuff because I find it dry, self-indulgent, and pretentious claptrap...

So along comes CLOUD ATLAS, and pretty much ticks all of those boxes. This is a film made by the Wachowskis, a pair of sibling directors who peaked early on in their careers with THE MATRIX and have gone downhill ever since. I'm not sure whether CLOUD ATLAS is as bad as SPEED RACER - on the face of it, probably not - but it smacks of desperation and 'look at me' attention seeking.

This is a long-running, slow moving storyline which tells various mini-narratives over the course of its running time. One is set in a futuristic Korean society, one is about life in a nursing home in contemporary times, one is a historical account from the 19th century. None of these stories adds up to much on its own, but the idea is that each of the characters in the stories are connected, sharing souls with characters in otherwise unconnected tales. A look at reincarnation, if you like.

What this amounts to is having the core cast taking on wildly diverse roles. Western actors will play characters who look like themselves in one story and then don 'yellow face' for the Korean tale. Koren actress Doona Bae is turned into a westerner for one of her roles. The problem is that this make-up looks RIDICULOUS with plasticine foreheads that made me think I was watching Klingons on STAR TREK. In addition, the acting stinks, particularly from the trying-too-hard likes of Jim Broadbent and Hugh Grant. I was embarrassed, and cringing through most of this. It really is drivel, and for the life of me I can't see why some reviewers are praising it as some kind of masterpiece...

Reviewed by SnoopyStyle 5 / 10

Hit and Miss but very Ambitious

Some compelling, some amazing, some confounding, some forgotable, some annoying, it's all this and more. Above it all, this is ambitious. There's a couple of themes going. Basically the good and bad we do affect the future. It's a movie where actors play multiple roles in multiple timelines where they face challenges.

Not every story is equal. Some stories are more compelling. Quite frankly, parts of some stories are more compelling than others. The slave whipping scene is certainly the most compelling. The most interesting story is the future Seoul. However it is a hit and miss kind of viewing experience. Jim Broadbent in the retirement home has problems. If he can call his brother, why couldn't he call the cops? In fact, where are the cops in that whole story?

I have to be honest that I couldn't remember and keep up with some of these stories. Some become just a mishmash of different stories. It doesn't help that the same actors are in different stories. To me, that concept is more of a hindrance. All the fake makeup create an aura of artificiality to everything. The idea of connected souls is admirable, but they may as well not use the makeup. That would be something interesting. This feels like Eddie Murphy.

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment