Terry Gilliam's 12 Monkeys

[MEHEARTJC]

12 Monkeys is a cult classic with an intriguing story and amazing performances by Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt.


This week, I finally got around to watching my SE dvd copy. It had been over a decade since I last seen this movie. I was suprised that this single dvd also included a long making of documentary.


The documentary provides an intimate look into the mind and method of Terry Gilliam. He is truly one of the most visual minded directors around. At one point, Terry shows extreme frustration because he can't seem to translate the images in his head into reality. Another moment that stood out for me was Terry and the film creators having a meeting after the test screening. The test audience overwhelmly hated the movie, and didn't buy into the love story. Terry and the producers were just baffled. One guy was on the verge of tears saying, "we made this movie that apparently only the people in this room love".

They rolled the dice and decided not to change the film. It ended up being a success. Makes me wonder just how effective test screenings are.

Terry fans should definitely check out this doc. You get an appreciation for just how difficult and unpredictable a director's job can be.

[cathexist]

It's on the blu-ray as well...I watched most of it recently.

I didn't realize he also did secret screenings of Brazil for critics as well to get his original version released.

Baron Munchausen is still my favorite Gilliam film...even with the problems it had during production it ended up being a fantastic film.

I wish Fisher King was coming out on blu-ray...

[wonkavision]

Originally Posted by cathexist

I wish Fisher King was coming out on blu-ray...

Love Fisher King, probably my fav Gilliam film...although I was blown away with Dr. Parnassus.
12 Monkeys is my least favorite film...I really dislike Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt, although Pitts performance was pretty good.

[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by MEHEARTJC

12 Monkeys is a cult classic with an intriguing story and amazing performances by Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt.


This week, I finally got around to watching my SE dvd copy. It had been over a decade since I last seen this movie. I was suprised that this single dvd also included a long making of documentary.


The documentary provides an intimate look into the mind and method of Terry Gilliam. He is truly one of the most visual minded directors around. At one point, Terry shows extreme frustration because he can't seem to translate the images in his head into reality. Another moment that stood out for me was Terry and the film creators having a meeting after the test screening. The test audience overwhelmly hated the movie, and didn't buy into the love story. Terry and the producers were just baffled. One guy was on the verge of tears saying, "we made this movie that apparently only the people in this room love".

They rolled the dice and decided not to change the film. It ended up being a success. Makes me wonder just how effective test screenings are.

Terry fans should definitely check out this doc. You get an appreciation for just how difficult and unpredictable a director's job can be.

He isn't only one of the most arresting directors since Kubrick (one of his major influences - the other being Fellini). He's one of the only directors that continues to tell original stories on a large visual scale. He was JK Rowling's first pick for the Harry Potter movies and he was the only first choice that the studio would not grant her in the making of the movies.

He isn't the kind of grand-scale-visual director that makes remakes and readaptations. He'd probably be the most successful director in the business if he agreed to do more merchandise-oriented movies. But, generally, Hollywood hates this guy.

If you liked the making of doc for 12 Monkeys, I suggest you buy or rent Lost in Lamancha. It's a documentary put on by IFC about the movie he never made (now, finally, back in pre-production), called The Man Who Killed Don Quixote. It was to star Johnny Depp and, to my knowledge still will star Depp, and only 6 minutes-or-so of the movie was actually filmed before it was shut down.
I highly suggest you check this documentary out. Not only is the documentary itself satisfying, but it has a very extensive Q&A with Gilliam as one of the bonus features.

[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by wonkavision

Love Fisher King, probably my fav Gilliam film...although I was blown away with Dr. Parnassus.
12 Moneys is my least favorite film...I really dislike Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt, although Pitts performance was pretty good.

You mean to say that you like The Brothers Grimm better?

I grew up on Terry Gillaim. Time Bandits was my Ghost Busters or Goonies, growing up. I probably watched it at least once a week for an entire summer, when I was 8-or-so. So, there isn't a single Terry Gilliam movie I don't own (aside from some of the Monty Python stuff - which I don't consider as being something that truly counts as Gilliam directed work, being that he only did the animation). I, however, won't let my love of Gilliam persuade me into saying that The Brothers Grimm was better than 12 Monkeys.
I think people who don't like Willis' acting don't get what his character is really about in the film. He's supposed to be socially inept and, basically, a perpetual child - so he's going to seem really disconnected from the other characters/actors because he doesn't understand him. Brad Pitt has the same problem from the opposite end of the spectrum. He grew up over-privileged and never had to grow up. That's why it's so fitting that the characters run the poles of the story they run and why they, at first, are attracted towards one another and, then, repelled from each other.

[Batman1980]

12 Monkeys is a fun movie that I like more every time I see it because I notice new stuff every time I see it. One of Willis' best performances and probably Pitt's best performance.

