Cloud Atlas

I’m sure folks have seen this story…

theguardian.com/books/2016/ … tudy-finds

I remember when I read the book ca. 2010 thinking that this must have been written in Scrivener…hard to imagine managing the interlocking stories without it.

The movie was so lame!

That’s because they had to cut almost half of it out to be releasable in theaters. Too many story lines had too many threads removed for them to make enough sense. And after Jupiter Ascending flopped no management people thought highly enough of the Wachowskis to allow them to release the 4-hour cut that was said to be far superior.

I think cloud atlas would have been better served under a limited series tv show treatment. It really is the best to adapt novels into screen via tv shows formatting. The technology is feasible.

Loved the film. Would like to see a four-hour cut of it.

I don’t think four hours would be enough to do the novel justice.

ps

I usually prefer books to the films they spawn. In the case of Cloud Atlas (and The Dressmaker, recently), I loved the film, but didn’t enjoy the book.

As do I, and this was markedly the case with CA. But then, I read the book some while before seeing the movie, which may have influenced my taste for the movie — the two were, in my viewing, much different… hmm, “stories” doesn’t quite fill the bill here. “Experiences” perhaps.

ps

Nothing short of maybe a Netflix miniseries would do so, really, but it would still probably be better than the theatrical edition (and is, according to the sources I read). And I actually enjoyed the theatrical cut.

I think Fight Club might be the only movie I liked more than the book. I felt like more thought and effort went into the movie’s creation than the book’s, and the movie makes me think and feel more than the book does. I put the book down never wanting to read it again, but I’ve rewatched the movie more times than I can count.

Jurassic Park is a much better movie than a book!
pigfender.com/index.php/2013 … ssic-park/

Really you think so? Its been many years (read the book in hardback probably before the film rights had even been sold) but I remember being so disappointed with the dumbing-down of Jurassic Park as a film, then even more so when I got The Lost World and found it was written as a sequel to the movie rather than the book.

Spielberg had acquired the rights to the book before Crichton had even written it.

Yup, the movie is much better. The linked article in the above gives some examples of the reasons why.

Are you allowed to use your own article as evidence proving your own argument? Seems a little iffy :slight_smile:

Why not?

Reminds me of being invited to dinner—20 years ago—by a former Dean of Foreign Languages at a university in China. He was into cross-cultural studies, in particular between Chinese and English. During the conversation after dinner he said something about what he saw as a particular difference between the two, but which was absolutely untrue of English. I said very politely, “Professor, I really don’t think that is true.” To which he replied, “Of course it’s true; it says so in my book!”

Why did he believe it? Because he had written all the “English” examples himself … to me as a native English speaker they were clear “Chinglish”! :unamused:

I promptly dropped the subject.

:laughing:

Mark

Like a hot chop suey potato? :open_mouth: