786 reviews
- Smells_Like_Cheese
- Sep 14, 2007
- Permalink
Twelve Monkeys is typically Terry Gilliam, loaded with the director's trademark quirky visuals, and, as such, should get right up my nose (I'm not a huge fan of his hallucinatory, surreal style, to say the least). And yet I still love this unusual time travel tale: it's got great performances, with a particularly strong turn from the then up-and-coming Brad Pitt, and Gilliam's chaotic storytelling actually suits the inherent madness of the whole movie. The twisty-turny plot keeps the viewer on their toes throughout, and Gilliam pulls all the threads together neatly for the finale. The occasional moment of visual excess still niggles (the steampunk/trash-heap aesthetic of the future isn't my cup of tea), but on the whole this is definitely one of the director's best films.
Bruce Willis stars as James Cole, a convict from the future who is sent to the past to try and discover the origins of the virus that wiped out most of the world's human population. After a violent altercation with the police of 1990, Cole is sent to an asylum where he meets patient Jeffrey Goines (Pitt), son of a wealthy scientist (played by Christopher Plummer), and quite possibly plants the seeds of mankind's destruction in the lunatic's mind. Together with his psychiatrist Kathryn Railly (Madeleine Stowe), Cole tries to prevent the disaster from occurring.
At times, it seems as though Gilliam has only the slightest command of proceedings, and the film demands that the viewer puts in 100% concentration to avoid becoming as lost and confused as Cole himself, who becomes more and more unsure about what is reality and what isn't as the film progresses. Characters ramble, often seemingly incoherently, but what they are saying is, for the most part, intrinsic to the outcome, so pay attention (or have your finger on the rewind button). Those who make the effort will be rewarded by a film that is constantly inventive and frequently clever, and worth at least a few viewings to appreciate it to the fullest.
Bruce Willis stars as James Cole, a convict from the future who is sent to the past to try and discover the origins of the virus that wiped out most of the world's human population. After a violent altercation with the police of 1990, Cole is sent to an asylum where he meets patient Jeffrey Goines (Pitt), son of a wealthy scientist (played by Christopher Plummer), and quite possibly plants the seeds of mankind's destruction in the lunatic's mind. Together with his psychiatrist Kathryn Railly (Madeleine Stowe), Cole tries to prevent the disaster from occurring.
At times, it seems as though Gilliam has only the slightest command of proceedings, and the film demands that the viewer puts in 100% concentration to avoid becoming as lost and confused as Cole himself, who becomes more and more unsure about what is reality and what isn't as the film progresses. Characters ramble, often seemingly incoherently, but what they are saying is, for the most part, intrinsic to the outcome, so pay attention (or have your finger on the rewind button). Those who make the effort will be rewarded by a film that is constantly inventive and frequently clever, and worth at least a few viewings to appreciate it to the fullest.
- BA_Harrison
- Feb 27, 2021
- Permalink
Terry Gilliam's stunning feature-length adaptation of Chris Marker's short film LA JETEE is full of mind-bending surprises, yet still touches your heart thanks to the superb cast. Gilliam's flair for the phantasmagorical works with the script by David and Janet Peoples to play with your head as much as it does with poor James Cole (Willis at his most Steve McQueen-like -- better than McQueen, even!), a time-traveling convict from the future who literally doesn't know whether he's coming or going as a team of scientists keeps sending him back to the wrong eras while trying to prevent a 1995 plague that's deadly to humans but harmless to animals. Willis, the justifiably Oscar-nominated Brad Pitt, and Madeline Stowe as a well-meaning psychiatrist give some of the best performances of their careers. Even Paul Buckmaster's tango-style score is haunting. This one's a don't-miss!