[wonkavision]

Originally Posted by Paul Kersey

You mean to say that you like The Brothers Grimm better?

I did like Brother's Grimm, more than 12 Monkeys though? Hmmm...they rank about the same. As you immersed yourself in Time Bandits growing up, I did the same with Monty Python and the Holy Grail and Brazil.

Originally Posted by Paul Kersey

I think people who don't like Willis' acting don't get what his character is really about in the film. He's supposed to be socially inept and, basically, a perpetual child - so he's going to seem really disconnected from the other characters/actors because he doesn't understand him. Brad Pitt has the same problem from the opposite end of the spectrum. He grew up over-privileged and never had to grow up. That's why it's so fitting that the characters run the poles of the story they run and why they, at first, are attracted towards one another and, then, repelled from each other.

I get his character. It really has nothing to do with that. I just simply find Willis annoying in whatever role he's in. Sorry, I just don't find him believable in anything.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Paul Kersey

You mean to say that you like The Brothers Grimm better?

I grew up on Terry Gillaim. Time Bandits was my Ghost Busters or Goonies, growing up. I probably watched it at least once a week for an entire summer, when I was 8-or-so. So, there isn't a single Terry Gilliam movie I don't own (aside from some of the Monty Python stuff - which I don't consider as being something that truly counts as Gilliam directed work, being that he only did the animation). I, however, won't let my love of Gilliam persuade me into saying that The Brothers Grimm was better than 12 Monkeys.
I think people who don't like Willis' acting don't get what his character is really about in the film. He's supposed to be socially inept and, basically, a perpetual child - so he's going to seem really disconnected from the other characters/actors because he doesn't understand him. Brad Pitt has the same problem from the opposite end of the spectrum. He grew up over-privileged and never had to grow up. That's why it's so fitting that the characters run the poles of the story they run and why they, at first, are attracted towards one another and, then, repelled from each other.

I can see them as opposite sides of the same coin. I don't think they were ever drawn towards each other, they were just in the same place at the same time more than once, that's all.

[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

I can see them as opposite sides of the same coin. I don't think they were ever drawn towards each other, they were just in the same place at the same time more than once, that's all.

I guess, by "drawn together", I'm talking about believably being in the same place at the same time so much without it just seeming like some sort of god machine thing.

[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by wonkavision

I did like Brother's Grimm, more than 12 Monkeys though? Hmmm...they rank about the same. As you immersed yourself in Time Bandits growing up, I did the same with Monty Python and the Holy Grail and Brazil.

I grew up on Holy Grail, too. I just never liked it as much as Time Bandits.

I'd like to know what you meant by "grew up" on Brazil, though.
How young were you when you first saw it? And what does that have to do with anything but trying to seem more sophisticated? Furthermore, what does being more sophisticated have to do with the Brothers Grimm, if that's what you're implying?

As far as Willis' acting is concerned; how is it any less believable than John Pryce's acting in Brazil? Acting isn't there for you to believe the actor. It's there for you to believe the story.

[wonkavision]

Originally Posted by Paul Kersey

I grew up on Holy Grail, too. I just never liked it as much as Time Bandits.

I'd like to know what you meant by "grew up" on Brazil, though.
How young were you when you first saw it? And what does that have to do with anything but trying to seem more sophisticated? Furthermore, what does being more sophisticated have to do with the Brothers Grimm, if that's what you're implying?

As far as Willis' acting is concerned; how is it any less believable than John Pryce's acting in Brazil? Acting isn't there for you to believe the actor. It's there for you to believe the story.

Honestly, I'm not sure exactly your motivations with your odd, probing questions. When I say "grew up on", I was following your comment on that for Time Bandits. I was a kid, a young teenager (16) when I first saw Brazil and became obsessed with it for various reasons and none of which has to do with your implication of seeming more sophisticated. Simply put: I love the film and everything about it, always have, always will. Yes, I was older than 8 or so, but certainly still growing and evolving as humans do. I simply connected to Brazil and watched it quite often on my VHS tape "growing up".

I'm totally unclear as to your question about Brothers Grimm. I wasn't implying anything other than I probably enjoy it more than 12 Monkeys.

Acting is indeed there for you to believe the actor. If you don't believe the actor, how in the world will you believe the story and every dialogue that is spoken by the actor to move the storyline? I suppose that's somewhat of a rhetorical question.

[Member-115369]

I love that film. A tad ahead of Fear and Loathing as my favorite Gilliam movie. Picked it up on Blu recently, need to get around to watching it again!

[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by wonkavision

Honestly, I'm not sure exactly your motivations with your odd, probing questions. When I say "grew up on", I was following your comment on that for Time Bandits. I was a kid, a young teenager (16) when I first saw Brazil and became obsessed with it for various reasons and none of which has to do with your implication of seeming more sophisticated. Simply put: I love the film and everything about it, always have, always will. Yes, I was older than 8 or so, but certainly still growing and evolving as humans do. I simply connected to Brazil and watched it quite often on my VHS tape "growing up".

