Sense 8 -Wachowskis and J. Michael Straczynski on Netflix

[Overmind One]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fountain

It is a pretty bizarre film. I would say it and Cloud Atlas are in a similar league of incoherence.

Um, I did not find the Cloud Atlas "incoherent" at all. But I had to watch it several times to achieve the clarity about it I have today. Same with The Matrix and its other sequels. This movie looks like a very overdone love story. The trailer I just watched in this thread was not at all encouraging.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Um, I did not find the Cloud Atlas "incoherent" at all. But I had to watch it several times to achieve the clarity about it I have today.

I did not find Nirvana incoherent, either, but I had to listen to Smells Like Teen Spirit a few times to achieve clear comprehension of the 3rd and 4th verses where he sounded like he was singing with marbles in his mouth.

 

[YJ02]

Um, I did not find the Cloud Atlas "incoherent" at all. But I had to watch it several times to achieve the clarity about it I have today. Same with The Matrix and its other sequels. This movie looks like a very overdone love story. The trailer I just watched in this thread was not at all encouraging.

Just watched it on HBO on Saturday.

Not "incoherent (though I could see how some of todays viewers of films may have had trouble keeping up)" but more like what was it? 4 movies in one all loosely connected by the subtle similarity of characters with the obvious re-use of the same actors (a Korean playing a blond WASPy woman of the 19th century? c'mon!).

So the Wachowskis' get to say; "we can make an action movie on a ship, a love drama in the mid 20th century, a comedy and a 70's or 80's crime drama with just a tad of "blaxpoitation"--oh yeah and sci fi".

I have read that some people are "madly in love with the movie". I can not see why. It was ok as a film, I really didn't see a reason to be "in love" with it. Perhaps they were fans of the book first?

 

[Overmind One]

Just watched it on HBO on Saturday.

Not "incoherent (though I could see how some of todays viewers of films may have had trouble keeping up)" but more like what was it? 4 movies in one all loosely connected by the subtle similarity of characters with the obvious re-use of the same actors (a Korean playing a blond WASPy woman of the 19th century? c'mon!).

So the Wachowskis' get to say; "we can make an action movie on a ship, a love drama in the mid 20th century, a comedy and a 70's or 80's crime drama with just a tad of "blaxpoitation"--oh yeah and sci fi".

I have read that some people are "madly in love with the movie". I can not see why. It was ok as a film, I really didn't see a reason to be "in love" with it. Perhaps they were fans of the book first?

The key to loving this movie is multiple viewings. At least three. Note the parts and plots of each time segment and it will start not only making sense, but crystallizing into a single message. The main theme of the movie is CONNECTIONS. These are not separate stories really, they are parts of one story spanning centuries. Its like The Matrix and its sequels. You might think you "get it" the first time, and might even feel disappointment with it. But after seeing each one more than three times, it makes lots more sense than is apparent. I love the way the Watchowskis write stories.

 

[YJ02]

The key to loving this movie is multiple viewings. At least three. Note the parts and plots of each time segment and it will start not only making sense, but crystallizing into a single message. The main theme of the movie is CONNECTIONS. These are not separate stories really, they are parts of one story spanning centuries. Its like The Matrix and its sequels. You might think you "get it" the first time, and might even feel disappointment with it. But after seeing each one more than three times, it makes lots more sense than is apparent. I love the way the Watchowskis write stories.

Nope. I got it all the first time:

transmigration of souls/re-incarnation-and their happenstance re-acquaintancing-and, by the way, the 'souls' are not necessarily reprised by the same actor in the diff time periods. Ex-the "doctor" onboard ship can be agruesd to be the "evil" hitman Smoke played by Weaving in the 70's/80's time set. Also, Hank's playing the bad assed writer who threw the critic of the roof could also be seen as a re-incarnation of the Weaving character. The scientist in the nuclear power plant could have been re-incarnated to the character played by Berry in the far future.

juxtapositioning of the re-incarnated souls between their former lives and their future ones. EX-Halle Berry's role as a Maori slave woman, to a 'crusader' journalist then finally to being a member of a group of superior humans, who have been using the left over tech and their visits to the inferior humans in the "valley" who seem to be mostly white. (ethnic role reversal)

also on slavery-that its concept of man using man goes on no matter how "clean" and neat it may appear. That would be again, the Maori slaves and the treatment and attitude of the ship's crew towards the free Maori. Through the 19th century America question of slavery vs abolition, to the 70's/80's emerging of the black american (portrayed by the tenacity of Berry's journalist) juxtaposed by the "attack dog" perception we get from the character played by Keith David (the "blaxpoitation" theme). All the way to Sonmi being the figurehead for "fabricant" freedom and rights and then the oppressed (are the Sonmi's and her "sisters" the final iteration of humanities' slaves?) becoming a god head.