In the future humans exist underground, the surface having become uninhabitable due to the release of a virus years before in 1996. The ruling classes are scientists and large sections of the population are held as prisoners in tiny cells; prisoners who "volunteer" to help work out what happened back in 1996 that killed off 99% of the population. Requiring information about the visit, James Cole is sent back to 1996 to gather what information he can. However, sent to 1990 by accident, Cole finds himself in a mental hospital where he meets From the very start this film marks itself out as being very much a Terry Gilliam product and those who hate his work will probably dislike this film for the same reason. However, pleasing people like that is not my concern and 12 Monkeys is actually one of Gilliam's most accessible films as it sets his imaginative style within a narrative that is satisfyingly complex and thoroughly enjoyable from start to finish. The story is not perfect though, the connection to the start is nice but the ultimate twist behind the virus just seems to have been thrown in to keep the film tidy; a minor complaint though because even then the main thrust of the story (Cole) keeps it together. The twisting plot plays with both Cole's and our sense of reality and it is genuinely gripping from start to finish Gilliam's direction is superb, whether it be the realistic world of the 1990's filmed with clever angles and shots or the wonderfully twisted world of the future, it is all excellent and was such a pleasant find in my local cinema at the time.
The film benefits from great turns from the cast. Willis was having a bit of a career resurrection in the mid-90's when several films showed us that he could actually act for me, 12 Monkeys was one of them. Willis is superb as he spins from madness to sanity and back again; he underplays all the way and is so much better than the wise-cracking everyman that he is better known for. Pitt is just as good but in a different way. Getting an Oscar nomination that he deserved, Pitt risks overdoing it but pushes his crazy performance as far as he can without being indulgent I'm not saying he is perfect but I would could this as one of his best performances to date. Stowe is very much in the shadow of these two but she holds her own well. Morse, Seda, Meloni and Plummer are all good in minor roles but really the film belongs to the lead three Willis in particular and Pitt in a great supporting role.
Overall this is a great sci-fi; the story is great and is only helped by Gilliam's imaginative direction and awareness of the fantastic. Meanwhile the cast are very strong, with the famous leads giving some of their best performances to date. Downbeat, imaginative, engaging and one of the more accessible of Gilliam's films, it stands out as one of the best American sci-fi's of the past few decades.
The film benefits from great turns from the cast. Willis was having a bit of a career resurrection in the mid-90's when several films showed us that he could actually act for me, 12 Monkeys was one of them. Willis is superb as he spins from madness to sanity and back again; he underplays all the way and is so much better than the wise-cracking everyman that he is better known for. Pitt is just as good but in a different way. Getting an Oscar nomination that he deserved, Pitt risks overdoing it but pushes his crazy performance as far as he can without being indulgent I'm not saying he is perfect but I would could this as one of his best performances to date. Stowe is very much in the shadow of these two but she holds her own well. Morse, Seda, Meloni and Plummer are all good in minor roles but really the film belongs to the lead three Willis in particular and Pitt in a great supporting role.
Overall this is a great sci-fi; the story is great and is only helped by Gilliam's imaginative direction and awareness of the fantastic. Meanwhile the cast are very strong, with the famous leads giving some of their best performances to date. Downbeat, imaginative, engaging and one of the more accessible of Gilliam's films, it stands out as one of the best American sci-fi's of the past few decades.
- bob the moo
- Feb 12, 2005
- Permalink
I know "12 Monkeys" gets its respects in being a highly respectable science fiction motion picture, but it deserves a whole lot more then just that. I believe this is one of the greatest Sci-Fi flicks ever created. It's imaginative, visionary, and masterfully conceptualized; all imperative elements in the orchestration of profound science fiction. Brad Pitt delivered one of the most entertaining and fun performances I've ever witnessed as a crazed looney bird who's the son of a eminent virologist, and to a less profound degree in the art of acting, Bruce Willis displayed one of his greater performances as well. 12 monkeys hits on all cylinders and makes it one of the great Terry Gilliam's most profound achievements.
- Mcnabbbeasty
- Mar 19, 2021
- Permalink
"Twelve monkeys"'s got all the elements to become Terry Gilliam's masterpiece. An outstanding screenplay, a sustained rhythm, clever sometimes ironic dialogs. Moreover, he had a good nose about the cast. "Twelve monkeys" is also the first movie where Bruce Willis stands back from the kind of character he used to play in his previous movies. Here, a jaded and hopeless character which you could nickname a prisoner took over from a fearless and invincible hero (as it was the case in "Die hard"). No matter how he tries, he's a prisoner of the time. The movie contains a very thrilling end too. It's got a real dramatic power. But this terrific movie is also a reflection about man, the dangers he dreads (notably, the ones that could cause the end of the world and here, these are virus that can create illnesses). No matter how long it will take, "twelve monkeys" will be estimated at its true value: one of the masterpieces made in the nineties.
