Toronto International Film Festival

Cloud Atlas is an epic. The nearly 3 hour film is directed by 3 different filmmakers, The Matrix helmers Andy and Lana Wachowski and Run Lola Run‘s Tom Tykwer. The film is packed with an equally impressive cast including Tom Hanks, Hugo Weaving, Halle Berry, Susan Sarandon, Jim Broadbent and Hugh Grant. But even with a deck stacked this heavy, is it enough to make Cloud Atlas an instant masterpiece?

The film spans roughly 400 years and follows a massive 6 story-lines in each period. The connecting through lines are the spirits (or souls) of each of the characters. The message is simple. Some spirits are destined to always find one another, resulting in a multitude of continued experiences, whether it be fall in love or be eternal enemies. The concept is great… but sadly it just doesn’t work well as a film. Or at least as this film.

The film is often difficult to follow, not unlike Richard Kelly’s equally complicated Southland Tales. And at 3 hours, its unlikely that I will dedicate any more of my life to viewing it again in the pursuit of further clarification.

As a film lover, a film doesn’t always have to be great. But for me to commit 3 hours to a film it had better be at least good. Cloud Atlas falters where so many student films falter – it doesn’t appreciate the length of time available to tell a story. 3 hours divided roughly evenly into 6 stories means that each story has about 30 minutes to get its message across. Slightly longer than a typical short film but not quite long enough for me to develop a deep connection with any single character, the majority of Cloud Atlas‘ storylines fall prey to falling just short of their intended goals. And ultimately the question that I had upon leaving the film was ‘why do I care?’

One of Cloud Atlas‘ own verbalized questions became resoundingly appropriate. “What is the ocean but millions of drops of water?” Perhaps the filmmakers hoped that the film, although not necessarily effective in each of its parts, would create a tapestry that would create a stronger and clearer whole. And maybe they’re right. If the film were told in a linear narrative it would easily fall apart and its parallel themes would be lost. Meanwhile, the dangers of having a non-linear storyline become a tool for projecting a deeper meaning but without the clarity to see it through can become an equally bad idea.

Aesthetically, both Tykwer and the Wachowskis nail the look of the film’s many narratives. Tyker took over the contemporary filmmaking and from what I understand handled four of the story lines. His vibrant and kinetic style is apparent in many of the film’s vignettes. His overall style is something to get lost in and I often forgot that I had been sitting for over 2 hours watching something with no real story to speak of. Meanwhile, the look of The Wachowskis’ futuristic dystopian city and world building are definitely Wachowski-esque. Of all of their credentials thus far, I’d say that the aesthetic energy most on display was most reminiscent of Speed Racer, as was the storytelling (for both good and bad).

It is not impossible to weave a huge number of storylines and characters together masterfully. Filmmakers have been attempting the Herculean task since D.W. Griffith’s Intolerance. But it would seem that Cloud Atlas would have been better left as a book or in a singular filmmaker’s hands. The film has 6 very distinct and interesting worlds each with its own aesthetic that each needed the ability and attention to be explored on their own. Unfortunately, Cloud Atlas seems to have too many moving parts, both in and behind the scenes, parts whose muddled movements result in one weighty and uninteresting epic.

The Master is the latest film by Paul Thomas Anderson. The film follows Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), a WW2 veteran suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and alcoholism, who after being released from the Navy, drifts from place to place unable to keep a job. Eventually, he becomes a stowaway on a boat bound to New York City from San Francisco. The commander of the boat is Lancaster Dodd aka ‘The Master’ (Philip Seymour Hoffman). There, he is introduced to Dodd’s ‘The Cause’, a Scientology-like message of empowerment. Newly recruited to ‘The Cause’, Freddie travels with Dodd, his wife (Amy Adams) and his entourage around the US spreading The Master’s message.

To start off, I will say that I knew almost nothing about this film except that it was apparently about Scientology. And all I know of scientology I gleamed from South Park and once getting a Dianetics test at the CNE (the CNE is a massive carnival/fair that happens at the end of the summer every year in Toronto).

The film opens with absolutely stunning visuals which reminded me of Anderson’s ‘There Will Be Blood’. I was looking forward to a long period of visually driven storytelling and although there was some dialogue I wasn’t disappointed. Anderson has the ability to capture and maintain an audience’s attention for long durations using only exquisite visuals. And the film has its long durations, clocking in at 2 hours and 17 minutes.

From start to finish, the film is beautifully shot and has a number of beautiful sequences reminiscent of Rembrant paintings… but with more nudity. Unexplained nudity is par for the course in this film. However not overtly explained, the nudity is validated through Quell’s unquenched sexual appetite and failed sexual romances. One odd sequence is during a ‘Cause’ meeting where all the women instantly have no clothes on and they remain like that for the duration of the sequence. If this is part of the Cause’s message, you have our attention.

Joaquin Phoenix’s performance is a mater class in acting. Although it is hard to separate him in my mind from the man who shit on someone sleeping as a performance art piece I was often completely lost in his work as Quell. Physically, I can’t imagine Phoenix committing more wholeheartly to the roll. Also, I am surprised that I didn’t see him give himself lacerations or broken bones during some of the more physical parts of his performance as Quell wrestles with his post traumatic stress disorder. He was able to completely fall into the roll of drifter/alcoholic which makes me wonder if his whole I’m Still Here foray was not some Daniel Day Lewis type method research. Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s performance is also something to take note of. His ability to disappear into Lancaster Dodd is remarkable and even with such weighted subject matter, he keeps the performance honest and unbiased.

When going through some notes before seeing this film I came across a script from college with a note from a writing prof saying characters are story. This is a perfect example of that note. The film is about a man searching for acceptance. We learn that Quell’s father died of alcoholism and his mother is in an insane asylum. The girl of his dreams lives back in his hometown and he pines forever on a love that will never be. Pile on top of this his inability to deal with the traumas he’s encountered during his time in the South Pacific. Phoenix’s ability to balance all of these pieces make him a contender for award’s season.

I am constantly asking myself ‘How do cult leaders draw in their followers?’ I don’t think The Master attempts to answer this question but the character exploration from both sides pulls the audience in and keeps them. People are generally looking for validation or confirmation in what they do and the characters that have been crafted here explore that beautifully. As Quell’s father figure, Dodd gives Quell what is missing in his life – purpose, opportunity and affection. As a statement on organized religion and indoctrination, ‘The Master’ sends a pretty powerful message about the ways that repair can also rupture an already broken soul.

‘The Master’ is a definite 5 out of 5.

Tag: Toronto International Film Festival

TIFF 2012 Review: Paul Thomas Anderson’s ‘The Master’