Cloud Atlas

[Dax]

To put simply: Fantastic. Thoroughly recommend - But make sure you have plenty of time spare and are able to devote focus to it for the whole thing, as if you miss something it will likely be something important that will add to your understanding of the film.

Biggest offer of a tip I can give to you if watching it: Stick with it. It seems very 'in at the deep end' from the get-go, but it does become clearer as you keep watching, and it is a very rewarding watch if you manage to grasp what the film is actually about early in.

Big mentions to Hugo Weaving's and Tom Hanks' major role parts, because they genuinely bring a level of belief to the film that I doubt would be possible had anybody else done it.

 

[tobapopalos]

Or you could read the book.

 

[Dax]

Or you could read the book.

Or I can view a conveniently condensed version of the book that should only require 3 hours of my time, instead? Fancy that, utilising film for it's purpose - Who'd have thought of it?

In my book review this week (just for you, Toby), I present this:

 

[Alcibiades]

But the books are always better than the films and reading is better for you anyways.

 

[tobapopalos]

Or you could read the book.

Or I can view a conveniently condensed version of the book that should only require 3 hours of my time, instead? Fancy that, utilising film for it's purpose - Who'd have thought of it?

In my book review this week (just for you, Toby), I present this:

I find it painfully ironic that you posting that what I'm saying is predictable is in itself more predictable than what I'm saying. It just seems to be your go-to response when I say something so you don't actually have to address the content of my posts. Laziness and ineptitude incarnate.

And it makes me wince that for someone who condemns the "intellect" of the forum users you think of a film as being a "conveniently condensed" version of a book. Because everyone knows the merit of books can be measured purely on how much time you have to waste reading the useless things. And what do you have to show for it when you've finished? Nothing. I don't even know why they bother using perfectly good paper creating the pieces of ****. **** literature, man.

 

[Chris'o]

OMG Toby. Are you having the predictable talk again?? Isnt that a bit... predictable?

 

[Dax]

OMG Toby. Are you having the predictable talk again?? Isnt that a bit... predictable?

Only as predictable as I made it by intentionally luring it out of him (duh).

The bit where you make a sweeping attempt at calling me an idiot? Yeah, that's hilarious. You're the best trollbait in the entire world.

What did you honestly expect when you enter my thread (that I made to spread the word about something I genuinely enjoyed) to make a smarmy comment? Some welcome praise? A pat on the back? You're genuinely one of those people I'd sometimes love to push my thumbs into their eyesockets until I feel brain matter. Fact.

But the books are always better than the films and reading is better for you anyways.

It's something I watched, and recommended. I have a crate full of books, apparently me recommending a film means I don't read? Okay, then. I have too many other things on that list to spend time reading yet another book (I am currently reading http://www.amazon.co.uk/Antifragile-Things-that-Gain-Disorder/dp/0141038225, for the record).

 

[tobapopalos]

Oh, DaX...you and your supposed trolling.

Every time someone says something contrary, you say you're trolling them. You have been doing it for years. Again, it is lazy to use the same responses every time someone disagrees with you. I'm "trollbait" simply because I contradict you.

You have three standard responses in any argument: Stupid picture which isn't remotely relevant in any way, saying people are morons because they have fallen for your cunning troll, and recently you've added "toby is predictable" to your repertoire. Despite what you might think I didn't enter "your" thread (am I supposed to ask permission first, your majesty?) to try and make you look like an idiot. But when you reply is full of idiocy, I can't help but address it.

I only posted because I thought it was odd that here is a film which is an adaptation of a very famous and well-liked book, and you don't even mention the book in your review of the film. Usually when a book is adapted to the big screen, I go and read the book first. Film adaptations are usually far less enjoyable than the books themselves, and it gives you a much more meaningful experience. Nothing compares with reading a book for the first time. If you watch the film before reading the book, you ruin that.

 

[Dax]

<Attempts to justify responding to obvious troll post with a diktat on a forum personality>

And lo, the continued and pointless unintelligible mutterings of a fool.

