Beyond the Clouds

looks like the bet movie I've ever seen. not too much for intelligent perception but so rich for perception sensitive. Antonioni is comparably wise to his movie. Malkovich's so organic, roles are so true, situations are so real. I've change my world outlook after this cinema. I'm a beginner literati in Russia -- country of Tolstoy and Dostoevskiy -- and I'm quite sure watching Antonioni is good and fun for russkies, because I and we do understand his point of view. so I don't understand his lesser raiting on IMDb. I'm sure, speaking from Russia and our people, we like Antonioni because of his romantic soul and positive sensation of surrounding reality

"Beyond the Clouds" is an over-the-top artsy group of four vignettes each a offering a glimpse into a man-woman relationship from the tenuous to the turbulent. Although the film offers superb cinematography, some exquisite visual beauty, and a cast of fine performers, there's little meat on the bones of this fragmented work. A taste of a relationship cannot impart the fullness of it and synergism suggests that much more can be accomplished with one story in 2 hours than with four. Nonetheless, "Beyond the Clouds" will be fodder for dilettantes and a visual feast for the all albeit superficial, stilted, and lacking in substance.

If you speak French or can put up with sub-titles, you will really enjoy this movie. If on the other hand you just want to see God's most beautiful creatures, this is a must see. Not an ounce of silicon in sight. Zalman King eat your heart out. Sophie Marceau's body is the epitome of perfection and everything I had ever fantasized about. Her part is even in English. Even the fact that she was * with John Malkovich did not detract for her beauty. Sophie is a ten if ever there was one. Chiara Caselli and Inés Sastre are 9.5s. Oh yeah, it is a pretty good story. Several little vignettes are woven together in a sort of Six Degrees of Separation style.

A summing up of all the aging, ailing Antonioni's career themes, strengths (visual beauty, a sense of mystery and poetry) and weaknesses (pretentious stiff dialogue, ideas that are sometimes not really all that deep, a penchant for getting beautiful actresses undressed without a lot of justification). But this is also something quite different than he's ever done, in that these are a series of short stories, loosely tied together by sequences of John Malkovich playing a director looking for his next film (Wim Wenders helped the physically limited Antonioni by directing the Malkovich sections). By keeping the pieces smaller, I found this more fun, and more moving than most of Antonioni's films. There isn't the chance for the ideas to run as thin, and there seems to be more empathy for his characters now. Humans may be screwed up, but at least Antonioni no longer stands above them judging. One moment actually brought me near tears. The film captures the lonely enigmatic solitude of the artist, and of life itself.

The worst segment in this very uneven sketch film is the first, a silly tale of abandonment featuring pretty boy Kim Rossi Stuart and the Lancôme model Inés Sastre. It reeks of chic and product placement. The second episode, with a bored-looking Sophie Marceau is hardly better; we can't care if she stabbed her dad six, twelve or 528 times. Sophie does have a lovely body, however, and the boutique she works in is elegant. The triangle story is next, with Peter Weller playing a bilingual rich man with a wife (Fanny Ardant, sensational) and a mistress (Chiara Caselli, OK). Fanny's big scene has her smashing a vase then chewing out her straying hubby. She manages to be drunk, angry and horny all at once: I have never seen her act with such power. Pity that the little sequel with Jean Reno meeting Fanny in the empty apartment isn't very effective. The last segment with Irène Jacob, a pretty girl with a big secret, is a little gem, but it feels tacked-on, not really a part of the picture.

I'm not really sure what to make of this movie, especially after seeing a great film like La Notte. Unfortunately I saw this in German during an Antonioni film festival at the Frankfurt Film Museum, so I didn't get to hear Malkovich's great voice. He is supposed to tie together four stories about couples in Italy. However, as good an actor as he is, Malkovich cannot rescue the most ridiculous of the four stories portrayed here: a woman who comes up to him at a waterside cafe near a shop she owns and blurts out about how she killed her father nearby. Then the two of them go home, have sex, and he leaves. It seems as if Antonioni lost the subtlety had in earlier films (like The Passenger) when dealing with sex and replaced it with blatant nudity. However nonsensical the storyline is, the film features two things that make it watchable: eye and ear candy. The actors and actresses are all beautiful people, and the cinematography is marvelous - scenes in old Italian cities contrasting with a bit in a tall apartment building overlooking a city (reminiscent of La Notte). The ear candy, however, is what really makes the film worth watching. U2 and Brian Eno collaborated on "Your Blue Room" and "Beach Sequence," both of which set the mood perfectly in the film. The songs are available on "Passengers: Original Soundtracks 1."

How can this movie possibly have such a high rating? When it comes to the director, I'll admit being ignorant of his past works, and maybe they are fine works. This was not a fine work by any stretch. The script is terrible. The acting is horrible. You can't blame the actors, though. They don't have anything to work with. Every character acts like a psychotic stalker or a schizophrenic. The dialog is entirely nonsensical. To quote Mark Twain from "Fenimore Cooper's Literary Offenses", simply replace "Deerslayer" with "Beyond the Clouds": 1. A tale shall accomplish something and arrive some where. But the "Deerslayer" tale accomplishes nothing and arrives in air. 2. They require that the episodes in a tale shall be necessary parts of the tale, and shall help to develop it. But as the "Deerslayer" tale is not a tale, and accomplishes nothing and arrives nowhere, the episodes have no rightful place in the work, since there was nothing for them to develop. 3. They require that the personages in a tale shall be alive, except in the case of corpses, and that always the reader shall be able to tell the corpses from the others. But this detail has often been overlooked in the "Deerslayer" tale. 4. They require that the personages in a tale, both dead and alive, shall exhibit a sufficient excuse for being there. But this detail also has been overlooked in the "Deerslayer" tale. 5. The require that when the personages of a tale deal in conversation, the talk shall sound like human talk, and be talk such as human beings would be likely to talk in the given circumstances, and have a discoverable meaning, also a discoverable purpose, and a show of relevancy, and remain in the neighborhood of the subject at hand, and be interesting to the reader, and help out the tale, and stop when the people cannot think of anything more to say. But this requirement has been ignored from the beginning of the "Deerslayer" tale to the end of it. All of this applies to "Beyond the Clouds". The characters don't act like human beings, they don't talk like human beings. There seems to be no real story to tell. As far as I can tell, it seems to me that the director simply wanted to see some beautiful actresses naked and came up with an excuse. Don't waste your time, that's all I can say.

For thirteen years after "Identification of a Woman" Michelangelo Antonioni was unable to make another film. However in 1995 he made a sudden return with "Beyond the Clouds" a collection of short stories linked by a film director (john Malkovich). Each film explores, with no real conviction or success the themes of desire,love and deception . At the time the film was hailed as a success, both Antonioni and wenders, who undoubtedly directed parts of the film, were praised. However on closer examination "beyond the Clouds" is far from a masterpiece although visually the images are beautiful all the stories are both implausible and without depth. The film fails in its attempts to explore complex human emotions. John Malkovich's character also fails to link the stories neatly and his ramblings are both pretentious and boring. The only story worthy of real praise is the final one starring Irene Jacob, always superb, who adds a touch of concision to an otherwise lost film. For those looking to explore the human emotions of love, desire, freedom , loss and loneliness would do far better to watch Krystof Kielslowski,s acomplished "Three colours" trilogy which cleary show the late Kielslowski to be far superior to Antonioni.