- dbdumonteil
- Jun 12, 2003
- Permalink
- planktonrules
- Jul 20, 2012
- Permalink
In 1996, a deadly virus is released by a terrorist group known as The Army of the Twelve Monkeys and wipes out 5 billion people from Earth and the survivors are forced to live underground.
In 2035, the prisoner James Cole (Bruce Willis) is forced to return to 1996 to find the original virus to help the scientists to research the cure to mankind. However, he is mistakenly sent to 1990 and locked up in a mental institution, where he meets the lunatic Jeffrey Goines (Brad Pitt). James Cole unsuccessfully tries to explain his assignment to the doctors, including the psychiatrist Kathryn Railly (Madeleine Stowe) that is responsible for his treatment, and then he tries to escape but is incarcerated in a cell. Out of the blue, he vanishes, in the beginning of the incredible journey of James Cole.
"Twelve Monkeys" (1995) is a sci-fi ahead of the time. The plot has many details that requires the viewer to watch this film more than once to fully understand the story. Watching "Twelve Monkeys" again in 2021 is particularly scary in times of the pandemic Covid. Hope that the history does not follow fiction. My vote is nine.
Title (Brazil): "Os 12 Macacos" ("The 12 Monkeys")
"Twelve Monkeys" (1995) is a sci-fi ahead of the time. The plot has many details that requires the viewer to watch this film more than once to fully understand the story. Watching "Twelve Monkeys" again in 2021 is particularly scary in times of the pandemic Covid. Hope that the history does not follow fiction. My vote is nine.
Title (Brazil): "Os 12 Macacos" ("The 12 Monkeys")
- claudio_carvalho
- Jan 12, 2021
- Permalink
Now, I thought this movie was good and I suggest seeing it. It is very entertaining. However, several things detracted from my ability to really get into the story (which was very good). I'll see anything by Gilliam... you know its going to be something interesting.
1)Brad Pitt's acting. Come on, Brad... your character can't be THAT crazy? I would have appreciated a little more subtlety to his insanity. This led the viewer not to take his character seriously (let alone a global threat). His acting was very over the top and ineffective. Four years later he figured it out in Fight Club... in which he was superb. Unless he makes some horrible career moves, Pitt will be remembered as one of the premier/bad-boy actors of this period in film.
2) The ending... just flat out bad and melodramatic.
With some fine tuning, I believe 12 Monkeys could have been right up there with Seven or Silence of the Lambs as a great film of the 90's. However, it just isn't.
1)Brad Pitt's acting. Come on, Brad... your character can't be THAT crazy? I would have appreciated a little more subtlety to his insanity. This led the viewer not to take his character seriously (let alone a global threat). His acting was very over the top and ineffective. Four years later he figured it out in Fight Club... in which he was superb. Unless he makes some horrible career moves, Pitt will be remembered as one of the premier/bad-boy actors of this period in film.
2) The ending... just flat out bad and melodramatic.
With some fine tuning, I believe 12 Monkeys could have been right up there with Seven or Silence of the Lambs as a great film of the 90's. However, it just isn't.
Normally I try to avoid Sci-Fi movies as much as I can, because this just isn't a genre that really appeals to me. Light sabers, UFO's, aliens, time traveling... most of the time it's nothing for me. However, there is one movie in the genre that I'll always give a place in my list of top movies and that's this "Twelve Monkeys" I remember to be completely blown away by it the first time, but even now, after having it seen several times already, I'm still one of its biggest fans. Every time I see it, this movie seems to get better and better.
Somewhere in the distant future all people live underground because an unknown and lethal virus wiped out five billion people in 1996, leaving only 1 percent of the population alive. James Cole is one of them. He's a prisoner who lives in a small cage and who is chosen as a 'volunteer' to be sent back to in time to gather information about the origin of the epidemic. They believe it was spread by a mysterious group called 'The Twelve Monkeys' and need the virus before it mutated, so that scientists can study it. But their time traveling machine doesn't work perfectly yet and he is accidentally sent to 1990, where he meets Dr. Kathryn Railly, a psychiatrist, and Jeffrey Goines, the insane son of a famous scientist and virus expert...
