Jenseits der Wolken

This is a special film if you know the context. Antonioni, in his eighties, had been crippled by a stroke. Mute and half paralyzed, his friends -- who incidentally are the best the film world has -- arranged for him to 'direct' a last significant film. The idea is that he can conjure a story into being by just looking at it. So we have a film: about a director who conjures stories by simple observation. And the matter of the (four) stories is about how the visual imagination defines love.

The film emerges by giving us the tools to bring it into being through our own imagination. The result is pure movie-world: every person (except the director) is lovely in aspect or movement. Some of these women are ultralovely, and they exist in a dreamy misty world of sensual encounter. There is no nuance, no hint that anything exists but what we see; no desire is at work other than what we create.

I know of no other film that so successfully manipulates our own visual yearning to have us create the world we see. He understands something about not touching. No one understands Van Morrison visually like he does. Morrison's Celtic space music is predicated on precisely the same notion: the sensual touch that implies but doesn't physically touch.

Antonioni's redhead wife appears, appropriately as the shopkeeper and she also directs a lackluster 'making of' film that is on the DVD.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.

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.

Michelangelo Antonioni is one of the major figures of cinema history, even if most people haven't heard of him. He was nowhere near as prolific as filmmakers such as Fellini, Godard, Bergman, Kurosawa, or Truffaut. And his films now are difficult to procure. There are only a few readily available, and I have seen all of those but one (Il Grido, which has recently been released on DVD by Kino). Four of the five Antonioni films that I've seen, L'Avventura, Red Desert, Blowup, and The Passenger are among the best films ever made. One other that I've seen, L'Eclisse, I think probably is also to be included among them; if only the video that I saw would not have been so horribly defiled! Now I have seen Beyond the Clouds.

I had always heard that it was a great failure, but it was difficult to lower my expectations of Antonioni. Wim Wenders' presence did not help, either. Throughout the film, there were many things that annoyed me, and also many things that I loved. I think a pros/cons list will help here.

Cons:

1. The writing seems weak. All the stories told have little depth, it seems, and we find out almost nothing about anybody we meet in the picture. Usually, Antonioni's writing can be used to show just how well a film can be written, and his characters are the definition of "complex." But in another way I can also see the style of writing presented here in a more positive light, which I'll comment on later.

2. The acting is really weak. I cannot in any way defend it. There is not one performer who isn't subpar here, and most of the actors are second-rate actors in the first place (Irene Jacob excepted). John Malkovich is one of the hammiest actors who's ever lived. The only thing I ever liked him in was Being John Malkovich, because that film delightfully (and, apparently, unnoticeably, at any rate by Malkovich himself) mocked his very pretensions, which are in full force in this film.

3. Casual nudity - okay, no one on Earth wants to see John Malkovich buck naked. Fortunately, if you are a fan of female nudity, nearly every woman in the film, including Bond girl Sophie Marceau, appears naked from head to foot with everything in between (sorry, Irene Jacob fans, no nudity from her!). I myself don't mind nudity when it is called for, like in Last Tango in Paris, but the rampant nudity in this film makes it seem like European softcore along the lines of Emmanuel. Actually, the softcore it really reminded me of was Red Shoe Diaries. The light jazz by Van Morrison just adds to this effect. Antonioni was once a proto-feminist. Many of his most famous films were from a distinctly female point of view. And when men did take over in his films, they were very unlikable. Here, the women are often exploited.

Pros:

1. Cinematography - okay, we have two of the best visual directors of all time working on this film, the cinematography ought to be outstanding. It is, generally. There are a couple of visual moments that are absolutely spectacular, some of the best I've ever seen. This includes an ethereal scene where Malkovich explores a deserted playground on a beach. He sits on a swing, spins around in it with a shot that involves a beautifully moving camera, and then we watch a strong wind blow sand around on the beach (Antonioni loves showing the wind in his films). Another great visual scene involves a camera gliding about a spiral staircase near the end of the film.

2. Mood - The nonchalant flow of the narrative actually adds a lot of mood. The title of the film is entirely appropriate. You do feel as if you're witnessing something beyond the clouds. Certain stories are left in suspension, never to be resolved, and it feels right. By the final scene, Beyond the Clouds had nearly won me over. Still, there were too many things wrong with it to suggest it to non-Antonioni fans, but Antonioni fans owe it to themselves to see it once. 6/10

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.

Although I'm a big fan of his work, and specially his revolutionary masterpieces, I would say this film did not live up to my expectations regarding Antonioni's abilities. In one word, I found myself utterly bored. I could not bring myself to share any emotions with the characters (no matter how hard I tried) and finally gave up on watching it. Malkovich was poorly casted and instead of bringing warmth and real human emotions to the character, made it a drag and sometimes impossible to follow. There are no real links for this four short stories, and least of all Malkovich's ramblings and philosophical (attempts at best) remarks bordering on sunday sermons. If you want good quality film, better stick to the director's earlier works. Sorry!!!