12 MONKEYS
A film review by Billy Bud Vermillion
Copyright 1996 Billy Bud Vermillion
Twelve Monkeys, a film by Terry Gilliam starring Bruce Willis, Madeline Stowe, Brad Pitt, and(hee-hee!)Frank Gorshin
I've always been a great admirer of Terry Gilliam's films. His dark, often humorous, always edgy vision of the world has had me enthralled since Time Bandits(one of my favorite films--favorite as opposed to those films which I acknowledge as great; it just has that certain magic which grabs me).
Twelve Monkeys, in a lot of ways, is sort of a follow-up piece to his other films. He manages to incorporate the idea that insanity is relative(seen in The Fisher King), the concept of a dystopian future where one cannot trust anyone else(Brazil), and, the death of loved ones(seen in Time Bandits--though they weren't really so well-liked in that case, The Fisher King, The Adventures of Baron Von Munchausen, and, in a weird kind of reversal, Brazil). In fact, Twelve Monkeys seems to place Gilliam in the position of reworking many old ideas, often those of other people(La Jetee is mentioned as source material, and Vertigo is actually paid tribute to in the narrative, itself).
This aside, the film is very much Gilliam's own novel work. He has created a strikingly original time travel movie, drawing some fine performances out of Bruce Willis(wow, I didn't use to think this guy could act!)and Brad Pitt(who, for a welcome change, isn't playing a dumb bohunk in this one, but rather an intelligent lunatic).
Time travel movies tend to be difficult for filmmakers to present in realistic ways, the paradoxes involved often clouding up viewers minds to the point of numbness. Gilliam doesn't elude this bugaboo, though he does throw some interesting tricks into the mix. I especially enjoyed the ambiguity Willis felt towards his perceptions of reality. At the end, we are left wondering whether Willis' character, James Cole, caused the end of the world or not.
Lemme explain: sometime in the future, Cole is sent back in time by a group of scientists to learn about the Army of the Twelve Monkeys who, in 1996, allegedly let loose a virus capable of destroying the world.He is sent back to 1991, however, where he meets Pitt and Madeline Stowe, a psychiatrist. He's incarcerated in a mental institution(Gilliam may be making a strong statement of social and moral outrage at the state of mental health care by his depictions of the hospital). He tries to warn them about the future, but it only helps in cementing his status as "insane." He is then brought back to the future, sent back to 1996, where he kidnaps Stowe(who has written a book on lunatics with end-of-the-world theories, shuttles back and forth a few more times, becomes convinced he's crazy, gets shot in 1918, Stowe ends up believing his story, they search for the Army of the Twelve Monkeys, etc. etc. Kinda confusing, but the confusion is necessary for Gilliam to keep his form consistent with his intentions. Did Cole, by going back in time to 1991, cause Stowe to write her book, which was read by a virologist/nutbar,which in turn led to the unleashing of the plague and the endanger-ification of mankind? Don't know the answer to that one. Gilliam gives us a few clues, but no hard and fast answers. The film's final shot is touching and provacative and is the best pseudo-answer available: a boy's eyes, staring up into the sky, weeping. The boy is Cole(woops, gave it away!sorry to those who ain't done seen it)and this scene seems to suggest a circularity to time, that the future has ramifications for the past and present and vice versa.
In short, it's a damn tasty flick.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews