Dear Reader: Update, Movie Review Intelligence will discontinue
publishing this website at the end of May (more...)
Search a Movie:
CLOUD ATLASMovie Reviews
Science fiction drama about how the actions and consequences of individual lives impact one another throughout the past, the present and the future. Cast:Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Doona Bae, Susan Sarandon, Hugh GrantDirector:Lana & Andy Wachowski, Tom TykwerRelease Date:October 26, 2012DVD Release:January 29, 2013From:Warner Bros.Rating:RLength:2 hr. 43 min.
Cloud Atlas played to good not great reviews. Reviews were mixed. • Katey Rich wrote for Cinema Blend, "...big, ambitious, gorgeous, glorious... its ambition and its enormous heart are still jangling through my veins..." • And David Edelstein wrote in New York Magazine, "...sci-fi romantic drivel..." More Reviews Below...
Alynda Wheat, People: VERY GOOD(cg) "...from its audacious (if uneven) narrative to its stunning effects... it almost asks too much of viewers, but certainly no more than it's willing to give."(See all of Alynda Wheat's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 226 words, 10/25/12
Richard Corliss, Time: MODERATE "...exceptional in its reach and ordinary in its particulars -- an impressive, messy sprawl, nearly three hours long and, in emotional impact, an inch deep."(See all of Richard Corliss's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,707 words, 09/11/12
Christy Lemire, Associated Press: WEAK(cg) "Maybe if you're 20 years old and high in your dorm room with your friends, the platitudes presented might seem profound.... pseudo-intellectual, self-indulgent..."(See all of Christy Lemire's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 818 words, 10/25/12
Mara Reinstein, Us Weekly: MODERATE(cg) "...an exasperating, head-scratching puzzle.... Just when a character makes a breakthrough, co-directors Andy and Lana Wachowski change lanes."(See all of Mara Reinstein's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 124 words, 10/25/12
Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: EXCELLENT(cg) "...a cornily enthralling sci-fi kaleidoscope... the design of what you're seeing is hypnotic, and it wires you into the film... it's like a gonzo miniseries..."(See all of Owen Gleiberman's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 796 words, 10/26/12
Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "It's elating to watch filmmakers you admire take on the impossible. David Mitchell's 2004 novel is an uphill battle incarnate. And nobody makes it to the top."(See all of Peter Travers's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 217 words, 10/26/12
Claudia Puig, USA Today: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "The cumulative effect is one of spectacle over substance. But what a spectacle. The cinematography is gorgeous, the editing artful and the production design impeccable."(See all of Claudia Puig's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 645 words, 10/26/12
Roger Ebert, RogerEbert.com: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...what a film this is! And what a demonstration of the magical, dreamlike qualities of the cinema. And what an opportunity for the actors. And what a leap by the directors..."(See all of Roger Ebert's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 825 words, 10/26/12
James Rocchi, MSN Movies: EXCELLENT(cg) "It's got an all-star cast and a tremendous amount of action... so full of passion and heart and empathy that it feels completely unlike any other modern film in its range..."(See all of James Rocchi's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 873 words, 09/09/12
get our iPhone app... or get our mobile web app...
