It's one of my favourite books, Cloud Atlas. Not as good as Ghostwritten, David Mitchell's other genre- and era-spanning novel, but still pretty special. And it's been made into a film, unbelievably. I say unbelievably because of the sheer enormity of the task of cramming six different storylines into one film, while maintaining coherency, pace, drama, and thematic connections. There's enough content in each individual storyline to make into a standalone film. It's a miracle that the Wachowskis and Tykwer pulled it off, frankly, and Cloud Atlas must go down as one of the most dizzyingly ambitious films ever made.
There are two big decisions that shape Cloud Atlas. The first is the repeated use of actors across the six plotlines: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Doona Bae, James D'Arcy, Ben Whishaw, Hugh Grant, Hugo Weaving and so on all crop up time and time again. One of the effects of this is that it's very silly. Part of the fun is trying to spot when each actor re-appears in a new role. It takes you out of the action for a moment - a cardinal sin in the world of Hollywood narrative form, which depends on invisibility - but only for a moment. Tom Hanks' Irish greaser-cum-Miami-druglord-author is utterly ridiculous, Doona Bae plays a white American at one point and all of them (except Bae, obviously) undergo the prosthetic transition to Asianness, which is very weird, too. There have been calls of 'racism!' but that's a load of nonsense. Odd as it may be, as an approach to casting, I found it to be genius. The Wachowski's rationale behind reusing actors is to help tie themes of a united and continuous humanity together; one suspects it was also a budgetary concern. That's not why I like it so much. I like it precisely for its ridiculousness, I like that the Wachowskis and Tykwer took this enormous gamble knowing that many people would find it bizarre and off-putting, despite the $100m that they ploughed into it. A quick browse through this Wikipedia page indicates that while actors playing multiple roles is not uncommon, it is usually done for comedic effect, as in Kind Hearts and Coronets, or characters that are related and share a physical resemblance. In having most of its cast appear time and time again, even if it sometimes looks a bit shoehorned in, Cloud Atlas surely stands alone. It is this throwing caution to the wind and going all-out that I find admirable. Which brings me to the second big decision.
Instead of copying Mitchell's Russian doll plotline (it goes: Ewing (part 1), Frobisher (1), Rey (1), Cavendish (1), Sonmi (1), Zachry (1 and 2), Sonmi (2), Cavendish (2), Rey (2), Frobisher (2), Ewing (2)) they opted to cut between all six at regular intervals until they all collide in one flippin' stupendous climax. Thus, it becomes this spinning-plates balancing act, maintaining focus on one storyline while keeping the other five spinning. For three hours. It is completely barmy, and stunningly ambitious, and they nail it. Perhaps not the cleanest hammer-stroke; maybe the first one didn't catch it fully, but they got it in. And because they had to cram everything in, as with the actor situation, they just go for broke, making use of everything at their disposal to tie the segments together: match-cuts, cliffhangers, sound-bridges, thematic links, cliffhangers, plot parallels, the magnificent score, cliffhangers...It's like the end of Chicken Run (bear with me...) where the chickens' barmy flying machine somehow manages to fly despite nearly falling apart at the seams at every opportunity. It has just enough glue and good-will to succeed. That's what Cloud Atlas is like: a barmy contraption that should by all rights fail, but the power of the movies gives is just enough gung-ho spirit to get it over the barbed-wire fence. Andy and Lana Wachowski and Tom Tykwer's bravery is commendable.
No comments:
Post a Comment