What I like so much about this movie is the fact that it is never clear whether all what you are seeing is real or not. Is this just an illusion, created in the mind of a mentally ill man or is it real? Does he really come from the future and can he really travel through time? Was the population really wiped out by a virus, released by the army of The Twelve Monkeys? Those are all questions that will leave you wondering from the beginning until the end. If the makers of this movie had chosen to make it all more obvious, I'm sure that I would never have liked it as much as I did now. It's just that mysteriousness that keeps me interested time after time. But that's not the only good thing about this movie of course. The acting is amazing too. Normally I'm not too much a fan of Bruce Willis, but what he did in this movie was just astonishing. Together with Madeleine Stowe and Brad Pitt he should have won several awards for it, because together with the amazing story, they made this movie work so incredibly well.
Even after several viewings, I'm still a huge fan of this movie. Except for this movie, I have only seen one other Terry Gilliam movie and that's "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", which wasn't bad, but didn't really convince me either. However, it's this movie that really makes me look forward to his other work. I give it a 9/10, maybe even a 9.5/10.
Somewhere in the distant future all people live underground because an unknown and lethal virus wiped out five billion people in 1996, leaving only 1 percent of the population alive. James Cole is one of them. He's a prisoner who lives in a small cage and who is chosen as a 'volunteer' to be sent back to in time to gather information about the origin of the epidemic. They believe it was spread by a mysterious group called 'The Twelve Monkeys' and need the virus before it mutated, so that scientists can study it. But their time traveling machine doesn't work perfectly yet and he is accidentally sent to 1990, where he meets Dr. Kathryn Railly, a psychiatrist, and Jeffrey Goines, the insane son of a famous scientist and virus expert...
What I like so much about this movie is the fact that it is never clear whether all what you are seeing is real or not. Is this just an illusion, created in the mind of a mentally ill man or is it real? Does he really come from the future and can he really travel through time? Was the population really wiped out by a virus, released by the army of The Twelve Monkeys? Those are all questions that will leave you wondering from the beginning until the end. If the makers of this movie had chosen to make it all more obvious, I'm sure that I would never have liked it as much as I did now. It's just that mysteriousness that keeps me interested time after time. But that's not the only good thing about this movie of course. The acting is amazing too. Normally I'm not too much a fan of Bruce Willis, but what he did in this movie was just astonishing. Together with Madeleine Stowe and Brad Pitt he should have won several awards for it, because together with the amazing story, they made this movie work so incredibly well.
Even after several viewings, I'm still a huge fan of this movie. Except for this movie, I have only seen one other Terry Gilliam movie and that's "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", which wasn't bad, but didn't really convince me either. However, it's this movie that really makes me look forward to his other work. I give it a 9/10, maybe even a 9.5/10.
- philip_vanderveken
- Aug 14, 2005
- Permalink
While I didn't dislike this movie, I had to put aside any understanding about the implications of time travel that stuck in my mind. I love time travel movies, but they always leave a bittersweet taste for me. The story is interesting but I can never get beyond the point of "What is he trying to do?" The effects launched by travel into the past are so fundamentally unpredictable, they can't stand up. He says he can't change things and then goes about changing things. I can sense the frustration in Bruce Willis's character. He is trying to buy favor with his own time. But how can he even have his own time if he changes the past, even in the smallest way. We could go on. Once we just choose to ignore these questions, we have a basic chase movie where the kidnap victim does begin to relate to her captor and his cause. I just can't get past the previously mentioned factors. I will give Bruce Willis credit. He plays the haunted, victimized creature he becomes very well. Brad Pitt plays a very tightly wound nut case as well.
In 2027 James Cole is a prisoner living beneath the streets of Philadelphia with some of the very few survivors of a virus which wiped out most of humankind back in 1996. Somehow these people living under the streets have invented time travel. OK then. The scientists in charge send Cole back to 1996 to collect information on the virus in order to develop a cure. Why, if you have time travel capabilities, the focus is on finding a cure for the few people alive in 2027 rather than stopping the virus from wiping out the species in the first place is not particularly clear. Anyhow Cole's mission gets off to a bad start when he ends up in 1990 rather than 1996 and immediately finds himself placed in a mental institution. This is all very weird. It's about to get much weirder.