movie review intelligence
NEW YORK/LOS ANGELES/CHICAGO/TORONTO (14 Reviews)
A.O. Scott, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...an unruly grab bag of styles, effects and emotions held together, just barely, by a combination of outlandish daring and humble sincerity."(See all of A.O. Scott's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,320 words, 10/26/12
Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News: WEAK(cg) "...a massive, ill-fated but well-intentioned mess... for all its strengths, the film is cursed by an ADD-style structure and a flashy but inevitably ineffective casting stunt."(See all of Joe Neumaier's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 506 words, 10/26/12
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: WEAK "...muddled, frustrating... what sinks it is not the largeness of its ambitions but the lack of skill it displays in terms of writing, directing and acting."(See all of Kenneth Turan's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 953 words, 10/26/12
Kyle Smith, New York Post: POOR(cg) "...the alleged big ideas are sophomoric clichés.... has the intellectual heft of daytime television... I'll grant that the film has many layers. All of them are terrible."(See all of Kyle Smith's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 662 words, 10/26/12
Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "There's not much interest in stylistic consistency... the movie doesn't really work, but it's fascinating in the ways it doesn't."(See all of Michael Phillips's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 897 words, 10/26/12
Rafer Guzman, New York Newsday: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...visually sumptuous, audaciously acted but only vaguely meaningful.... a movie about everything, but that's the same as a movie about nothing."(See all of Rafer Guzman's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 307 words, 10/26/12
David Edelstein, New York Magazine: POOR "...the most jaw-droppingly woo-woo piece of sci-fi romantic drivel since 'The Fountain'... multiple B-movies bicycle-pumped into something supposedly momentous."(See all of David Edelstein's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,154 words, 10/22/12
Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...what a film this is! And what a demonstration of the magical, dreamlike qualities of the cinema. And what an opportunity for the actors. And what a leap by the directors..."(See all of Roger Ebert's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 825 words, 10/26/12
Nick Pinkerton, Village Voice: FAIR "Each segment feels more like an extended trailer for itself than a sound narrative... There is a great deal of humbug about art and love, but it is decidedly unlovable..."(See all of Nick Pinkerton's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 289 words, 10/24/12
Peter Howell, Toronto Star: VERY GOOD(cg) "It's a trip, all right.... creates awe about worlds seen and unseen, frequently bypassing the brain on the way to the heart and soul."(See all of Peter Howell's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 920 words, 10/26/12
Liam Lacey, Toronto Globe & Mail: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...tremendously ambitious.... at three hours, the film feels truncated, which raises the question of whether the entire adaptation exercise might have chosen the wrong form."(See all of Liam Lacey's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 730 words, 10/26/12
Karina Longworth, LA Weekly: POOR "...a truly stunning misuse of talent and resources, and for others, it's the film of the Toronto Film Festival, if not the year.... inconsistent, tone-deaf..."(See all of Karina Longworth's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 576 words, 09/13/12
Josep Parera, La Opinion: VERY GOOD(cg) "No es una película fácil operfecta. Pero nada de eso debería mantener al espectador temeroso de darle una oportunidad. Se la merece."(See all of Josep Parera's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 393 words, 10/26/12
Glenn Sumi, Toronto Now: WEAK(cg) "...gets lost in the ether.... Some sections work better than others, and the thing does come together near the end, but what a slog to get there."(See all of Glenn Sumi's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 185 words, 10/25/12
KEY CITIES (13 Reviews)
Ann Hornaday, Washington Post: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...suffers from sanctimony that is probably inevitable when evoking the Eternal Now... [but] as a hymn to mutability it reaches for the high notes and hits them often enough."(See all of Ann Hornaday's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 639 words, 10/26/12
Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: MODERATE(cg) "...epically ridiculous... Zen for dummies. I can't say I didn't enjoy it on some level, but it's not the level of universal wisdom the Wachowskis and Tykwer would have us be on."(See all of Steven Rea's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 565 words, 10/26/12
Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star-Tribune: WEAK(cg) "Pronouncements like, 'Our lives are not our own; we are bound to each other past and present' may inspire on the page but they clunk in the theater."(See all of Colin Covert's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 506 words, 10/26/12
Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: MODERATE(cg) "...ambitious in nature, epic in scope and, ultimately, a big, overstuffed mess.... the wildly uneven quality of these stories ultimately proves to be the movie's undoing."(See all of Bill Goodykoontz's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 681 words, 10/26/12
Ty Burr, Boston Globe: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...feels like the most feverishly expensive late-night college bull session ever. There are glories here, but they fade in the light of day."(See all of Ty Burr's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,077 words, 10/26/12