You know that you dropped into an extremely obvious troll (you may state your understanding of it as whatever you please, the fact is I was just hoping you'd realise it for what it is and shut up). Somebody even clearly observed this for your convenience too, for the record.

My responses are limited to the subject matter presented to me: Fundamentally, this forum lacks enough of anything to justify anything but the above "typical responses" from myself.

You clearly sit upon a self-built throne of "I r cleva", yet you don't seem to utilise what most would denominate to be intelligence. I watch you amble around every post I make, dropping yourself into attempting to argue and outwit somebody that genuinely laughs every time you respond to anything that they post - Because that is what I aim to achieve. Just because you cannot possibly contemplate the entertainment value of this for yourself, it does not mean it does not exist: And it certainly does exist for me. And this entertainment value is infinite for those such as yourself that feel it necessary to try and demean somebody that finds your self-purpose of internet existence hilarious.

I took Philosophy to meet wonderfully vibrant individuals just as yourself, to incite and mock them for my personal amusement. Why? Because you take yourself so seriously, and in the process seem to believe that everybody else must do so, as well.

THIS BIT IS THE BIG OLD LESSON:

So please, for creation's sake take the lesson on board: Nothing you will ever say will stop me posting these supposed "predictable responses", because I enjoy seeing you (and a select few others) respond every single time. You cannot undermine, effectively mock, or linguistically intimidate me (as I watch you also try to do to others). It's the only thing that keeps me visiting these forums, for additional information.

THIS BIT IS THE FILM-RELEVANT BIT:

Now, for your little bit about why I post about a film before a book - I happened to watch it at a friend's, as they had all decided to watch it on rental before I had appeared (obviously from a fruitful day of trolling this goldmine of a forum), and decided that some people may take a look at it (it was an independent film, so it got a lot less media coverage than films usually do) and will be able to take away the enjoyment of it that I did. I have no desire to currently read the book, as I believe that was enough for me to chew on for the time being. Is this a crime, one might ask? Only one of being strapped for more reading time (as I clearly dictated for you above, and even linked my reading material to yourself so that you might expand your mind a tad).

AND THIS BIT IS FOR THOSE AMONGST THE FORUMS THAT SIMPLY CANNOT COMPREHEND MY BEHAVIOUR:

And there: I believe if this doesn't define to you in the simplest manner the extent of your continuing pattern of error, then you are beyond help.

 

[Dimitar]

Could you not have this discussion every day, in every thread

 

[Dax]

Could you not have this discussion every day, in every thread

If people could just contemplate what I'm actually telling them, this mess would have been far less painful than it has ended up being for the remaining majority.

EDIT: But just to help the few out to help the many, I've highlighted the themes of my response. You can read whichever bit is relevant to you, thus making reading the normal convoluted mess a bit easier on the ol' boggle.

 

[tobapopalos]

Oh no, I've been trolled!

I don't take myself seriously at all. However, I do take the time to make proper responses based on what the other person has said rather than just making up some meaningless tripe about trolling or whatever your latest reaction of choice is.

The idea that your responses are justified by what you are responding to is clearly nonsense. No other person on these forums feels it is necessary to spam like you do. You imply that you are superior by saying that the forums lack intellect and essentially that you don't want to waste your time making proper posts in response to clearly inferior beings, but here you are claiming that I'm the one with the "I r cleva" attitude. Hypocrisy.

As to your talk about the "predictable" nonsense, that is all I see it as. It is meaningless. I'm sure you find it highly enjoyable, but that doesn't make it relevant. And whether or not you find something enjoyable has absolutely no bearing on what I have to say. Believe it or not, your personal happiness does not enter my thought process at any point during my day. It is irrelevant to me in every sense.

I also took philosophy. Congratulations to you for picking a subject. I'm sure it makes you very proud. However, this is also irrelevant. Moving on...

Go ahead and continue posting your "predictable" posts. I can't say it is something I'd personally find that amusing since it is basically spam, but to each their own I suppose.

