To change the future you must know the past

Rating: 7/10 (6 June 2013)

In Twelve monkeys, a disease killed almost the whole world population in 1996. Everybody who survived lives under the ground to make sure they won't get the disease. However, they want to live above ground again, but obviously if they go there they will get infected by the virus. To avoid that from happening they have to make an anti-virus. They send prisoners into the past to trace the path of the virus and find out more about it, so they can make the anti-virus and live on the surface of the Earth again. James Cole is one of the prisoners and gets sent into the past, but he gets sent to the wrong year. He is declared crazy because he says he's from the future and gets locked into a house for crazy people. When the scientists from the 'future' find out that he was sent to the wrong year, they sent him to the right year. Still, no one believes him, until one person finally does believe him and tries to help him. Now, let's take a look at the narrative form of the film. The dramatic structure is a four-part structure; it has a rising action, climax, falling action and a resolution. That is also what makes this movie great to watch because there is a huge climbing action part where we actually get to know the characters and the story develops. Then almost at the end of the movie there is a very abrupt, but very exciting climax. It's a linear narrative form, so in this case the fabula and syuzhet are both the same as the plot. It might seem that it isn't chronological, because the time traveling and dreams make it look like there are flashbacks and flash forwards, but from James' perspective everything happens in chronological order. Also Terry Gilliam chose to use the first persons view, the whole story is told from Willis perspective. Using this technique also makes the watcher confused because you're not shore whether you can trust Willis or not (because you obviously don't know what the other actors are thinking).The confusion this causes also builds up tension and makes the movie exciting to watch. This means that perspective is really important in this film. You could also argue that it is a nonlinear narrative form, but if I'd explain why I'd spoil the movie. The film is also non- diegetic, because there is no story teller involved. One would say it has an open ending, which leaves room for imagination, but I am still not sure whether I should say that the movie twelve monkeys has an open or closed ending. This is because most questions I asked myself at the beginning of the movie where answered at the end. However, still some parts are missing and you will never be completely sure what happened after the ending of the movie. As the plot is so complicated and completely incomprehensible for the watcher at the start, there has to be a way in which all the pieces will fall together in the end. Terry Gilliam used some very clever techniques in his movie as well by starting the movie with Cole's dream. When being introduced to that very first scene, it doesn't make any sense. But as the dream keeps reappearing throughout the movie, each time we see it, we understand a bit more of it. This goes on until the end, where, when we see the full dream for the last time, it all makes sense. This way of unfolding and explaining the plot is very interesting. The overall light and color used in the movie is a bit "depressing"; the saturation is quite low which creates this mood. Most of the movie uses front light, just like normal daylight caused by the sun. Not many complicated light and color techniques are used, to avoid the watcher from getting distracted from the plot, which is very complicated and needs the entire watcher's attention to be understood. This is a very intelligently done. What Gilliam also does is moving the camera around very fast. The key to making the movie interesting is by making the watcher confused and therefore making him want to understand the movie and see how it ends. Terry Gilliam definitely succeeded in making it interesting with this sixth technique. Overall, my opinion about the movie had several points of view. Even though for me the movie wasn't what I usually like to watch, I could come to the following conclusion: The movie has an incredibly original plot, and the way it is presented to the watcher is very interesting in a complicated way. It is a movie anyone could watch, and I would recommend it to a broad audience; a lot of action and quite some violence is involved, some science-fiction (because of the time traveling), mystery, all blended into one movie, so anyone who likes those kind of movies can watch it. One thing is missing; romanticism. There is barely any romance in the movie, and this is what may already make the movie less interesting for part of the female audience.