There are other subtle things that I am not sure if they were intended or not. To me the 19th century story shows man still in its formative phase, just beginning to question things like slavery, killing for greed,etc (although these epiphanies happened at different times in diff places around the world through time) and more importantly to the story line-it is the character's realization of these concepts; anti slave, anti greed, compassion for all man (was it Ewing the sick man aboard ship? Helping another man a Maori, a slave, an unknown to him) free willed love vs setpiece marriage.

The "middle parts" of pre WW2 love story, the nuclear power investigation, the "enslavement" of a brother by a brother into an old people's home-all show mankinds and the character's stages where the struggle to enact these new found beliefs occur.

Then Sonmi and perhaps the final revolution against "the man" and then to the post apocalyptic connection where the "most righteous souls" have been rewarded with not only finding one another but with escape from a corrupted Earth.

I suspect-as is normal, that to get the story in total and as intended, one should read the book.

Yup, got it the first time.

 

[Overmind One]

Nope. I got it all the first time:

transmigration of souls/re-incarnation-and their happenstance re-acquaintancing

juxtapositioning of the re-incarnated souls between their former lives and their future ones. EX-Halle Berry's role as a Maori slave woman, then an ambivalent wife of a 19th century white american man who believes in slavery, to a 'crusader' journalist then finally to being a member of a group of superior humans, who have been using the left over tech and their visits to the inferior humans in the "valley" who seem to be mostly white. (ethnic role reversal)

also on slavery-that its concept of man using man goes on no matter how "clean" and neat it may appear. That would be again, the Maori slaves and the treatment and attitude of the ship's crew towards the free Maori. Through the 19th century America question of slavery vs abolition, to the 70's/80's emerging of the black american (portrayed by the tenacity of Berry's journalist) juxtaposed by the "attack dog" perception we get from the character played by Keith David (the "blaxpoitation" theme). All the way to Sonmi being the figurehead for "fabricant" freedom and rights and then the oppressed (are the Sonmi's and her "sisters" the final iteration of humanities' slaves?) becoming a god head.

There are other subtle things that I am not sure if they were intended or not. To me the 19th century story shows man still in its formative phase, just beginning to question things like slavery, killing for greed,etc (although these epiphanies happened at different times in diff places around the world through time) and more importantly to the story line-it is the character's realization of these concepts; anti slave, anti greed, compassion for all man (was it Ewing the sick man aboard ship? Helping another man a Maori, a slave, an unknown to him) free willed love vs setpiece marriage.

The "middle parts" of pre WW2 love story, the nuclear power investigation, the "enslavement" of a brother by a brother into an old people's home-all show mankinds and the character's stages where the struggle to enact these new found beliefs occur.

Then Sonmi and perhaps the final revolution against "the man" and then to the post apocalyptic connection where the "most righteous souls" have been rewarded with not only finding one another but with escape from a corrupted Earth.

Yup, got it the first time.

You will have no questions if you watch a few more times. NO WAY can you catch all the connections on a single viewing.

 

[Joelist]

Hopefully Cloud Atlas will improve with multiple watchings - I admit I was under the weather when I saw it.

The Matrix films, however, not. I like the first film, but the next two are pretentious drivel and the story falls apart under the weight of trying to shoehorn too many different elements in there. I've seen people compose huge essays trying to make the Matrix trilogy plot elements fit together in a logical manner, and they just cannot really do it (I admit I had hopes at the end of Matrix Reloaded that we were going to find out that the "real world" was simply another matrix for people who figured out the first matrix - now THAT would have been cool).

 

[YJ02]

You will have no questions if you watch a few more times. NO WAY can you catch all the connections on a single viewing.

Nope, no questions here thanks

I have seen other movies (like THE FOUNTAIN) that have similar ideas. Though no 2 movies are precisely the same, if you have seen one with a premise and then another with a similar premise, then you are "keyed in", gets kind of predictable.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Nope, no questions here thanks

I have seen other movies (like THE FOUNTAIN) that have similar ideas. Though no 2 movies are precisely the same, if you have seen one with a premise and then another with a similar premise, then you are "keyed in", gets kind of predictable.

