Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Capone takes a trip inside Terry Gilliam's THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR. PARNASSUS and demands that everyone see it at least twice!!!

Hey, everyone. Capone in Chicago here. Sometimes a work of art isn't a pretty, serene, neatly packaged thing. Sometimes it's a controlled mess--chaotic, with touches of the grotesque and very few shiny corners. The latest work from director and co-writer (along with Charles McKeown) Terry Gilliam is an uproarious celebration of the way our minds work and the ways they are constantly conflicted, challenged, and tempted to follow the path to instant gratification rather than spiritual fulfillment. THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR. PARNASSUS is also a certified riot, a carnival ride, a love story, and a biblical epic co-starring the devil himself (played by the only man with the pipes or balls to play Satan the way he should be played, Tom Waits). My favorite Gilliam films are those with which he is able to truly cut loose and let us peak behind his eyes into that wonderfully complicated brain of his. DR. PARNASSUS is such a film and then some, with a small squadron of gifted actors guiding us through a visual landscape that barely makes sense after a second viewing of the film. In fact, it's difficult for me to imagine that anyone could really process everything that's going on in this movie after only one sitting. I've seen it twice and I'm ready to experience it again just to make sure I didn't miss anything. The first time, you watch it to get to know the characters and learn the basic plot; the second time, you take in the ideas behind the Imaginarium itself--a world literally behind the mirror where your soul is up for grabs. Just thinking about it again makes me ready to see it one more time. Of course, DR. PARNASSUS will be remembered as the last filmed performance of Heath Ledger, who plays Tony, a man found hanging by his neck from a bridge by a group of traveling performers and conjurers. They save him, and he uses his skills as a salesman to help bring much-needed customers to their little buggy of wonders. It's actually kind of remarkable and, in a weird way, fortuitous what Ledger was able to complete for this film and what he wasn't. If what is on screen is the only indication, he shot everything except what I assume would have been largely green screen work for scenes that take place on the other side of the Imaginarium's mirror. In an effort that I think makes for a better film, Tony transforms into a different-looking person (played by different actors) each time he enters the other side. Johnny Depp, Colin Farrell, and Jude Law take their turn attempting to capture the spirited performance that Ledger brought to this role. It's great to see that, much like he did in THE DARK KNIGHT, Ledger was interested in cutting loose and having fun with this part. And if you watch carefully, tucked away in the middle of Depp's appearance as Tony, you'll get a fitting and lovely tribute to those who pass away too young. I've somehow managed to make it this far in my review without even mentioning the rest of this memorable cast. Andrew Garfield (LIONS FOR LAMBS; the RED RIDING trilogy) plays Anton, the act's barker who is charged with bring customers to the world of Dr. Parnassus (Christopher Plummer, whose look for this part is remarkably similar to that of his portrait of Leo Tolstoy in the upcoming THE LAST STATION). Unbeknownst to his co-workers, Parnassus is actively attempting to protect souls from being captured by Mr. Nick (Waits). The prize for the most souls is the good doctor's daughter Valentina (model Lily Cole, giving a solid performance here that is part innocent, part temptress). Verne (Mini Me) Troyer is also on hand as Percy, and I was really pleased to see him get a role that wasn't just about having him around for comic visual relief. Percy is the voice of reason in this pack of freaks, and while Troyer isn't the greatest actor, he's a genuine standout. When Tony gets wind of Parnassus' plight to save his daughter from the devil, he dives head first into actively working to improve the customer count and save a few souls. While being a work of fantastical genius, THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR. PARNASSUS isn't always a pretty thing. These characters exist in the gritty, grimy streets of London. And while the world on the other side of the mirror is certainly more pristine at times, it too can turn pretty nasty, especially when Nick infiltrates and attempts to steal souls. But it's in this world where we see Gilliam shine as the visual artist he has been since his Monty Python days. My favorite Gilliam film remains FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS, and there are some very similar visual themes happening in DR. PARNASSUS. He doesn't create fantasy worlds to loose yourself in; he wants you tense, even scared about what's around the corner or just off frame. His images are, at times, disturbing, if only because you can't believe a single person could envision such things. For all these reasons, I implore you to check this film out. If you see it more than once, I guarantee you'll see very different films with each viewing. It's worth watching on the strength of Ledger's work alone, but it's everything else that's going on that's going to keep you enraptured.
-- Capone Follow Me On Twitter

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Jan. 8, 2010, 9:31 a.m. CST


    by alan_poon

    Can't wait to see this.Was Ledger really going to be that good?

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 9:32 a.m. CST

    This has been out for an age in the UK

    by Drsambeckett1984

    Absolutely loved it! Lily Cole is lovely.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Lily Cole?

    by alan_poon

    Lily Lily legs Lily?

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 9:39 a.m. CST

    i just took a huge shit

    by akkosa

    and it is a work of art and is just as entertaining, interesting and intelligent as this film. Nobody can disagree with me since it is art.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 9:48 a.m. CST

    Agreed with this article's title

    by Chakraborty

    Everyone should see it at least twice.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 9:51 a.m. CST

    BRAZIL will always be my favorite TG movie

    by ISleptWithKathyBatesAndAllThatIGotWasThisStupidTalkbackName

    However, FEAR AND LOATHING certainly comes close!.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10:09 a.m. CST

    12 Monkeys

    by Drsambeckett1984

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10:32 a.m. CST

    I saw this and it was mediocre as hell

    by manifestchaos

    Capone is as full of shit as ever

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10:35 a.m. CST

    I stand by my position

    by Jarek

    Thoroughly great film.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10:42 a.m. CST

    A Review

    by Samson_K

    I sent this to Harry back in October after I had seen it. There are a few mild spoilers.<BR><BR> The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus <BR><BR> I saw this yesterday and find this almost painful to say but I thought that the film, unfortunately, was a mess.<BR><BR> The film has moments of brilliance – vast imaginative vistas and landscapes that are artistically beautiful (although, and call me a Luddite if you want, but I ended up feeling that the CGI landscapes didn’t really suit Gilliam’s style – I ended up longing for the practical effects and sets that worked so well in his other fantasies.) Some of the performances are tip top – Verne Troyer is pretty damned wonderful as is Christopher Plummer and Tom Waits is incredible, bring a nice sense of beaten up humanity to the devil. The performance of the movie for me comes from Andrew Garfield – his Anton dominates every scene that he’s in – bringing warmth that the rest of the film sadly lacks. The general setting, a dark and bleak London (which almost becomes the city of Brazil in the way that it is presented) is very effective – giving the city a gothic feel that really does work.<BR><BR> Where the film fails is mostly in narrative! The film doesn’t seem to want to go anywhere – sure we are given an idea of the story, we are told what’s going to happen and what’s at stake but there is no real sense of – well, impetus. I’m not going to give anything away but Doctor Parnassus stands to lose a lot if he doesn’t win his bet against Mr. Nick but the way that the story unfolds shows none of the despair or urgency that should be at the heart of the movie. Parnassus acts in ways that implies that there is a race against time but it’s not something that is conveyed in the structure of the movie. The film is also let down by Lily Cole’s character – I’m not sure that I’d blame her acting but you can tell that Valentina is meant to be a natural successor to Sally Salt (from Munchausen) but she ends up being a bit bland and charmless for my liking. <BR><BR> Of course the movie has a notoriety of being Heath Ledger’s last movie and unfortunately his performance feels unfinished, in fact much of the film feels unfinished and I wonder if that may be down to the lack of opportunity to do pick up shots or ADR work? I think that Ledger was a charismatic and talented actor but this film doesn’t show that. He’s good, at times, and he’s amateurish at times. It feels, as I mention, unfinished. The replacement Tony’s are fine to a point but I do feel that the film suffers from the fact that this is what they had to do to finish. Specifically in the final sequences where, and I’m sorry but mild spoilers follow, you find out exactly who and what Tony is. As this makes up the last part of the movie you get the feeling that having Colin Farrell playing the part cheats the character a little. This is nothing against Farrell at all but because it’s Tony’s character thread’s denouement it loses impact because it’s not him. <BR><BR> I’ve read much about how Gilliam believes that it’s a better film because of the different faces of Tony but I’m not sure that I’d agree.<br><BR> The finale is confusing and fragmentary and characters seem to have pay-offs that aren’t filmed or edited well and again it’s a bit of a cheat against what could have been a marvellous film. I have no idea whether these problems were down to the screenplay and the changes that were thrust upon it or direction and editing but the film was flawed and ultimately a bit bland and aimless.<BR><BR> I love Gilliam, even having found something’s to like in Brothers Grimm, but for me ‘The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus’ is pretty much an exercise (and definition) of style over substance and that is a real shame.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 11:34 a.m. CST

    Samson, right from the first paragraph...

    by Chakraborty

    ...your review is off. I liked the film, but Verne Troyer's performance is stink awful. And the guy playing Anton comes off as a douche, and I hated that annoying little fuck. We agree that Cole is bland and dull, though... <p> But as is the case with all of Gilliam's films, people view them with different lenses, and bring a lot of themselves when it comes to interpreting them...even people who like his films tend to vary in terms of which ones they like...c'est la vie....but your review is off for me... and I found Ledger's performance in this film to be brilliant, and the best thing about the movie... <p> You claim to have liked Brothers Grimm, which I loathe, so I think we have different lenses, but I think people who enjoyed Brothers Grimm might share your view of this film.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Everyone's going ga ga over Ledger but

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    this movie had me sold at Christopher Plummer. I'll watch him in anything. I'm going to enjoy all the actors, but Plummer should be stand out.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 11:48 a.m. CST


    by The_taste_of_love

    Saw this a few months back and loved it. Lily Cole Mmmm. Didn't think much of Depp though. Colin Farrell knocked it out of the park.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 11:48 a.m. CST

    And didn't Plummer play Pitt's dad in Monkeys

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    or am I imagining things?

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 11:58 a.m. CST


    by The_taste_of_love

    Chakraborty you thought Lily Cole was dull??? Did we see the same film??? She sparkled with the burgeoning repressive desire of the innocent. can only imagine what it must've been like for the old Doc to have his daughter pop her cherry in his mind, that's all kinds of fucked up.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Burgeoning repressive desire of the innocent.........

    by The_taste_of_love

    .....also known round my way as being " a bit of a trouty young tart"

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 12:08 p.m. CST


    by Chakraborty

    She's pretty to look at...she looks like a porcelain doll with a beautiful set of tits...and Gilliam likes to choose some actors more for how they look rather than their acting ability, much like his placement of midgets in many of his films...but she has no charisma or personality...she's just something dazzling to look at...but I can't imagine why anyone would want to marry I totally sympathized with Tony's character (for the most part), and not at all with Anton.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 12:21 p.m. CST

    Marry her.. No.....

    by The_taste_of_love

    Do what Tony did to her??? Oohhhh yeah. But wasn't that her 'arc'. She played spoilt yet innocent girl that fullfilled her desire to realize it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Like Capone said, its about realizing the spiritual over the material.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 12:56 p.m. CST


    by Samson_K

    I said that I found something in Brothers Grimm to like - I liked the lead performances and the atmosphere.<BR><BR>I suppose that I found some things to like in this too but as a cohesive whole it wasn't as satisfying. I think that Anton was an anoying character but performed well. Also, as I mentioned Ledger was great at times but at times he was in my opinion a bit lost. Though I do think that may have been down, as I say, to lack of time for any reshoots or ADR.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 1 p.m. CST

    Why So PARNASSUS???

    by Broseph

    Seriously this looks like a head trip ala Lsd.I'll check it out.and it's heath ledger's final movie after the kick ass performance in the dark knight i feel it's owed to honor him.faer and loathing and twelve monkeys are my favorite tg films

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 1:03 p.m. CST

    Mess is right

    by fuldamobil

    Unfortunately, this film is a confused, confusing disaster. Samson hits the nail on the head, in my opinion. The story really has no logic. It seems to center around a contest with the Devil, but the Devil here doesn't seem to have much interest in whether he wins or loses. I don't really understand Leger's character. A major revelation at the end about him feels like a deus ex machina. Save for the very pretty and mildly charming Lily Cole, it's hard to stay interested. And, any film that requires Verne Troyer to give a performance is in big trouble. Now, I also hate Fear and Loathing, so maybe this film only appeals to those who like that movie.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 1:09 p.m. CST

