Head in the Clouds

This is a boring history drama. bad acted and badly directed by Duigan, who is also the writer of the book which inspires the movie. 2 hours in which everything seems to happen, but in which nothing really happen. The story of the relationship between Charlize Theron (ok, every time you see her your jaws drop...), Penelope Cruz and an inexpressive Stuart Townsend during the second world war has no deepness and no meaning, because the characters don't seem to know what they are doing. Even in the most dramatic parts you fell asleep and didn't feel anything. This may be because writers should not direct the stories of their own books (Evil Enko is another example of a very bad adaption), or they don't have the right distance from the story they want to tell.

Put Charlize Theron, Penelope Cruz, Stuart Townsend and director John Duigan of Sirens and you get a very cloudy mix romance/war drama set in WW2. The romance/war drama seems to look good in the first place, just like any other romantic historical war drama such as English Patient, Cold Mountain or even Malena. However, the whole movie ends up a cloudy head for the audience with the bad editing and poor presentation, without letting us know what is the cause of misfortunes when we are being presented a scene of someone who just died. It has confused the audience, and we just simply do not know what has happened. The ending itself has end abruptly, which marks the film totally down. Theron and Cruz might have faired well here, but the bad plot and poor storyline presentation had pulled both of them down. For instance, when Theron found out that Cruz was whipped, we have no idea who has whipped her, and when did that takes place. Poor usage of French in the film also pulls the film down, with the cast speaking the wrong words in the right timing. Mabey it's time Duigan should take a look at the correct usage of French words at the right time. In all, the movie live to the title: Head in the Clouds.

I am a huge fan of WWII era films. I enjoy seeing how costumes and persona's are played out in the film. When i read the synopsis of this particular one, i thought, 'this could be a good one'. But unfortunately, I was disappointed. Theron and Townsend seem as if they are worried too much of showing their real life emotions for each other throughout the film. The whole thing hardly ever connects well. I do like the fact that they spoke the original languages, I appreciate that concept and also, the costume designer did a wonderful job. Nevertheless, Charlize and Stewart look bored through the whole thing, and she also seems as if she is reading her lines from the palm of her hand. The emotions just AREN'T convincing enough.

I love historical movies. I love romantic movies. I love dramatic movies. And, I love action movies. Head in the Clouds is a combination of all of these movie genres. However, Head in the Clouds is probably the worst movie I have seen in years. The acting is bad and the plot is obvious (self-centered, slutty, rich girl becomes a better person). In addition, some of the characters are utterly worthless. All of this is really ashame considering the fact that there were large amounts of money spent on making a period like this. The story had potential if only it hadn't been thrown together so sloppily. I usually like the movies that Charlize Theron, Stuart Townsend, and Penelope Cruz are in. But, they must truly be ashamed of Head in the Clouds.

A romance that never gets to show chemistry between the actors. Charlize Theron after the Oscar performance in "Monster" doesn't define her character at all, as well as Penelope Cruz. the plot should have been interesting for its handling the theme of two lifetime lovers having to chose between passions and personal convictions. Like Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman in" Eyes Wide Shut" the passion between real - life lovers is quite disappointing. Last but not least the whole context seems to be conceived as an encyclopedia of cliché. All things considered, a forgettable flick, despite Charlize Theron gorgeousness. I would suggest you a better way of spending two hours.

I think this film is the director/writer's excuse to do some soft * and create his idealised version of Paris. Bad writing, bad directing, even some bad acting from Theron, who I normally love. But perhaps she couldn't help it given the circumstances. I didn't care about any of the characters, except perhaps Cruz's.I was so bored, and yet compelled to sit through until the end, which wasn't even a bitter end, just a pathetic fizzle. I liked Berkoff, he was excellent, but even here, the scene he was in detracted from his work. I can't even think of more to write so I can fill in the 10 lines I'm supposed to for this comment. Watch something else, unless you want to go to sleep. Or, indeed, if you want a little soft * with all the usual suspects - a bit of s & m, a bit of girl kissing and a man's wet dream, two beautiful woman to himself in bed. Turn the sound off and just watch.

I'm glad Mcdonald's hasn't killed me yet and I lived long enough to rate this film a 1. This film is so typical of all the European trash made today that tries to survive on cutesy European 40's era wardrobes, sexual immorality, and of course the lesbo or threesome scenes which is SO important these days. NOT! Even flat Charlise in a hot tub couldn't save this film! Oh man, is Penelope Cruz a horrible actress or what? She can't speak English, she looks absolutely dreadful without makeup on (I'm sure that's why Tom dumped her after waking up one morning next to her when he wasn't drunk). OK, she looks pretty good with makeup, but she's no Selma, whom she's riding on her coat tails! The film moves so slowly and drudges through the war and all the boring political and sexual themes, oyvay! It's also VERY left. This film needed a music score or something in the background to wake you up! The only reason I'm giving this film a one is because Charlise is a true whacked-out nut-case that plays a good zombie void of emotion. Also, her constantly changing hair styles should earn the hairdresser an Oscar! Other than that, man, this film is boring! This is like one of those Cannes Film Festival films that all the artsy people leave the theater going "ooh, ahh, the deep subplots", yada yada yada! Flamio

I really liked the movie "Trapped" with Charlize Theron and Stuart Townsend,seeing them together in another film as lovers- I believe,will be wonderful. Like Gable and Lombard. The nice thing is to know they are a true life twosome.I love both of their acting. Stuart townsend is such a fresh new face and he is so versatile.When he acts your drawn into his performance with such reality and appeal. I look forward too more of them together.Guess Charlize got her way- she wanted him in her next movie!You go girl!

I saw this movie not expecting much from it. I was more interested in seeing how the chemistry between Charlize and Stuart works as they are lovers in real life too. The movie is a melodramatic love story that takes place in the years that preceded WW II and during the war. The story is rather predictable and quite boring sometimes. But what makes this movie nice to see are some moments that are nicely portrayed by the main actors and that I find rather moving. And if something makes this movie special, is Stuart Townsend that gives a certain feeling to his character. In the end, I liked the movie as I ignored some of its flaws (like most of the movies I see)and appreciated the overall atmosphere created, a couple of moving a memorable scenes and the beautiful chemistry between Charlize and Stuart. I think, it is underrated. It should be around 6.5-7. I give him an 8, as a balance.

I'll keep this simple -- this movie could have been great, but it wanted to be too much. It wanted to be epic, it wanted to be about friends and it wanted to be an anti-war movie and on top of that, it wanted to be about WWII and the underground work. I wanted to like this movie and while it's not impossible to watch, it is slow and plodding some times. This is a movie that really could have hit the audience hard, but it just kind of laid there instead. We go through a long, long development of the relationship between the two main characters Charlize Theron and Stuart Townsend. This could have been story enough, but no, we have to follow them over a 10 or 15 year period and go all the way through WWII. Early on, we are introduced to Penelope Cruz who is a good friend to Theron's character. And from this we kind of slip into a pseudo-three-way that never fully develops. Then there is the Spanish Civil War that Cruz's character feels she must partake in as well as Townsend. Again, this could have been an interesting story all on its own. Finally, we get into WWII and it drags on and on and I started to lose interest in the characters and the story. It's all just too much of a BIG story and, at the same time, not enough of a story to really hold our interest. The actors were okay, though sometimes I felt like Theron was just reading her lines. Townsend, for the most part fits the role, but other times he comes across as too modern for the time period. There are a few twists and turns here that keep the viewer interested, but overall, its not as good as it could have been. A shorter version, about one of the many story lines could make this a really, really good film.