Stephen Whitty, New Jersey Star-Ledger: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "Parts are brilliant. Parts are worthless.... if the talented Wachowskis are ever going to achieve true artistic nirvana, they're going to have to be more disciplined..."(See all of Stephen Whitty's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 829 words, 10/26/12
Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: VERY GOOD(cg) "...unlike any other movie... despite some weaknesses, a sense gradually emerges - a strong feeling mixed with an idea - about the dance of good and evil over time."(See all of Mick LaSalle's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 732 words, 10/26/12
Moira Macdonald, Seattle Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "It's hard to know quite what to make of the film... There are moments when it works wonderfully, but too many where it feels overlong and ponderous."(See all of Moira Macdonald's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 511 words, 10/26/12
Marc Mohan, Portland Oregonian: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...a head-trip of a movie... Generally, the editing propels the multiple strands forward, maintaining momentum and avoiding confusion..."(See all of Marc Mohan's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 725 words, 10/26/12
Calvin Wilson, St. Louis Post-Dispatch: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...ambitious and mostly successful... at once boldly experimental and vastly entertaining... The cast is terrific... superior filmmaking."(See all of Calvin Wilson's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 296 words, 10/26/12
Steve Persall, Tampa Bay Times: POOR(cg) "...an incoherent waste of time... a formless sprawl of constantly bewildering scenes, leap-frogging through time... elaborately self-indulgent..."(See all of Steve Persall's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 453 words, 10/25/12
Tom Long, Detroit News: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...exciting, exhausting and energizing, a brazen film that leaves somber cinema seeming too passive for its own good. This is a movie as big as life itself."(See all of Tom Long's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 585 words, 10/26/12
Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "The Wachowskis create a gleaming, meticulously rendered future-world where every tiny detail fascinates... Tykwer opts for a slower, gentler pace..."(See all of Rene Rodriguez's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 870 words, 10/26/12
ALTERNATIVE/INDIE PRESS (11 Reviews)
Nick Pinkerton, Village Voice: FAIR "Each segment feels more like an extended trailer for itself than a sound narrative... There is a great deal of humbug about art and love, but it is decidedly unlovable..."(See all of Nick Pinkerton's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 289 words, 10/24/12
Katey Rich, Cinema Blend: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...big, ambitious, gorgeous, glorious... its ambition and its enormous heart are still jangling through my veins, almost too close to quite understand just yet."(See all of Katey Rich's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 789 words, 09/11/12
Peter Keough, Boston Phoenix: WEAK(cg) "The most disappointing film of the year, Lana and Andy Wachowski and Tom Tykwer's adaptation of David Mitchell's 2004 novel fails on nearly every level."(See all of Peter Keough's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 170 words, 10/25/12
Karina Longworth, LA Weekly: POOR "...a truly stunning misuse of talent and resources, and for others, it's the film of the Toronto Film Festival, if not the year.... inconsistent, tone-deaf..."(See all of Karina Longworth's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 576 words, 09/13/12
Keith Phipps, AV Club: VERY GOOD(cg) "...a beyond-ambitious undertaking... an imperfect film of great daring and tremendous humanity, a work of many stories, but a singular achievement."(See all of Keith Phipps's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 926 words, 10/25/12
Chris Barsanti, Pop Matters: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...the most daring, thrilling, satisfying, swiftly churning engine of big screen adventure to come along in some time.... And oh yes, Hugh Grant plays a bloodthirsty cannibal."(See all of Chris Barsanti's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 863 words, 10/25/12
Calum Marsh, Slant: POOR(cg) "...a multitude of terrible details and unwatchable moments... it's seven of the worst films I've ever seen in my life glued together haphazardly... an unparalleled disaster."(See all of Calum Marsh's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 658 words, 09/09/12
Glenn Sumi, Toronto Now: WEAK(cg) "...gets lost in the ether.... Some sections work better than others, and the thing does come together near the end, but what a slog to get there."(See all of Glenn Sumi's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 185 words, 10/25/12
Curt Holman, Atlanta Creative Loafing: GOOD (NOT GREAT)(cg) "...proves as compelling for its failed choices as for its stylistic bravado.... You don't know where it will lead you."(See all of Curt Holman's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 893 words, 10/25/12
MaryAnn Johanson, Flick Filosopher: OUTSTANDING(cg) "...the whole cast is entirely enthralling... These are wonderful actors -- and makeup artists! -- giving multifaceted tour-de-force performances... It's the ultimate movie."(See all of MaryAnn Johanson's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,275 words, 10/22/12
HIGHBROW PRESS (7 Reviews)
Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: MODERATE "Everything is connected, the film tells us. Yet its disconnections are so frequent and befuddling that we're left with little more than fascinating fragments..."(See all of Joe Morgenstern's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 784 words, 10/26/12
A.O. Scott, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...an unruly grab bag of styles, effects and emotions held together, just barely, by a combination of outlandish daring and humble sincerity."(See all of A.O. Scott's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,320 words, 10/26/12
Anthony Lane, New Yorker: MODERATE "...it could, and should, turn into a properly divisive film, touching off feuds between the fervid and the splenetic, but one has to ask: does it allow for immersion?"(See all of Anthony Lane's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,126 words, 10/22/12
Bob Mondello, NPR: MODERATE "...it would be hard not to admire what's being attempted here... [but] flashy visuals and fortune-cookie philosophizing do not a resonant movie make."(See all of Bob Mondello's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 579 words, 10/25/12
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: WEAK "...muddled, frustrating... what sinks it is not the largeness of its ambitions but the lack of skill it displays in terms of writing, directing and acting."(See all of Kenneth Turan's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 953 words, 10/26/12
Dana Stevens, Slate: FAIR "...galumphing and heavy-handed, its rare flights of lyricism stranded between long stretches of outright risibility. And yet there's something commendable..."(See all of Dana Stevens's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,020 words, 10/25/12
Andrew O'Hehir, Salon: VERY GOOD "I will tell you in the same breath that this is a flawed and potentially ridiculous work and that I loved it, and can't wait to see it a second time (and then a third)."(See all of Andrew O'Hehir's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,530 words, 10/25/12
MOVIE INDUSTRY (6 Reviews)
Peter Debruge, Daily Variety: EXCELLENT "An intense three-hour mental workout rewarded with a big emotional payoff.... challenges its actors to portray characters outside their race or gender."(See all of Peter Debruge's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 826 words, 09/08/12
Jordan Mintzer, Hollywood Reporter: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...a hugely ambitious, genre-jumping, century-hopping epic.... a film that aims for the clouds but is often weighed down by its own lofty intentions."(See all of Jordan Mintzer's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 911 words, 09/09/12
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times: WEAK "...muddled, frustrating... what sinks it is not the largeness of its ambitions but the lack of skill it displays in terms of writing, directing and acting."(See all of Kenneth Turan's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 953 words, 10/26/12
Emanuel Levy, Cinema 24/7: GOOD(cg) "...by turns existential and mental, spiritual and inspirational... a sharply uneven work, technically lavish but also bloated, stimulating as well as ponderous and pretentious."(See all of Emanuel Levy's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 782 words, 10/18/12
A.O. Scott, New York Times: GOOD (NOT GREAT) "...an unruly grab bag of styles, effects and emotions held together, just barely, by a combination of outlandish daring and humble sincerity."(See all of A.O. Scott's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 1,320 words, 10/26/12
Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: MODERATE "Everything is connected, the film tells us. Yet its disconnections are so frequent and befuddling that we're left with little more than fascinating fragments..."(See all of Joe Morgenstern's reviews...)(Read the full review...) 784 words, 10/26/12
25.0 Percentage Points Average Difference Between Reviews (Norm is 18.4pp; <18.4pp = More Consistent; >18.4pp = More Mixed)
Cloud Atlas's reviews are separated by an average 25.0 percentage points. The norm for this measure is 18.4 percentage points. Less than 18.4 indicates more consistent reviews; greater than 18.4 indicates more mixed reviews. In the chart below, each dot represents a review, with the dots at the top more positive than the dots at the bottom. From left to right, the dots represent reviews in big, bigger and biggest publications. Roll over each dot for more detail.
Cloud Atlas (52 reviews) Roll over dots for each review
Coverage:Cloud Atlas's reviews cover 100.0% of potential readers (average is 67.9%). Volume:The film's reviews total 38,798 words involume (average is 20,172 words). Length:The film's reviews average 746 words in length (the norm is 517 words).
Reviews Broke 8 Days Before Release (Norm is 1.2 Release)
Cloud Atlas's reviews on average broke 8 days before opening. Norm for this measure is 1.2 hours before. The chart below shows reviews on opening day and the days before and after opening; the left side is earlier and the right side is later. The red bars extending above the horizontal mid-line represent more positive reviews, and the red bars extending below represent more negative reviews. The white space/red bar in the middle is Cloud Atlas's opening day. Click on any bar for a list of the reviews for that day.
Cloud Atlas (52 reviews, click on bars for reviews)
Mobile Web App version 1.2 shows a list of all current movies and review information. You can click through to the cast, director, synopsis, release date and rating on page two, plus individual reviews on page three. The information is updated on a live/real-time basis. You can also search our database of films. Designed for when you're on the move and want the latest info, this app will work on any mobile web browser. From your mobile device -- only from a mobile device -- open our Mobile Web App here...