    This film really isn't very good. Infact at points, it's painfu

    by RedJester

    Why is everyone trying to pretend this film is better than it really is? It's not. It's like all the writers for this site feel like they have some obligation to give the film rave reviews. Kind of like Harry did with the Lovely Bones (which was miles better, btw). And I was expecting to fall in love with this movie, I really was! It just didn't have anything to fall in love with unfortunately :(

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 1:15 p.m. CST

    fuldamobil....there may be something to that....

    by Chakraborty

    I love Fear and Loathing...while those who hate it call the story a perhaps if you like Fear and Loathing you'll like Parnassus.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 1:24 p.m. CST

    It's better than Tideland.

    by DarthCorleone

    That's almost the most positive thing I can say about it. Sorry - I really wanted to enjoy it, but I won't be giving it a second chance.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 3:01 p.m. CST

    it's supposed to be out nationwide today, however...

    by BillboeFett

    I can't seem to find it playing anywhere within 100 miles of here, dammit

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 4:42 p.m. CST

    All of Gilliam's films have drawn a wide disparity...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... of opinions, with relatively little middle ground between raves and pans. Folks seem to like his work or hate it. "Parnassus" seems like it's invoking that same dynamic. Most of his films also require more than one viewing to fully digest what's being thrown at the viewer. Love him or hate him, Gilliam is unique. <p> As a lover of "Tideland" which was pretty much universally reviled by critics and audiences alike, I have little doubt that IODP will at the very least, be an interesting visit to the cinema and will require repeated viewings to fully absorb. In that respect at least, Capone's review is probably on the mark. <p> If you haven't seen it yet, and I haven't, I encourage you to hold your fire. If you don't like his other films, why see it at all? Much less flame-post? If you like [some/most of] Gilliam's work and have seen the film but didn't like it, well, there's no accounting for taste now is there? Unless of course you're too intellectually dishonest to acknowledge that truism. Either way, why slam Capone for liking it? <p> Trubba Not, or flame away. I care not.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 5:27 p.m. CST

    on your 3rd viewing, eh?

    by squeak

    that's sweet. you know what's better than a film that takes at least 3 viewings to understand, a film that you can understand in a single viewing. sure, there are movies that are fun to watch often and movies that reveal layers, but how the hell can you be positive in a review about a movie that you apparently barely understood after one viewing?

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 6:33 p.m. CST

    I'll be seeing it this weekend.

    by schadenfreudian

    I really didn't care for Tideland, but thanks to Brazil, time bandits and 12 Monkeys, I'll see everything Gilliam makes.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 7:27 p.m. CST

    The Splendiferous Zeppelin Escapades

    by markjamesmurphy

    The Splendiferous Zeppelin Escapades Of Filliam H. Muffman

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 7:31 p.m. CST

    Alright I just saw the movie for the 83th time...

    by RedJester

    And boy was I wrong! The first time I saw this I thought it was a turd. Second time? Turd. But with every consequent viewing, the hidden layers of the film shined through a little more. Like the way Verne Troyer says, "Hey you!" gold, pure comedy gold.. Anyways enough of me ranting, just go see the movie 83 times. You won't regret it.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 8:55 p.m. CST

    Squeak & Red Jester: Miss the point much?

    by Skyway Moaters

    Perhaps wilfully, to serve an agenda? Have you seen the film?

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10 p.m. CST

    Skymoaters: No, clearly you missed the point

    by RedJester

    I saw the movie about a week and a half ago as I've stated numerous times on this and prior boards. But basically what I said was that I went into the movie thinking it would be amazing, that I truly wanted it to be amazing, but it ended up being a mess of a film and just because I love Gilliam and respect Ledger doesn't mean I'm not going to be honest and tell it like it is. And what it is is a mess of a movie. So no, no agenda here. Just honesty.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10:08 p.m. CST

    Have you seen the film Skyway Moaters?

    by RedJester

    Oh, that's right, you've stated that you haven't. Do yourself a favor and see the damn film before degrading others opinions who have. The film is a complete and utter mess. Deal with it.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 10:43 p.m. CST

