Anyone else watched this yet? I liked it overall but thought the Tom Hanks far future thread to be unnecessary. It was the weakest of all. I'm going to try read the book in the hope that that thread is done better. Wish i'd seen it in a cinema. it' pretty epic.

The book is wonderful. Haven't had the desire to see the film yet.

I'm loving the old time style of the first chapter, hopefully it keeps my interest.

I'm told it goes 1,2,3,4,5,6,5,4,3,2,1.

That could be interesting.

the movie jumps around randomly as far as i could tell. the actors playing different parts made little sense as well. Suffered from the usual Wachowskis problems. Should have just stuck with the book.

I did enjoy watching Tom Hanks, but nothing else grabbed me.

I'll be honest, i can't say it's a shit film because something very profound moved me in this film and the following day I had a tragic loss. It has it's issues, but I felt it was filmed very well. Some of the makeup jobs weren't that good. But the second half was better.

I haven't seen the film, but when it comes to Mitchell novels "Ghostwritten" > "Cloud Atlas" any day.

I registered just to post this.

I thought it didn't quite get there. at least for me.
like it was on the edge of being profound and just fell a little short in execution.

I enjoyed it and i'm glad i a saw it, but i can't say it was great

Kinda feel the same way.

Most people I have talk too have pretty much said the same thing. It's very weird. Usually with a film short in execution, everyone say it sucks.

I felt like this was two different movies and one of them was more interesting than the other. When they focused on the "recurring lives" theme, I found myself moved pretty often. The typical Wachowski "fight the man!" theme that ended up dominating really turned me off at times though, and some of the makeup really took me out of it.

this thread may already have more posts than the original thread on the old board.

i thought it was pretty darn good. not without its faults, but there really isn't anything out there like it. i thought it was fascinating to watch.

i just bought the book for the lady and will read it when she's done.

I ended up thinking the make up was bad intentionally, particukarly in the future threads, in order to bring a manga/anime blend to the mix. I could be totally wrong but it's in those scenes that its blatantly obvious, but again, it might not be obvious to everyone so they had to let you know in case some people didn't get it.

and I think it's to point out that it is lives and souls reoccurring and coming around again, which is actually a great move given that if they'd gotten different actors for each of the corresponding characters in the different threads, we probably wouldn't have noticed the thread lines at all.

The characters in the future Korea storyline were supposed to be a new race, not weird looking asians. It was very distracting though. The worst was probably the anus on Halle Berry's forehead in the distant future, lol.

Its definitely about reincarnation, but its confused and inconsistent. The person with the comet birthmark was supposed to be the same person, reincarnated (at least from what I've read), but why have different actors play random roles in each story? It seems like it would make more sense if the same actor played the same role. Its even more confusing that Hugo Weaving plays the same evil character in almost every story (i think? my memory of this movie is foggy), yet the others play totally different characters, or dont show up at all.

I was impressed with how skillfully they managed to film the 6 different stories, though none of them had enough meat to stand on their own. I'm sure they had some rhyme or reason for how they shuffled them together, but its lost on me.

this film cost $128.5 million dollars