"Brazil" blew MY young, raised-on-Python, fantasy & SF-loving mind. I loved anything that seemed absurdist in any vaguely philosophical way. I was pathetically overeager that way, seeking something to DO in that direction (sensing my own aptitudes.) A lot gone done here!
Now that I am old and wise it's interesting to reassess "Brazil". (I've seen it many times over the years. This wasn't an overdue reunion.) It's all the little things, isn't it? It's brilliant world-building. So many throw-away jokes to catch, design and character-wise.
Ian Holm's Kurtzmann, for example. (Gilliam worked for Harvey Kurtzman, so I guess that's homage.) It's great that he has the incompetent cunning to injure his own hand (or feign injury) so Sam will sign the check for him (which forgery later ends up on Sam's charge sheet.)
Ian Holm's Kurtzmann, for example. (Gilliam worked for Harvey Kurtzman, so I guess that's homage.) It's great that he has the incompetent cunning to injure his own hand (or feign injury) so Sam will sign the check for him (which forgery later ends up on Sam's charge sheet.)
Ian Holm's Kurtzmann, for example. (Gilliam worked for Harvey Kurtzman, so I guess that's homage.) It's great that he has the incompetent cunning to injure his own hand (or feign injury) so Sam will sign the check for him (which forgery later ends up on Sam's charge sheet.)
Ian Holm's Kurtzmann, for example. (Gilliam worked for Harvey Kurtzman, so I guess that's homage.) It's great that he has the incompetent cunning to injure his own hand (or feign injury) so Sam will sign the check for him (which forgery later ends up on Sam's charge sheet.)
Kurtzmann: 'what a pathetic creature I am!' - in a theatrical, help-me-Sam! way. And Sam. Poor fool. He is clever enough to do Kurtzmann's work (which Kurtzmann can't do.) Not clever enough to see Kurtzmann is using him on two levels, not just one. And Sam. What a tool.
The tinest, most cutting in-film indictment of his dreamy character is the scene in which he is riding the weird tram-box home, drawing long, fantasy hair on his Jill print-out, going off into one of his weird reveries of chivalric-heroic rescue of the distressed damsel.
The tinest, most cutting in-film indictment of his dreamy character is the scene in which he is riding the weird tram-box home, drawing long, fantasy hair on his Jill print-out, going off into one of his weird reveries of chivalric-heroic rescue of the distressed damsel.
The tinest, most cutting in-film indictment of his dreamy character is the scene in which he is riding the weird tram-box home, drawing long, fantasy hair on his Jill print-out, going off into one of his weird reveries of chivalric-heroic rescue of the distressed damsel.
The tinest, most cutting in-film indictment of his dreamy character is the scene in which he is riding the weird tram-box home, drawing long, fantasy hair on his Jill print-out, going off into one of his weird reveries of chivalric-heroic rescue of the distressed damsel.
Meanwhile (although the camera never cuts back far enough to make this too obvious, but it's obvious): the tram car contains eight man, including Sam, all sitting, none of them standing to give their seat to the strap-hanging woman with one leg (obviously a bombing victim.)
The big question mark about the film is Jill. She's the elusive object of desire who will, in the end, submit to the hero's affections, adoringly. But the film is obviously critiquing that trope, while employing it, while using it to make us doubt where the reality line is.
The big question mark about the film is Jill. She's the elusive object of desire who will, in the end, submit to the hero's affections, adoringly. But the film is obviously critiquing that trope, while employing it, while using it to make us doubt where the reality line is.
The big question mark about the film is Jill. She's the elusive object of desire who will, in the end, submit to the hero's affections, adoringly. But the film is obviously critiquing that trope, while employing it, while using it to make us doubt where the reality line is.
The big question mark about the film is Jill. She's the elusive object of desire who will, in the end, submit to the hero's affections, adoringly. But the film is obviously critiquing that trope, while employing it, while using it to make us doubt where the reality line is.
The tragi-comic flan of Jill collapses out of this oven of the absurd. In Gilliam's defense, this is not because he got lazy. He was trying to do something complex & layered & cleverly 'meta', involving getting her 'wrong', but it got away from him and came out just wrong.
So, "Brazil", truly great film? Or just a pretty good film with flaws and bagginess, due to the director chasing gags and fun and failing to keep his eye on the ball?
You can follow @jholbo1.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.