    Yes, I've seen it.

    by DarthCorleone

    Living in LA has its privileges in that respect. Full disclosure: love Brazil, love 12 Monkeys, generally consider myself a Gilliam fan, etc. Loathe Tideland. Can't stand it. One of the most painful viewing experiences of my life. Parnassus wasn't that bad for me, but the plotting and the logic of its universe are - as several above say - simply a mess. It takes at least forty minutes before anything actually happens that moves the movie forward at all. And ultimately, there's no growth, no arc, and I'll be damned if I could tell you who the protagonist of the movie actually is. It has some appealing and creative ideas and themes, but they all just sort of feel slapped together onto a skeleton of a narrative.

  • Jan. 8, 2010, 11:40 p.m. CST

    saw it in the UK

    by D o o d

    didn't think much of it!

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 1:29 a.m. CST

    Fair enough Red...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... see my earlier post. I was talking about Gilliam films and repeated viewings in general. Hope I like it more than you did. I'm such a Gilliam hound I'll probably like it more than it maybe deserves. <p> No trubba here.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 2:55 a.m. CST


    by therightclique

    Why do we have to falsely build this guy up just because he's dead. It isn't fair to him or other hard working actors. We all know he was great in The Dark Knight, but that's it. He wasn't so hot in anything else he was in. He might've been on his way up, but it's dishonest to pretend that he was the greatest actor ever, cut down in his prime.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 3:27 a.m. CST


    by RedJester

    Don't forget Brokeback Mountain. Everyone always leaves that movie out of discussions because of the fact that it was about two gay dudes, but that was a brilliant f*cking film.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 7 a.m. CST

    Hi, I'm Troy McClure! You might remember me from such movies as.

    by Nasty In The Pasty

    ...The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus, and The Adventures Of Baron Munchausen!

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Nasty In The Pasty, that's just mean.

    by Grammaton Cleric Binks

    Funny, but mean.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 8:53 a.m. CST

    The Contrabulous Fabtraption of Professor Horatio Hufnagel

    by Skyway Moaters

    Lol Pasty, ya' bastige...

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 9:04 a.m. CST

    RedJester: Doh!

    by Skyway Moaters

    Didn't see your first post 'til just now. The snarky tone of my "miss the point" post was aimed at your. later "38th time" post. Hate when I do that...

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 9:27 a.m. CST

    A Fantatistical Work of Genius Capone?

    by peter_dickinson

    Umm No, this is a tremendous misstep and disappointment from a talented director. The script is an absolute mess, it meanders, it makes no points, scenes come and go without any particluar reason, there is no emotional range what-so-ever, scenes feel improvised by the actors and not in a good way. But worst of all, the trips inside the Imaginarium are dull and yes I will say it, ImaginationLESS. The look is cheap and there was nothing that stayed in my mind visually after it was over. Tom Waits is the only redeeming quality, so reign in the unfounded hyperbole there friend.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Skyway Moaters - Missed the point?

    by squeak

    Admittedly, I haven't seen it. But then, I didn't comment on the film, just the review. I have to block off enough time to watch it 3 or 4 times to understand it before I feel comfortable reviewing it.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, noon CST

    Again: Fair enough squeak...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... Gillliam's work is not appreciated by many many folks, even his best. I'm not copping a "holier than thou" attitude about this film (which I have yet to see), but I love everything the man has done with the exception of "The Brother's Grimm" (which I found hugely dissapointing), but I will cop to being a bit of a Gilliam apologist. My "miss the point much" post was directed more at RedJester than you, and was rather ill considered even so, as I missed his first post. Trubba Not. <p> We film geeks are a passionate lot, no? IODP is running 68% positive on both RT and Metacritic (albeit with substantial reservations by most reviewers), and I, demonstrably wrongly, surmised that neither of you had yet seen the film, and had an axe to grind. I apologize.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 12:12 p.m. CST

    But squeak?

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... I will stick by my assertion that almost all of Gilliam's films require more than one viewing, even by knowledgable film enthusiasts, to fully appreciate/revile. Dense and divisional are Gilliam's hallmarks... IMO...

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 12:19 p.m. CST

    I watched the Fisher King

    by detectivesoap

    due to a lot of people on these TBs name dropping it. I just fucking watched it last night and I want my life back. I couldn't figure out why I didn't like it (I like all the actors, and am generally into drunk redeems himself kinds of tales)and then I read Ebert's review. He nailed it perfectly. It's a collection of scenes, not a movie. Fuck the Fisher King...on to Baron Munchausen today for my Gilliamathon.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 12:25 p.m. CST

    "An axe to grind" against Capone's review that is...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... and it's only 65% positive on Metacritic vs 68% positive on RT...

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 1:48 p.m. CST

    "loose yourself in" ?!!!

    by oisin5199

    I'm disappointed, Cap. This is one of my biggest pet peeves in writing. Students make this mistake all the time. I expect more from a professional film reviewer. Anyway, can't wait to see this movie. I'll see Tom Waits in anything, and the Devil is a role he was born to play. Can't wait to see Heath one last time, too. I'm definitely a big fan of the Time Bandits/ Brazil/ Baron Munchausen era. And those films were all "messes." So I'll probably love this.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 3:43 p.m. CST

    Verne Troyer was terrible in this movie!!

    by manifestchaos

    He was guilty of some of the worst line delivery I have ever seen or heard in a professional film. I still love him, but mostly for being hilariously teensy, so he shouldn't have had nearly that many lines.

  • Jan. 9, 2010, 3:45 p.m. CST

    Tom Waits was good....

    by manifestchaos

    but I didn't think his performance was that epically good. Maybe it's just because I have very high standards for the role of the Devil, just look at who else has done a great job with it:<br><br> - Al Pacino in THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE<br> - Viggo Mortensen in THE PROPHECY<br> - Peter Stormare in CONSTANTINE<br> - Gabriel Byrne in END OF DAYS<br><br>Certainly not the greatest movies ever, but all featured awesome Satan performances (particularly Mortensen and Stormare, if I may). Tom Waits certainly deserves mention alongside the rest of that group, but I think some people are getting carried away with the hyperbole as far as his performance goes.

  • Jan. 10, 2010, 12:43 a.m. CST

    One to most definetly see...

    by immortal_pirate

    ...if not just for Ledger (we miss him dearly) but because Terry Gilliam is a mad genius. Since hearing about this film, I've been watching on the sidelines for any news. Now that I know it's playing in Tucson, AZ (70 miles from where myself and my boyfriend live) I fully intend on seeing it next weekend.

  • Jan. 10, 2010, 1:22 p.m. CST

    Saw it last night

    by MattmanReturns

    I was surprised how much I loved it. It's rare to see a movie lately that is entirely original and artistic.

  • Jan. 10, 2010, 1:23 p.m. CST

    And Grammaton is right

    by MattmanReturns

    Christopher Plummer is the real star of this. His performance was amazing. Ledger was certainly good, but he wasn't the center of the film as I was expecting.

  • Jan. 11, 2010, 8:24 a.m. CST

    Go See It

    by BeyondStatic

    This Terry Gilliam film got made. After "Don Quixote" and the Heath Ledger's untimely death (oddly prophetic in the movie however, and very character appropriate) it is a remarkable accomplishment that this film was finished. But not only was it finished, if the story of replacing Ledger's character with three other actors wasn't so heavily covered you'd have thought the film was always meant to be as it is. While this movie runs a bit long, it felt like it wasn't long enough. I wanted more about the characters. More fun behind the mirror. More enticement about the relationships and more backstory about the development of the Imaginarium. This is by far my favorite Gilliam picture to date. And well worth the adventure behind the mirror.

  • Jan. 11, 2010, 12:20 p.m. CST

    ...anybody home...?

    by FlickaPoo

  • This is the question we all must ask. Considering it 'is' a difficult film, and considering it 'does' ask for your attention and more than likely more than one sitting, I feel a lot of you are just too stupid to get it, and also making a big disservice to yourselves, the human race in general, and especially to Terry Gilliam who lets face it: is smarter than you, and smarter than me. Although maybe not. At least I don't find the movie in the leats bit confusing or confused.