November 10, 2012
Cloud Atlas’s Theory of Everything
Emily Eakin in the NYRB blog:
Cloud Atlas, the unlikely new adaptation by Lana and Andy Wachowski and Tom Tykwer of David Mitchell’s ingenious novel, should do well on DVD, a format whose capacity for endless replay will enable viewers to study at leisure the myriad concurrences binding the movie’s half dozen plots. Better yet, the directors should hire their friend the philosopher Ken Wilber to provide expert commentary and spare us from having to hit “pause” and “reverse.”
Ken Wilber? In academic circles, Wilber remains obscure. A sixty-three-year-old autodidact, he is the author of an ambitious effort to reconcile empirical knowledge and mystical experience in an “Integral Theory” of existence. Yet his admirers include not only the alternative-healing guru Deepak Chopra—who has called Wilber “one of the most important pioneers in the field of consciousness”—but also the philosopher Charles Taylor, the theologians Harvey Cox and Michael Lerner, and Bill Clinton. Wilber’s generally lucid treatments of both Western science and Eastern spirituality have earned him favor with a coterie of highly literate seekers for whom the phrase “New Age” is nonetheless suspect. He’s an intellectual’s mystic, short on ecstatic visions and long on exegeses of Habermas (whom he regards, for his perception of “homologous structures” in human individual and social development, as something of a kindred spirit). At the Integral Institute, a Colorado-based think tank inspired by Wilber’s ideas, scholars like Jack Crittenden, a professor of political theory at Arizona State University, strive to apply his approach to “global-scale problems,” from climate change to religious conflict.
All of which makes Wilber a natural ally of the Wachowski siblings, whose films tend to reflect a similar grandiosity of ambition.
Posted by Robin Varghese at 01:10 PM | Permalink






















Comments
Terrible film. A caricature of good and evil. In which Tom Hanks has multiple noses, and the hero in "New Seoul" is a Caucasian actor done up to look East Asian, which I discovered later by googling: I'd honestly thought he was a science fictionesque "humanoid" while in the theatre.
To top off this putrid paean to politically correct moralizing, at the end the lawyer and his wife are reunited and embrace each other joyfully in front of a table full of relatives and family members in a very rich and proper San Francisco house. Something which, in 1849, would never happen (they would have showed their exuberant affections privately), but who cares about accuracy in a film where the representative of an advanced civilization journeys to a primitive outpost to search for a...what?...an observation tower to send a laser beam into the sky?
A completely nonsensical three hours of my life that I won't get back. The only compensation is Jim Broadbent, who is, hands down, the best and most watchable actor of the past twenty years.
Posted by: Angling Saxon | Nov 11, 2012 1:11:12 PM
Interesting. I liked the book, and found the movie to be quite entertaining. Yes, the budget could have been better spent on makeup rather than the futuristic chase scenes in Neo-Seoul, and the racial incongruities kept simpler in a Caucasian setting across timelines for the movie, but it was an ambitious undertaking nonetheless.
Spoiler alert:
The laser beam sent a plea for help to the off-world colonies who had previously cut all links to Earth following the revelation about how the humanoids were being brutally treated - sent from the same tower and the location where the revolution had been earlier crushed.
Agree that Broadbent stole the show. The vignette set in the present; in the publishing world and in the nursing home, was hilarious!
Posted by: Sam | Nov 12, 2012 12:23:15 AM
Post a comment