Cole ends up jumping back and forth in time, quite befuddled by the whole experience. Anyone watching this film will also feel that sense of befuddlement. It's certainly an intriguing story but one which director Terry Gilliam never really got a firm grasp on. The film ends up being a bit of a disjointed mess. You're drawn into the story but ultimately end up lost in this movie's complex maze. Bruce Willis turns in a solid performance as Cole. He's solid and reliable, giving this film which threatens to veer out of control some desperately needed grounding. Brad Pitt is the other big star. He plays Jeffrey Goines who is one of the craziest crazies in the institution. Pitt plays the part with wild-eyed manic enthusiasm. The effect is quite jarring. Yes, Jeffrey is supposed to be crazy but this is some serious overacting on Pitt's part. Madeleine Stowe plays the female lead, Kathryn Railly, Cole's doctor at the institution. Cole pops in and out of her life. Initially she thinks he's nuts but as she processes new information she may have to re-evaluate that position. Unfortunately the chemistry between Willis and Stowe is lacking, the relationship between their characters falls rather flat. And as their relationship becomes more important in the story that becomes a big problem for the movie.
Ultimately 12 Monkeys is a rather frustrating film. It has an intriguing premise but the story does not play itself out in a very satisfying way. Things get muddled pretty quickly and the story twists itself into some confusing knots. The film tries to spring some surprises but telegraphs some of its twists way too soon, which is part of the reason the ending is not nearly as powerful as Gilliam would hope. Meanwhile Gilliam's assortment of visual tricks throughout serve no purpose other than to distract and annoy. Stowe's performance lacks energy, Pitt's has too much energy. Christopher Plummer is underused. Willis does a fine job but too much of what surrounds him disappoints. For all the jumping back and forth in time the film is rather slowly paced. The story may interest you but there really is not much in the way of entertainment. You would imagine a story such as this would be full of exciting moments but excitement is in very short supply. 12 Monkeys held great promise but in the end that promise is not fulfilled.
Cole ends up jumping back and forth in time, quite befuddled by the whole experience. Anyone watching this film will also feel that sense of befuddlement. It's certainly an intriguing story but one which director Terry Gilliam never really got a firm grasp on. The film ends up being a bit of a disjointed mess. You're drawn into the story but ultimately end up lost in this movie's complex maze. Bruce Willis turns in a solid performance as Cole. He's solid and reliable, giving this film which threatens to veer out of control some desperately needed grounding. Brad Pitt is the other big star. He plays Jeffrey Goines who is one of the craziest crazies in the institution. Pitt plays the part with wild-eyed manic enthusiasm. The effect is quite jarring. Yes, Jeffrey is supposed to be crazy but this is some serious overacting on Pitt's part. Madeleine Stowe plays the female lead, Kathryn Railly, Cole's doctor at the institution. Cole pops in and out of her life. Initially she thinks he's nuts but as she processes new information she may have to re-evaluate that position. Unfortunately the chemistry between Willis and Stowe is lacking, the relationship between their characters falls rather flat. And as their relationship becomes more important in the story that becomes a big problem for the movie.
Ultimately 12 Monkeys is a rather frustrating film. It has an intriguing premise but the story does not play itself out in a very satisfying way. Things get muddled pretty quickly and the story twists itself into some confusing knots. The film tries to spring some surprises but telegraphs some of its twists way too soon, which is part of the reason the ending is not nearly as powerful as Gilliam would hope. Meanwhile Gilliam's assortment of visual tricks throughout serve no purpose other than to distract and annoy. Stowe's performance lacks energy, Pitt's has too much energy. Christopher Plummer is underused. Willis does a fine job but too much of what surrounds him disappoints. For all the jumping back and forth in time the film is rather slowly paced. The story may interest you but there really is not much in the way of entertainment. You would imagine a story such as this would be full of exciting moments but excitement is in very short supply. 12 Monkeys held great promise but in the end that promise is not fulfilled.
