Swings for the seats

Rating: Null/10 (15 September 2004)

Terry Gilliam has made a career of trying to make films markedly different from the mainstream. That's a riskier career path than following the trails everyone else is using. It's neither more nor less commendable, although there are those who worship distinction for it's own stake.
A good movie is worth watching whether it's original or derivative and a bad movie is still a bad movie even if it's uniquely bad.
Gilliams record, apart from his Monty Python related work, includes the enjoyable TIME BANDITS, and BRAZIL, a masterpiece, IMO. BARON MUNCHHAUSEN is, perhaps, better left in the bin along with the careers of the executives who green-lighted the project.
TWELVE MONKEYS is, like BRAZIL, an essay in dystopia. Both movies revolve around malfunctioning societies. In the world of BRAZIL, we have a parallel universe which crosses 1930s-style fascism with an unmistakable Monty Pythonesque sensibility. In TWELVE MONKEYS, it's a future in which humanity is driven into a quasi-police state in a world dying from the results of bioterrorism.
Also like BRAZIL, TWELVE MONKEYS focuses on the efforts of an inhabitant of the dystopia to escape. In BRAZIL, the escape is retreat into a fantasy world. In TWELVE MONKEYS, a literal escape into the past is paralleled by an attempt by the protagonist, played by Bruce Willis, to destroy the dystopian future by preventing the event which causes it's creation.
In both films, the theme is that escape is impossible. But, TWELVE MONKEYS takes a very different tone from BRAZIL, where the fantasy interludes were at least partly light, if always ending in frustration. And, even though the world of BRAZIL was ugly, the film took such an offbeat look at it that there was humor relieving what ought, when all the decorations are stripped away, have been a depressing reaction. TWELVE MONKEYS is not funny. It's dystopia is offered up more or less straight, so the future world scenes set an ugly tone.
The present world scenes do not copy the light tone of the fantasy scenes of BRAZIL, either. They are more "realistic" then their future world counterparts, but not really lighter in feel.
As a result, whatever other merits TWELVE MONKEYS has, it tends to be a dark, dissonant piece.
As others have written, it attempts, in part, at least, to be an art film. And, it takes a relatively difficult plot concept, which is bound to alienate and lose some of the people who watch it. Essentially, it's a - fairly trivial - argument about predestination, and the absence of free will. The end is inevitable, despite the protagonist's best efforts to change it.
Alternatively, one might view the whole film as an exercise in solipsism, if the Bruce Willis character is seen as insane and hallucinating the entire plot.
Either way, frankly, there a bit of the air of a freshman dormitory in a liberal arts college to the piece. An impassioned argument over a philosophical issue by people who feel more deeply than they think.
However, the plot is well thought out and consistent.The outcome follows from the premises and the internal logic of the plot is, well, logical. The ending is not just grafted on. It's a - if not necessarily "the" - natural outcome of all which went before it. If one is attracted to the "coming full circle" aesthetic of story telling, there's not much to complain about.
The acting is good, especially both Bruce Willis, as the put-upon everyman, and Brad Pitt, in one of the most odd, yet compelling, roles of his career.
All in all, an interesting movie. Not one to come to looking for laughs. It requires some effort, and it's depressing. But, entertaining, to a degree.
The Winona Ryder character, from BEETLEJUICE, would love it.
bsl