You seem to be labouring under the delusion that I care about your reasons for posting these things. I do not. Whether or not it brings you pleasure, and whether you say I'm being trolled is, again, irrelevant to me. If you post something which I think is wrong then I'll say "this is wrong". For you to then reply to say that I'm predictable or being trolled doesn't matter to me. Again...it is irrelevant.

And finally we get to a bit which is actually on-topic. Considering this is your thread I thought you might not want to spam it quite so much, but never mind. I have no objections to you watching the film. You are free to watch whatever you want. I was just making other users aware (if they were unaware) that there is also a book called Cloud Atlas which they might want to read before watching the film. That way they can choose.

 

[Dax]

Stuff that implies he cares not for anything in this world but TRUTH AND REALITY

This entire post could have effectively been shortened down to this:

So, in short:

Cloud Atlas? It's a good film. It's lengthy, and in-depth - So pay attention to it and give it the time it deserves. It's also an independent film (the highest funded independent film in history, I'll hasten to add), where Tom Hanks in particular served as a catalyst for it being continued despite being put on hold four times due to literally no funding being available and backers claiming "it is going nowhere".

And to satisfy the supposedly nonchalant individual in the corner: There's a book. It was written by David Mitchell, and received significant praise and adulation from the fiction media. It's also apparently highly recommended.

 

[Garrett2]

i miss dungeon master. they never produced the last episode, but got cast to record a reading of the script. i finally have my end to that series.

 

[Dax]

i miss dungeon master. they never produced the last episode, but got cast to record a reading of the script. i finally have my end to that series.

I didn't expect anybody to get where that picture came from. Kudos!

 

[Alcibiades]

But the books are always better than the films and reading is better for you anyways.

It's something I watched, and recommended. I have a crate full of books, apparently me recommending a film means I don't read? Okay, then. I have too many other things on that list to spend time reading yet another book (I am currently reading http://www.amazon.co.uk/Antifragile-Things-that-Gain-Disorder/dp/0141038225, for the record).

I drew no conclusions as to what you do in your spare time. All I said was that books are always better than the films and reading is better for you anyways. I'm not wrong! I'm glad you watched, enjoyed, and recommended the film. Take your knee jerk hostile attitude away, would you?

 

[Dax]

But the books are always better than the films and reading is better for you anyways.

It's something I watched, and recommended. I have a crate full of books, apparently me recommending a film means I don't read? Okay, then. I have too many other things on that list to spend time reading yet another book (I am currently reading http://www.amazon.co.uk/Antifragile-Things-that-Gain-Disorder/dp/0141038225, for the record).

I drew no conclusions as to what you do in your spare time. All I said was that books are always better than the films and reading is better for you anyways. I'm not wrong! I'm glad you watched, enjoyed, and recommended the film. Take your knee jerk hostile attitude away, would you?

Please understand Alci, it wasn't actually hostility in my response to you. I did notice it was only an observation - I was just noting as much as I'd like to offer time to the book (which after viewing the film I did a brief run of research into to make my own judgements about the relationship between the book and the movie), I am already reading an absolute mind-blower which will likely occupy my time and thoughts for a good couple of months or so!

The book has had a far more positive reaction from critics than the film appeared to, which saddens me in a way - I found it to be a very thoughtful film, which happened to raise my big conversation topic of present appertaining to the theories of genetic memory (the idea that we inherit memories through generations of crafts, emotions, etc) and genetic repetition (the idea that we have extinguished the functioning possibilities of genetic individuality due to the vast number of our species). Still gets a big thumbs up from me.

 

[Coruba]

What is the point of reading the book when you could be lazy and watch the movie with a bucket of popcorn - shame on you I say

 

[atsanjose]

What is the point of reading the book when you could be lazy and watch the movie with a bucket of popcorn - shame on you I say

0/10


anyway
i didnt really like the movie, meh acting and meh storyline. so the book will probably be meh too

meh