 

[YJ02]

Jeez Bluce, easy man-step back from the edge, things aren't that bad

But yeah-FOUNTAIN,CLOUD ATLAS ("new age mysticism" disguised as scifi), ON A CLEAR DAY YOU CAN SEE FOREVER, etc,etc

All of these re-incarnation, wheel of life movies are enough for the proverbial "gun to the head" aren't they?

 

[Overmind One]

Jeez Bluce, easy man-step back from the edge, things aren't that bad

But yeah-FOUNTAIN,CLOUD ATLAS ("new age mysticism" disguised as scifi), ON A CLEAR DAY YOU CAN SEE FOREVER, etc,etc

All of these re-incarnation, wheel of life movies are enough for the proverbial "gun to the head" aren't they?

LOL...this post reminds me of my postman who says that thinking "too hard" makes his head hurt. . I suppose it takes a certain mindset and level of intellect to actually WANT to think as hard and completely as possible about things as a modus operandi. I never take anything on face value without verifying it. I learned that at an early age, starting with the demise of Santa Claus. . I consider it a form of PTSD!

 

[YJ02]

Some of these review statements are kind of harsh but pretty much correct. And they are right, the re-using of cast members and the SYFY "FACEOFF" type 'look what I can do' make up jobs is just for its on sake-like a movie that has violence just for the sake of seeing the blood.

"And some of the gimmicky, pointless miscasting of minor roles — the attempt to pass off Asian actress Doona Bae as a 19th-century Englishwoman, for example, or Halle Berry as a man or a white-skinned Jew — are laughably unconvincing."

FROM--Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-white-Hugh-Grant-cannibal.html#ixzz2jG7HyTGD

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2012/10/29/review-cloud-atlas-is-a-noble-disaster/

this -to me-pretty much sums up the ineffectual manner that the film has in tying up the threads

"In any event, it doesn’t help the audience understand what is happening to these people — especially when Hanks’s post-apocalyptic character, Zachry, has inexplicable conversations with an imaginary, top-hatted, devil-like creature called “Old Georgie”, who looks like a hybrid of the Warner Brothers Frog and Abraham Lincoln. Is Zachry schizophrenic? Why would a burlap-suited guy in a primitive society, thousands of years from now on what used to be Hawaii, visualize the embodiment of pure evil in Victorian fashion? Is it genetic memory? Mutant ESP? Is there just something eternally sinister about top hats? Who knows? The movie doesn’t offer any answers"

I just take it has that Old Georgie is just some type of final incarnation of the evil soul-played by Weaving-we see throughout, the gold hungry murderous doctor, the corporate hit man, the abusive boss of Papa Song's.

I also found the entire depiction of the Sonmi type fabricants to be more of the tired cliche belief held by westerners of asian women; that they are coy and complacent and willing to do anything to please. But the Wachowski's get away with this passive racism because they are part of the "hollywood elite". What would have been the reaction if "papa songs(not even a Korean word by the way "Papa" it is just perceived as a Korean word since it has gone unchallenged for so long)" was staffed by african, burly haired, high cheeked boned women dressed in animal skins and serving watermelon and field chicken?

 

[YJ02]

LOL...this post reminds me of my postman who says that thinking "too hard" makes his head hurt. . I suppose it takes a certain mindset and level of intellect to actually WANT to think as hard and completely as possible about things as a modus operandi. I never take anything on face value without verifying it. I learned that at an early age, starting with the demise of Santa Claus. . I consider it a form of PTSD!

Whatever man..CA is just a movie. Pleasing to the eye with its filming and SFX but in the end, just a movie and nothing "grand" about it.

 

[Overmind One]

Some of these review statements are kind of harsh but pretty much correct. And they are right, the re-using of cast members and the SYFY "FACEOFF" type 'look what I can do' make up jobs is just for its on sake-like a movie that has violence just for the sake of seeing the blood.

"And some of the gimmicky, pointless miscasting of minor roles — the attempt to pass off Asian actress Doona Bae as a 19th-century Englishwoman, for example, or Halle Berry as a man or a white-skinned Jew — are laughably unconvincing."