There is a story (possibly apocryphal) about an exchange between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the start of Twelve Monkeys. Gilliam (allegedly) produced a long list (think about the aircraft one from the Fifth Element) and handed it to Butch Bruce. It was entitled "Things Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It ended with a simple message saying: "please don't do any of the above in my movie".
There is a fact about this movie (definitely true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.
I would contend that these two factors played a huge role in creating the extraordinary (if not commercial) success that is The Twelve Monkeys.
Visually, the Twelve Monkeys is all that we have rightly come to expect from a Gilliam film. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and general (but magnificent) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his audience. Although the ending of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows heavily from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless movement of the characters towards their fate. It is this journey, and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.
I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all tend to suffer from the same weakness. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no denying that The Twelve Monkey's is a breath of fresh air in the tight-plotting department. Style, substance and form seem to merge in a way not usually seen from the ex-Python.
Whatever the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam also manages to get a first rate (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is excellent in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a suitably bonkers - and very scary - Brad Pitt.
It's been over a decade since this film was released. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered perspectives and the absurd one-way journey through time that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10.
There is a fact about this movie (definitely true). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.
I would contend that these two factors played a huge role in creating the extraordinary (if not commercial) success that is The Twelve Monkeys.
Visually, the Twelve Monkeys is all that we have rightly come to expect from a Gilliam film. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and general (but magnificent) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his audience. Although the ending of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows heavily from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless movement of the characters towards their fate. It is this journey, and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.
I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all tend to suffer from the same weakness. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no denying that The Twelve Monkey's is a breath of fresh air in the tight-plotting department. Style, substance and form seem to merge in a way not usually seen from the ex-Python.
Whatever the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam also manages to get a first rate (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is excellent in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a suitably bonkers - and very scary - Brad Pitt.
It's been over a decade since this film was released. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered perspectives and the absurd one-way journey through time that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10.
It is unfortunate that all big budget films cannot be as good as 12 MONKEYS. But alas is that not what makes these once in a while films so special? Obviously director Gilliam is a rare talent, a treasure. But even for him 12 Monkeys outshines nearly everything else he's ever done. (And that says a lot. Brazil after all is another incredible film.) But this movie has two things going for it that ale it rise to the very top of the top. #1 it features a stellar cast who all equally deliver fantastic performances. This is Bruce Willis at his peak -- before he sold out and went all Die Hard, when e still cared about being taken seriously as an actor. Same with Brad Pitt. Many attribute this film as the first time Pitt showed the world that he truly was an actor and not just another pretty face. (He further proved that point in Fight Club and many others through the years -- Money Ball, Tree of Life, et al.) and then there's Madeline Stowe. Besides the stellar acting though 12 Monkeys accomplished something even more important: it gave us the opportunity for future films such as Memento and Inception. 12 Monkeys not only featured a non-linear approach to time travel, it did so erratically boldly dynamically and unapologetically so, allowing future filmmakers, like the aforementioned referenced Nolan brothers, to feel safe stepping even further out on those limbs. 12 Monkeys opened that door and so many others. This is a film you can see over and over and still see something new in it AND be moved by. A classic by all standards.
- The-Ambassador
- Nov 27, 2014
- Permalink
I grew up on Python and have followed Terry Gilliam's subsequent directorial career for more years than I care to remember. Half his output leaves me cold, the other half dazzle me beyond belief. 'Brazil' is his movie that I would rate the highest, but I've come to think that I have unfairly underrated 'Twelve Monkeys'. I have always enjoyed it, but I've only come to realize just how good a movie it really is. Sometimes I think it is even better than 'Brazil'. It's a close pick. Unlike 'Brazil' Gilliam didn't come up with the script. He basically was initially involved as a director for hire. Thankfully the script itself (by David and Janet Peoples) is first rate. On top of that Gilliam manages to stamp his own style and approach on to the material without sliding into complete self-indulgence as he sometimes does. The budget of this movie wasn't anywhere near as large as you would imagine from the impressive results on screen. It looks superb. Gilliam coaxes first rate performances out of Bruce Willis (quite a surprise) and Brad Pitt (not such a surprise, see also 'Johnny Suede' and 'Kalifornia'). Madeline Stowe is also very good, as is Christopher Plummer, and in a small but important role, David Morse. It's difficult to fault this movie. It is a joy to watch, and improves with each viewing. I also highly recommend Chris Marker's 'La Jetee', the short experimental film which inspired 'Twelve Monkeys'. It is also brilliant.
