23/12/2016

12 Monkeys (University Critique)

                          
The following is an assignment for my class. It's kinda tedious and long-winded, but it goes into more detail than my original review, if that's what you're looking for. Also, it focuses more on design and shit (as I'm in a computer animation class) rather than a general look at the movie.
                       
                              
A director-by-hire, Terry Gilliam often found it difficult to find work, thanks to his difficult style and personal influence he imposed on past scripts. However, after 1991’s ‘The Fisher King’ went through production rather painlessly and made a made a comfortable return, Gilliam was hired by Universal to create the sci-fi thriller neo-noir 'Twelve Monkeys’, based on the 1962 'La Jetée’, a short French film told entirely in still images, that has essentially the same plot.
Said plot is set mostly in 2035 and and the early to mid-90’s. Some time in 1996 someone released a deadly virus that has wiped out most of humanity and that has made ground level living impossible, and the animal rights come terrorist group known as the Army of the Twelve Monkeys are the main suspects. James Cole, a prisoner in the 2030’s, is offered a full pardon in exchange for going back in time - a complicated, risky and confusing endeavour - to find out more information about the perpetrators so that the government of his present can stop the disaster of our past (and the original audience’s future).
From here on out the plot gets increasingly convoluted, and the audience is taken through several twists and turns as first one character, then another, doubt their sanity, and many of the plot lines are left open. I won’t get too much into all that in case you haven’t seen it and spoilers. Also it would take another several thousand words, and I’m not 100% on it myself. Suffice to say that it’s very re-watchable, and once Bruce Willis (doing what he does best here; looking bloodied and confused) and Brad Pitt signed on as two of the three leads (Willis even taking a pay cut to work with Gilliam) and Gilliam was given a say in the final cut, it was on.
                  
                  
The film itself bears many similarities to Gilliam’s earlier work, most notably 'Brazil’. Close-ups are often warped, fish eye lenses are often used, and the lighting is dim and patchy, focusing the viewer’s attention on the intended areas while bathing large areas of the sets in darkness. the style makes big spaces seem small, distorting our view of the world in the future. Many dutch angles and drunken, jerking pans are used, and the movie makes extensive use of Fresnel lenses to magnify the future scientists in ways very similar to 'Brazil’.
Then as we fly back to the past, the shots become more traditional and grounded, with mid to long shots being used without any odd angles, and a camera that is stationary more often. The lighting is cooler, compared to the radiating yellows in the steam punk-esque future. Close ups are used without any distortion, and it nearly seems as if our protagonist has awaken from a dream.
This effect is turned on its head once he enters the mental institution though, as the lighting becomes cold to the point of being clinical, and the camera rolls about more freely as Pitt’s character begins to affect the film.
The style of cinematography has greatly been influenced, both by the director’s style, and by the character that is leading in the moment. Because of this the film can leap from grounded thriller in style to lavish dream sequence without much warning, creating a confusing effect that compliments the twisting plot.
                      
                  
Because of the open ended nature of this film, I take the ending to mean whatever one wants it to mean, and that this personability is part of what makes the movie work so well. Perhaps the future gets changed, and there never is an apocalypse, or perhaps time travel was only able to create a loop in which to watch it happen, and our characters are stuck ending the film where it began.
There is a theme of man’s intended dominance over nature running throughout. As Willis makes his way to the airport as the film is wrapping up, he sees the signs of the Twelve Monkeys releasing the animals from the zoo, and the music kicks in as we see dream-like shots of giraffes running across a down-town bridge, a lion roaring at the edge of a building’s roof, etc. Knowing that the world is essentially about to start ending simply makes everything seem more surreal, rather than adding a cheap ticking clock element to the movie. We already sort of know that our protagonist is going to die; this is just how it starts.
It’s also a celebration of the inherent madness of humanity, with many scenes evoking 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’ and several characters commenting on insanity and our ability to categorise and treat it. The film is filled with a feeling of panic, achieved through the fantastic work of the actors, a good score, and a camera that rarely stops moving.
                    
              
From a monetary perspective, 'Twelve Monkeys’ was Gilliam’s most successful film. Though I prefer 'Brazil’, I liked this one for it’s noir atmosphere and it’s references to other movies (probably most notably 'Vertigo’ as a scene is playing in the background at one point, then later they re-enact it. Also as she walkes out to him on the street in her blonde wig it contrasts with a similar scene in 'Vertigo’. There, she is lit by a soft green light and is filmed in a mid-shot indoors. Here, she comes up quickly to the camera, seemingly forcing a close-up, and is lit from behind in a harsh red light.) and it’s probably in my top 20. It was very character driven, and the cast was fantastic. There were few elements that didn’t hold up.