FROM--Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-white-Hugh-Grant-cannibal.html#ixzz2jG7HyTGD

http://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2012/10/29/review-cloud-atlas-is-a-noble-disaster/

this -to me-pretty much sums up the ineffectual manner that the film has in tying up the threads

"In any event, it doesn’t help the audience understand what is happening to these people — especially when Hanks’s post-apocalyptic character, Zachry, has inexplicable conversations with an imaginary, top-hatted, devil-like creature called “Old Georgie”, who looks like a hybrid of the Warner Brothers Frog and Abraham Lincoln. Is Zachry schizophrenic? Why would a burlap-suited guy in a primitive society, thousands of years from now on what used to be Hawaii, visualize the embodiment of pure evil in Victorian fashion? Is it genetic memory? Mutant ESP? Is there just something eternally sinister about top hats? Who knows? The movie doesn’t offer any answers"

I just take it has that Old Georgie is just some type of final incarnation of the evil soul-played by Weaving-we see throughout, the gold hungry murderous doctor, the corporate hit man, the abusive boss of Papa Song's.

I also found the entire depiction of the Sonmi type fabricants to be more of the tired cliche belief held by westerners of asian women; that they are coy and complacent and willing to do anything to please. But the Wachowski's get away with this passive racism because they are part of the "hollywood elite". What would have been the reaction if "papa songs(not even a Korean word by the way "Papa" it is just perceived as a Korean word since it has gone unchallenged for so long)" was staffed by african, burly haired, high cheeked boned women dressed in animal skins and serving watermelon and field chicken?

I appreciate your comments on this movie, but look at all of the questions you have about its meanings. You are concentrating on the details and taking what you see literally instead of allegorically. Did you even wonder why the producers had Halle Berry and Tom Hanks and the others play completely different roles? Halle Berry played the wife of Vivian the composer, she played a Puerto Rican reporter, she played the surgeon who removed Sonmi's collar, and finally the Precient. Hugo Weaving played the nurse, Georgie, the Political Minister, etc etc etc. Why not different actors? The movie shows you why.

The Big Isle was not Hawaii. You missed the issue about the earth's oceans rising. The Sonmi fabricants could have been any systematically oppressed people and they simply chose those Asian women. They were only an allegory. They could have chosen blacks but that one is overused now. The whole story is much much deeper than you are looking. But like you said, the critics panned it. I personally am not at all surprised. It is way over their heads, just like the Matrix was. Conversely, something which was supposed to be epic like Prometheus was devoid of any depth.

I am not attacking you for your views here, I am just saying that you have to entertain the idea that perhaps you don't really understand the movie. You dont have to either. I totally did not get Mulholland Drive. But this movie is not a drama, it is not an action flick, it is not science fiction, it is allegory. I dont at all expect a Forbes critic to get this movie.

 

[Bluce Ree]

LOL...this post reminds me of my postman who says that thinking "too hard" makes his head hurt. . I suppose it takes a certain mindset and level of intellect to actually WANT to think as hard and completely as possible about things as a modus operandi. I never take anything on face value without verifying it. I learned that at an early age, starting with the demise of Santa Claus. . I consider it a form of PTSD!

Here's a challenge for you. Put a gun within reach next to you. Cue up "The Fountain" on Netflix. While watching the movie, count how many times you look over at your gun, provided you don't actually pick it up and blow your head off. If you survive, report back to this thread with your honest count.

 

[shavedape]

I have said that Halle Berry is a terrible actress. The discussion is over.

THE HAMMER HAS SPOKEN!!!

 

[Bluce Ree]

I have said that Halle Berry is a terrible actress. The discussion is over.

THE HAMMER HAS SPOKEN!!!

Ok, everyone. Thanks for participating. Looks like we're locking this thread up now.

 

[shavedape]

Ok, everyone. Thanks for participating. Looks like we're locking this thread up now.

Get back in your seat! You and Yongin are gonna watch this goddamn movie a few more times so we can settle this once and for all!

(Pay special attention to the part where Halle Berry, dressed as a man, pees standing up. If you look closely you'll notice that shot wasn't done via CGI. )

 

[Overmind One]

Get back in your seat! You and Yongin are gonna watch this goddamn movie a few more times so we can settle this once and for all!

(Pay special attention to the part where Halle Berry, dressed as a man, pees standing up. If you look closely you'll notice that shot wasn't done via CGI. )

I agree, she isnt that great an actress....but she sho is nice to look at! . In all seriousness, I still think she did okay in this movie with the roles she had. Im gonna read the book.

 

[Bluce Ree]

I agree, she isnt that great an actress....but she sho is nice to look at! . In all seriousness, I still think she did okay in this movie with the roles she had. Im gonna read the book.

Yes, avoid the question. I see you skipped right over and completely avoided my "The Fountain" challenge. Are you a scaredy cat?