I had the privilege of seeing this film at a preview screening years ago, and outside the theater I was confronted by a camera crew from a local TV station looking for comments on the film. At the time, the only words that escaped my mouth were "Awesome. Just awesome." I like to think I can articulate myself a little better than that, but at the time I was somewhat incapable of doing so.
The story is intriguing and thought provoking, and the acting is first rate from all the principals. This film was the first one that Terry Gilliam directed that he didn't have a hand in the writing credit for. Back with Universal after his long, arduous battle with them over "Brazil", Terry had achieved what he wanted most; the "final cut". Terry is a master craftsman, and each shot is like a beautifully conceived painting that has been constructed carefully with determination and conviction. It is only justice that such an individual should be unfettered in his attempts to convey a concept. Unfortunately, limitations still exist in such arrangements.
The Universal Collector's Edition DVD of this film is simply amazing, although most of the bonus features aren't listed on the box. It contains among other things, a director/producer audio commentary and an informative and extremely interesting 90 minute documentary on the making of the film called "The Hamster Factor and Other Tales of 12 Monkeys". It tells of some of the creative pitfalls in filmmaking, including a test of mettle when preview screenings tested poorly, striking the team with feelings of self-doubt and despair. Fortunately, for all of us, they decided to change very little about the film and released it to an enormous success.
The story is intriguing and thought provoking, and the acting is first rate from all the principals. This film was the first one that Terry Gilliam directed that he didn't have a hand in the writing credit for. Back with Universal after his long, arduous battle with them over "Brazil", Terry had achieved what he wanted most; the "final cut". Terry is a master craftsman, and each shot is like a beautifully conceived painting that has been constructed carefully with determination and conviction. It is only justice that such an individual should be unfettered in his attempts to convey a concept. Unfortunately, limitations still exist in such arrangements.
The Universal Collector's Edition DVD of this film is simply amazing, although most of the bonus features aren't listed on the box. It contains among other things, a director/producer audio commentary and an informative and extremely interesting 90 minute documentary on the making of the film called "The Hamster Factor and Other Tales of 12 Monkeys". It tells of some of the creative pitfalls in filmmaking, including a test of mettle when preview screenings tested poorly, striking the team with feelings of self-doubt and despair. Fortunately, for all of us, they decided to change very little about the film and released it to an enormous success.
A convict from the year 2035 is assigned a mission in order to win parole. He is sent back in time by a group of scientists to try and discover the source of a fatal plague that wiped out most of the human race. A plague which did not kill animals. In his travels he discovers mysterious graffiti announcing the arrival of the Army of the Twelve Monkeys.
Terry Gilliam has always been an interesting film director and visual stylist even when some of his movies are uneven. With 12 Monkeys he perhaps produces his most wholly satisfying work. It's a consistently compelling mystery within the framework of a time-travelling sci-fi narrative. It's a fairly complex story, so attention is demanded of the viewer. This is perhaps the chief strength of the film, however, as the labyrinthine narrative is one that benefits from multiple viewings. There are still some elements of ambiguity even at the end, so it's a film that actively encourages discussion.
There's a good cast too. Bruce Willis was on a bit of a run in the mid 90's and this is one of the great films he appeared in at the height of his powers. On the other hand, it's one of the first films where Brad Pitt was allowed to display his acting chops and show that he was a lot more than just a pretty face. While in visual terms, it's as interesting as you would expect from a Gilliam movie; although not as phantasmagorical as some of his more personal fantasy features. In 12 Monkeys he was a director for hire but it's not immediately obvious. Perhaps the distance this gave him actually helped instill some discipline that made the whole more cohesive on the whole. Whatever the case, this is an excellent sci-fi film with a compelling central mystery.
Terry Gilliam has always been an interesting film director and visual stylist even when some of his movies are uneven. With 12 Monkeys he perhaps produces his most wholly satisfying work. It's a consistently compelling mystery within the framework of a time-travelling sci-fi narrative. It's a fairly complex story, so attention is demanded of the viewer. This is perhaps the chief strength of the film, however, as the labyrinthine narrative is one that benefits from multiple viewings. There are still some elements of ambiguity even at the end, so it's a film that actively encourages discussion.
