Is he mad or are we? - Director Terry Gilliam

Rating: Null/10 (5 August 2013)

This film continues an ongoing thread of discussion in film history, about the subjective nature of memories and how they effect the perception of reality. It wears its specific references on its sleeves (and rightfully so): in the opening credits it says inspired by "La Jetèe" (1962) and later on the main characters literally watches "Vertigo" (1958) in a movie theater. The scene in "Vertigo" where they count the rings on the redwood tree align these films closest touching points, and reveal the overall story structure because they all exist in each of the three films. This is one of the most relevant use of a reference in any film I can think of, where we who have a memory of all three films, replicate in our minds the effect felt by the main characters in all three films - especially this one. A brilliant trick which evoke the memory of "Vertigo" and "La Jetèe" in the viewers mind, and thereby plant a memory just like in the mind of the main characters of these films. A memory which reflects the use of memory in the film, a memory encompassing a whole life of memories, from a young kid until his death. A memory of this film where we know the start (because the scene takes place in the third act) and with the reference we know the ending, but we still don't know how we're getting there.
This film cleverly exist in a vortex in between these other two films, drawing a references here and there into its core which create a new jumbling but cohesive meaning. The result is presented from a subjective point of view, where the explanation of why and how exist in the other films. The other two films explained more thoroughly the overall story, the bigger picture, while this is the experience of the subjective journey at the center of its swirling madness.
I can go on and on about the references to Hitchcock and the history of the subject, but it wouldn't tell you anything about whether the film succeeds in its mission and also, I'm sure you can find a better analysis elsewhere on the internet. :)
A film doesn't have to be a complete original to be great, even remakes can be better than the original films, it just have to be great within its own framework. A theme which this film wants to confuse and confront the viewer with is madness, and what it is in humans and societies. And I feel it fall short in this aspect of the story compared to that of the subject of memories. It compares the madness of the majority (e.g. the twelve monkey's army)and the individual (e.g. Dr. Peters), as well as who we lock up and don't, in a muddled way which for me is one of the things that drags the overall rating down by a margin.
Why I don't necessary think this film reaches the same level of greatness as the other two films mentioned, could have something to do with that this film wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the other films. It's a very good film that stands on its own legs, but it still needs the support from the other films holding each of its hands to remain upright and it still doesn't stand as tall as the others. It gives the subject a fresh perspective but not a new one, and never really starts taking its first wobbling steps towards a life of its own in that territory.