I'm totally unclear as to your question about Brothers Grimm. I wasn't implying anything other than I probably enjoy it more than 12 Monkeys.

Acting is indeed there for you to believe the actor. If you don't believe the actor, how in the world will you believe the story and every dialogue that is spoken by the actor to move the storyline? I suppose that's somewhat of a rhetorical question.

I'm not sure loving something since you're 16 is growing up on something. That's why I asked. I got my driver's permit, when I was sixteen. Does that mean I grew up driving?
I was asking "probing" questions because what I had figured by what you meant was exactly what turned out to be the case.
I only wanted to know this, because I thought it would be strange for somebody to have been watching Brazil since they were six or seven.
The only reason that matters is because having been repeatedly exposed to the vision of a single director from such a young age is going to effect one's taste in movies, in general more than being subjected to their work from a later time after one has been exposed to an entire array of influences on their taste.

The mention of sophistication has to do with the fact that I've seen a lot of people on this board throw a "sophisticated" title in when they want to talk down on something else. IE: "Box office movie "X" wasn't as good as Kubrick movie "Y", so my favorite movie makes me smarter than you" type of talk on this board. Sorry if I lumped you in with that crowd. The namedropping of Brazil just seemed to come a little too out of left field for me to be anything but suspicious and, thusly, sarcastic.

As far as acting goes, I still disagree. If Gary Oldman's character was more believable, he would have been much more subtle and the Professional wouldn't have been as good. There's an element of believability required, but I think too much believability just makes actors a distraction.
If I want to watch real people, I will watch a documentary.

[wonkavision]

Originally Posted by Paul Kersey

I'm not sure loving something since you're 16 is growing up on something. That's why I asked. I got my driver's permit, when I was sixteen. Does that mean I grew up driving?
I was asking "probing" questions because what I had figured by what you meant was exactly what turned out to be the case.
I only wanted to know this, because I thought it would be strange for somebody to have been watching Brazil since they were six or seven.
The only reason that matters is because having been repeatedly exposed to the vision of a single director from such a young age is going to effect one's taste in movies, in general more than being subjected to their work from a later time after one has been exposed to an entire array of influences on their taste.

The mention of sophistication has to do with the fact that I've seen a lot of people on this board throw a "sophisticated" title in when they want to talk down on something else. IE: "Box office movie "X" wasn't as good as Kubrick movie "Y", so my favorite movie makes me smarter than you" type of talk on this board. Sorry if I lumped you in with that crowd. The namedropping of Brazil just seemed to come a little too out of left field for me to be anything but suspicious and, thusly, sarcastic.

As far as acting goes, I still disagree. If Gary Oldman's character was more believable, he would have been much more subtle and the Professional wouldn't have been as good. There's an element of believability required, but I think too much believability just makes actors a distraction.
If I want to watch real people, I will watch a documentary.

You seem more of a linear thinker than I am. However, for the record, when I was 8 years old (or around there), I was head deep into all things horror: Black Christmas, Halloween, Exorcist, Night Of The Living Dead, The Changeling, It's Alive, Dawn of The Dead, Texas Chain Saw Massacre, etc. All thanks to my Dad...he got a kick out it and I couldn't get enough of it, intrigued by the feeling of being scared, but at the same time fascinated by the gore special effects (I remember wanting to do that kind of work...no typical fireman dreams for me). I also enjoyed fantasy and sci-fi prior to adolescence. I think had Brazil been out when I was 8 or so, I probably would have enjoyed it, probably not understood everything (I certainly know I'd love the music.) or maybe I would.

As for acting, I see your point and we'll just have to quietly and respectively disagree. It's like a storyteller, some people have a gift and can tell you a story and you're riveted, engrossed in the storyteller's every word, then there is everybody else who have no business telling stories.

[Paul Kersey]

Originally Posted by wonkavision

...I think had Brazil been out when I was 8 or so, I probably would have enjoyed it, probably not understood everything (I certainly know I'd love the music.) or maybe I would.

That's what I mean. It's a very complex and introverted story. Regardless of what somebody is allowed to watch, when they're a kid, what they can wrap their head around is totally different.
Although my favorite movies were all time travel movies, when I was a kid, and they all have kind of confusing situations (Although I'll admit that Time Bandits is more linear than most). So, maybe I'm wrong.

And, FYI, I might be a more linear thinker than you, as you suggested.
I'm, basically, moonlighting as a writer. I've written some screenplays that I'm trying to figure out what to do with and I'm in the process of writing and developing an episodic space opera comic with a friend of mine.
Not that you have to be a linear thinker to be a writer, but it tends to be the lexicon, depending on what you mean by "linear" I guess.