There's a good cast too. Bruce Willis was on a bit of a run in the mid 90's and this is one of the great films he appeared in at the height of his powers. On the other hand, it's one of the first films where Brad Pitt was allowed to display his acting chops and show that he was a lot more than just a pretty face. While in visual terms, it's as interesting as you would expect from a Gilliam movie; although not as phantasmagorical as some of his more personal fantasy features. In 12 Monkeys he was a director for hire but it's not immediately obvious. Perhaps the distance this gave him actually helped instill some discipline that made the whole more cohesive on the whole. Whatever the case, this is an excellent sci-fi film with a compelling central mystery.
- Red-Barracuda
- Apr 19, 2012
- Permalink
Shockingly Realistic with the condition what we r going through now in 2020.. a movie ahead if it's time. Bruce is phenomenal in this one. One of the greatest time travel movie in Hollywood.
Pretty good film with great twists and turns that keep you engaged. All the acting is wonderful from Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt. The plot is very interesting and felt unique. Some scenes felt like they dragged on a bit could have used some more editing. Overall still a good film with a fresh plot that was enjoyable.
- aleksanderk-95350
- Oct 3, 2021
- Permalink
I don't know why his name is not under credits, but Pitt has done one of the best acts ever, of his career. No wonder he was nominated an Oscar for this. For all his amazing looks, he puts too much hard work in his roles. I never thought if that crazy guy role for a slim, good looking, stubbled stud will ever work. But he proved these amazing guys too can be crazy, that too beautifully.
Bruce was good as usual, may be too much drooling in his role and for his psychiatrist. Even for that personality he easily managed to overpower those two guys in the theater (kinda Die Hard thing). That scene was funny as hell.
Time travels, I think, if are that frequent, can never be right on the money. Ending up in the trenches as result is never a good idea. Can't they transport the person with his clothes on. I mean I will never wish to be teleported to some place naked, at-least factor in the weather for God's sake.
We have witnessed Corona recently and 2035 is a bit far away. Doesn't portend well for the human race.
Overall a good watch #TwelveMonkeys1995 - 8/10.
Bruce was good as usual, may be too much drooling in his role and for his psychiatrist. Even for that personality he easily managed to overpower those two guys in the theater (kinda Die Hard thing). That scene was funny as hell.
Time travels, I think, if are that frequent, can never be right on the money. Ending up in the trenches as result is never a good idea. Can't they transport the person with his clothes on. I mean I will never wish to be teleported to some place naked, at-least factor in the weather for God's sake.
We have witnessed Corona recently and 2035 is a bit far away. Doesn't portend well for the human race.
Overall a good watch #TwelveMonkeys1995 - 8/10.
- sudhirkumarpal8
- Apr 4, 2021
- Permalink
I thought I had seen this film a couple of times but realised I could never get past the psychotic characters and crazies. Very Blade Runner like in that respect. But in this post covid year, it made for a great story with just a bit of sci fi. Lots of clever little homages and not a mobile phone in sight, and the whole 1990s US looks so retro.
I liked the film, but it's a little overrated in hindsight. I wish the story could have been played out smarter, without the constant nutjob acting which became just annoying. Clockwork Orange next!
I liked the film, but it's a little overrated in hindsight. I wish the story could have been played out smarter, without the constant nutjob acting which became just annoying. Clockwork Orange next!
- dingalingalong
- Apr 2, 2021
- Permalink
I am convinced that most people here who rated this movie as "masterpiece" or excellent did it so because it was directed by a member of the Monty Python, which they, like me, love. Let me tell you: this movie is not that good! In fact it is bad.
It is overlong, full of overacting, the sets look amateurish, the story is very confusing and the end is completely unsatisfying.
Unfortunately, I felt like I wasted two hours of my life.
It is overlong, full of overacting, the sets look amateurish, the story is very confusing and the end is completely unsatisfying.
Unfortunately, I felt like I wasted two hours of my life.
- Freethinker_Atheist
- Aug 21, 2017
- Permalink