Brazil, by Terry Gilliam

[ApostateAbe]

If you recognize the name Terry Gilliam, that is because he was part of the Monty Python crew (the animator). In 1985, he made a movie called Brazil, which I am ashamed to say I have never seen before tonight, or even so much as heard of, strangely. Also strange is that the movie has nothing related to the country of Brazil except the style of some of the music and the title. If you haven't seen this film, well then, shame, shame, shame on you--you must see it immediately. It is a 1984 comedy. If that sounds twisted, then you get the idea.

[Dingfod]

I love Braziland its quirky blend retro and moderne in the various future machines, one of the few times anyone has ever seen a Messerschmitt car in a movie, and of course, Robert De Niro as Harry Tuttle, renegade heating engineer. A dark but fun look at a dark Orwellian future. I haven't seen it in more than a decade, but I seriously need to buy that one, is it available on DVD?

[livius drusus]

I've never been able to get through it. People keep trying to shame me about it but it doesn't seem to motivate me when push comes to shove.

[Dingfod]

Maybe you hadn't smoked nearly enough weed.

[wildernesse]

I have seen Brazil (and all the way through), and I really don't think it's anything to be shamed into seeing. Not really my style, though, so I would say that.

[Godless Dave]

It didn't do it for me. My artsy college friends loved it. They also loved other Terry Gilliam movies like "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" (snooze-fest). I thought it was a ripoff of 1984 only not as funny. However I must say I really like the trench coat with super wide brimmed hat look.

I believe the studio fucked with the film after Terry was finished directing it, and it didn't turn out to be everything he wanted it to be.

[Dingfod]

Okay, perhaps the movie had limited appeal. That certainly would explain its small box office take and short run. It's done well on video because of weirdos like me.

And yeah, the trenchcoat and super wide-brimmed fedora look is cool.

Sometimes I think it would be cool if computers used antique typewriter type keyboards and if accounting clerks wore translucent green plastic shades.

[livius drusus]

Maybe you hadn't smoked nearly enough weed.

What is this "enough weed" you speak of? God knows I've never encountered it. :bonghit:

[Goliath]

I found Brazil to mainly be a long, nonsensical piece of crap...I couldn't make it all the way through the movie, either (although I've seen about 3/4 of it). The only thing that Brazil has on Lost Highway was that Brazil was only slightly more interesting than driving at night.

[Dingfod]

Maybe you hadn't smoked nearly enough weed.

What is this "enough weed" you speak of? God knows I've never encountered it. :bonghit:Pipeweed, the tobacco of wizards and hobbits, of course.

Generous quantities of alcohol are a decent substitute allowing one to enjoy things that would otherwise be intolerable or just plain boring.

[Farren]

God I can't believe some of the comments on this thread. Brazil is definitely in my top ten movies of all time. Its super-fukken brilliant. Within a few minutes of the beginning of the movie I was so completely gripped it would take a nuclear detonation to distract me. I've watched it, oh, about 7 times so far. I can assure you its certainly not a 1984 ripoff. The subject matter is similar but its definitely a different kind of beast.

Interesting history, too. Apparently when the films distributors screened it for test audiences in the US, people found the dream sequences "confusing" (which I think is bizarre, given their obvious relevance to the story), so they asked Gilliam to take them out. Gilliam refused, so they refused to allow its distribution (they had exclusive rights). Gilliam stuck to his guns and held private screenings of the master copy in New York, which resulted in it winning several awards including a Film Critics award without having ever hit the circuit, Eventually it was released on video circuit and has gone on to cult legend status.

[Godless Dave]

Yep, the people who like Brazil really like it. It topped the list of "movies I hate that everyone else loves" in a thread I started once.

[viscousmemories]

I've always loved Brazil, and have probably seen it a dozen times. I reviewed it in my movies journal here and it has come up in a thread or two.

One nitpick of previous replies: According to the director's cut DVD flap, "Orwellian" is a common but inaccurate characterization of the film. Gilliam's intention was to satirize - through gross exagerration - bureaucracy (the most evil fucking word in the world that I can never spell without looking it up) as it exists today, not paint a picture of a possible future.

[Darren]

I've always loved Brazil, and have probably seen it a dozen times. I reviewed it in my movies journal here and it has come up in a thread or two.

One nitpick of previous replies: According to the director's cut DVD flap, "Orwellian" is a common but inaccurate characterization of the film. Gilliam's intention was to satirize - through gross exagerration - bureaucracy (the most evil fucking word in the world that I can never spell without looking it up) as it exists today, not paint a picture of a possible future.

I've loved the film ever since I first saw it, and I've lost count of how many times I've watched it. :yup:

As for the nitpick, I'm not entirely sure that Orwell's intention with 1984 was particularly futuristic either. As far as I know, the original title of the book 1984 was going to be "The Last Man in Europe" or something like that. In any case, again going by my shaky memory, I'm pretty sure the book was published in 1948, and the final title was just the publish date with reversed order of the last two digits: 1948 - 1984. What I'm getting at is that in 1984, Orwell was also going after something that he saw as underway and relevant at the time, and that it was not really intended so much as a "futuristic" novel than a critique of authoritarianism. In that respect, I'm not sure that the "Orwellian" characterization of Brazil is entirely out of order.
I also think that the drab greyness and implicit authoritarianism of the "real world" (as opposed to the "dream world") in Brazil shares a great deal with the picture Orwell paints of society in 1984 (or is it 1948?).

[viscousmemories]

Thanks for the response, Darren. I have always heard 1984 characterized as futuristic, but I confess I've never read it so I can't really speak to that. In any case, here's what the DVD booklet says:

While researching a book on the making of and the feud over the American release of Terry Gilliam's BRAZIL, I read nearly every review published in the U.S., and saw very few that failed to describe the story as "futuristic" or "Orwellian". Most called it both.

The comparisons are understandable, if inaccurate. There isn't a futuristic moment or element in BRAZIL. The story is Orwellian, in the sense that it is set in a totalitarian state where individuality is smothered by enforced conformity. But where George Orwell, writing in 1948, was envisioning a future ruled by fascism and technology, Gilliam was satirizing the bureaucratic, largely dysfunctional industrial world that had been driving him crazy all his life.

- Jack Mathews, author of The Battle of "Brazil" and film critic for Newsday
I just realized this DVD set (it's my roommate's, and called "The Criterion Collection") has a "making of" video as well as other interesting looking features on two additional DVD's, so I think I'll be watching those soon.