User reviews

How does one put a Monty Python twist on a dystopian/Orwellian (whichever term you prefer) science-fiction fantasy? The answer might not be clear, but as long as Terry Gilliam knows it, it can be done. The "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" director begins his career of daring reality-bending films with "Brazil," maybe his greatest or if not most signature film.

Named after the iconic song, "Brazil" is a quirky-spirited and outlandish futuristic film that operates subtly and with peculiarity as only Gilliam would have it. Unlike the more popular dystopian films of today, you can't rely on theme-heavy dialogue to understand Gilliam's warning to society, you have to sit and absorb the bizarre imagery, seemingly irrelevant dream sequences and comic downplay of dramatic events. Once you understand why it's there and stop worrying about exactly what it means, the genius becomes clearer.

The film stars Jonathan Pryce as Sam Lowry, an unambitious bureaucrat who works for the Ministry of Information in a very mechanical society with an extensive yet inefficient process for bringing criminals, namely terrorists, to justice. Therefore, a small printing error leads to the unlawful arrest and death of Archibald Buttle, not Archibald 'T'uttle. Lowry must investigate the error and in the process comes across a woman (Kim Greist) whom he recognizes from his dreams where he's soaring in the air with wings toward a beautiful woman in white robes. He decides to pursue this woman and it leads him down a dangerous path.

Gilliam introduces us to this society by showing its excessive yet seemingly unreliable technology. Sam's air conditioning breaks down, gourmet food is needlessly ground into globs and everything has a large and obtrusive cord attached to it. All this seems strange because its on the periphery of what's happening to Sam, so it can easily be dismissed as excessive detail. On the contrary, it's what quietly makes this Gilliam's masterpiece.

The more human story is in Sam's pursuit of this dream in reality, a dangerous feat. Claiming early in the film that he wants nothing for himself, this woman is the only exception. He pursues it relentlessly and it costs him. As completely absurd as some of the events occurring to him appear to be, these trippy sequences ultimately test his character despite their strange tactics.

Icing all this is the quirky Monty Python style. It's not the humor that lends itself to the film, but sort of the spirit of Monty Python. Even Michael Palin plays a small role to sort of perpetuate this feeling. Since everything goes mostly unexplained, this humor compounds the oddities of the film, poking fun at the excessiveness whether it be Sam's mother's face lifts and same surgeries that slowly kill her friend or playing up the dialogue between Sam and other characters such as Tuttle (De Niro) in the midst of an abnormal scenario.

"Brazil" might not be a science-fiction film for everyone, but it deserves classic status for lovers of the genre. It's just very untypical in its delivery, going for a hallucinogenic and more discomforting style of film-making that Terry Gilliam has made a name for himself on. It won't appease the average viewer who demands more direct service between him/herself and the creative mind behind the film, but it will offer a lot to ponder to those who like partaking in that when the credits role.

~Steven C

Visit my site http://moviemusereviews.com

This movie did not leave me with a happy feeling when I was done viewing it, but I definitely found it well worth the time. It posits a dark future world where the government has become a gigantic bureaucratic beast. The simplest exchange requires mountains of paperwork and a strict adherence to procedures has replaced anyone's ability to critically think about what they are doing or stand up to the brutality they know lurks around them. Sam Lowry is a man who seems more than happy to live as a cog in the giant machine. When he sleeps, however, he flies through beautiful blue skies towards the woman of his dreams. As he attempts to correct an "oversight" by the Ministry Of Information for whom he works (one of the more obvious nods to Orwell) which has resulted in an innocent man's death, he finds a woman who appears to be the one in his dreams. The line between his dreams and his reality blur ever further as he goes deeper and deeper into the government machine to find out who she is.

Terry Gilliam once again seems to have spared no expense in making sure every visual element of the world adds up to a cohesive whole which makes you feel as if you're really experiencing the characters' surroundings. And, of course, it is a world rendered realistically enough to feel feasible, and yet surrealistically enough to leave an unforgettable impression on you.

Despite the simplicity of the main plot, the movie is full of subtexts and images which carry a message even though you may not see them on the first viewing. In one scene, a man is buying "clean air" from a vending machine along the street. The sides of the highways are walls of billboards which hide the barren environment beyond. A group of people carry a banner that announces "Consumers for Christ" in a store decorated for the holidays as a small child tells Santa she wants a credit card for Christmas. Actually, therein lies one of the things that may turn some people off to this movie. It seems Gilliam had so many things to say about the state of society today that some people may find the movie lacks a coherent message once it's done. The ending will no doubt come as a shock to many people as well, but it was refreshing to me to see something well outside the Hollywood conventions for a change.

My only real complaint was that Robert De Niro's character was so enjoyable, but saw so little use. Other than that, however, I thought it was a film which presents some compelling things which deserve serious thought, even though most people probably won't be able to get past the trademark Gilliam visual quirkiness to see what he is saying. Eight and a half out of ten from me.

A virtual celebration of writer/director Terry Gilliam's singular creative vision and seemingly limitless imagination, Brazil is a unique movie experience. And it is kind of hard to put the label of any one particular genre on the film; it's generally referred to as "dystopian science fiction" (which certainly isn't wrong), but it's also a satire, a drama, a black comedy and perhaps even a fantasy film. Like many other dystopian sci-fi films (e.g. Fahrenheit 451, Equilibrium, The Hunger Games), Brazil depicts a totalitarian society, but that's about as far as the similarities with other films go.

The whole design of Brazil's crazy world is unlike anything I've ever seen in other movies (with the exception perhaps of those made by the same filmmaker). Where films with similar themes typically go for a futuristic look that is defined by all the technological advancements the writers and filmmakers can dream of, Terry Gilliam chooses the complete opposite direction. In his film, technology seems to have made no progress since somewhere around the forties or fifties, and what technology there is doesn't exactly look very reliable. And unlike other dystopian films, it's not primarily the bleak aspects of a totalitarian society Gilliam wants to explore; in his film, he wants to show how hilariously insane, inept and ridiculous many of the mechanisms and instruments of oppression truly are. In that sense, Brazil is mainly a satire (at least that's how I perceive it), and it is often either darkly funny or downright hilarious.

There is simply not a dull moment in the film: it's a wild ride that never lets up and almost every image on the screen practically bursts with clever (often hilarious) details; from the way food is served in restaurants to how the benefits of plastic surgery are presented, Gilliam's imagination can only be marveled at. His vision of a bureaucracy gone mad is probably the most entertaining nightmare ever put on film (I'm talking about the director's cut, of course). A masterpiece that gets even better after repeat viewings: 10 stars out of 10.

Favorite films: http://www.IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/

Lesser-Known Masterpieces: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070242495/

Favorite Low-Budget and B-Movies: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls054808375/

I really can't tell you how much my first viewing of this movie knocked me out. Nearly twenty years ago, before Terry Gilliam's reputation is what it is today, seeing this in a cinema without knowing ANYTHING about it, it was one of the most unforgettable movie experiences of my life! Still is. I was a Python fan since childhood and well aware of Gilliam's animation work, but nothing could prepare you for just how bizarre, funny, scary and disturbing 'Brazil' is. It's still one of the most original and inventive science fiction movies ever made, with a surreal, retro future quite unlike anything seen on a movie screen before or since. Gilliam mixes Python's anarchic, intellectual humour with Orwell, Kafka and Theatre Of The Absurd elements and comes up with something really special. John Sladek kinda sorta wrote some stories in a similar territory before this, and Dean Motter has written some comics since, but 'Brazil' is really in a world of its own! Jonathan Pryce was fairly obscure at the time and an odd choice to play the leading role, but is perfectly cast, and it's hard to think of an actor who would have been as convincing and sympathetic. The rest of the cast includes an amusing cameo from Robert De Niro, Kim Greist (only her second movie, after 'C.H.U.D.' of all things!) as Pryce's love interest, Python's Michael Palin, and a bunch of excellent Brit character actors - Bob Hoskins, Ian Richardson, Ian Holm, Jim Broadbent, etc.etc. It goes without saying that when I praise 'Brazil' I am ONLY referring to Gilliam's cut. This is still an utterly brilliant movie, one of the very best of the last twenty-five years. I can't recommend this movie highly enough, it is a masterpiece pure and simple.

I have read a lot of understandably negative reviews of the movie 'Brazil.' Brazil(in its proper form) is a long film at well over two hours, it has many cutaways to dream sequences that are only loosely related to the rest of the film, and the narrative story is not always the driving force of the film which many people find confusing. With all these things going against it, Brazil is clearly not a film for everyone.

All that being said, Brazil is my very favorite movie. Those things previously described as reasons that some people will dislike the movie are the very reasons I love it. The story is both simple and complex depending on how you look at it, and this kind of paradox is what makes for great art. There, I did it! I used the 'A' word, and not lightly. Brazil is an art film, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Sam Lowry(Jonathan Pryce) is our hero, an unambitious bureaucrat within the ranks of the Ministry of Information. The only place he is willing to be more than a drone is in his dreams where he is some sort of angelic knight fighting to save his dream girl. While running an errand for work, Sam comes face to face with a woman who is the very image of the dream girl, and his life is forever changed when he surrenders his tranquil unambitious life in the attempt to pursue the woman.

This movie is less about the story than it is about the atmosphere in my opinion. Terry Gilliam is a visual genius, and this movie marks his peak(so far) in producing a visually stunning film, with due apologies to Adventures of Baron Munchausen and 12 Monkeys which are beautiful in their own rights. The oppression of the bureaucratic life is felt by anyone who watches this film, and the freedom experienced in the dreams is a fantastic counterpoint. This film does a wonderful job of evoking emotional responses for me, and I suspect for most of the fans of the film as well.

The film can be viewed at many different levels of complexity, from fairly simple to fully allegorical. The simple view would be that the movie is about the dreams we create to escape our dull lives, and the potentially disastrous results of pursuing them in waking life. Symbolically the film can be interpreted as a vicious attack on the status quo as an impersonal, consumer/beauty oriented beast that is upheld by a draconian adherence to regulations and invasive public policy. There are many other ways to see it, most of which are probably unintended, but certainly completely valid.

The best part about Brazil is that it is absolutely hilarious. Jonathan Pryce shows remarkable aptitude for physical comedy. The dialogue is as funny as any movie you'll ever see, though the humor is very dry, and often so subtle that you might not get a joke until a minute after it has passed. There are the occasional tidbits of out loud guffaws one would expect from a script that was partly written by Tom Stoppard, but there is not a constant barrage of this material.

Brazil is a very cerebral film, so if you are thinking, "What does cerebral mean?" you can probably skip it. Anyone who expects to have a story clearly spelled out for them, and done so in a concise manner with little background interference will hate Brazil. Brazil is a film for those who want texture, emotional involvement and some sort of deeper meaning.

Brazil is my favorite movie, but it is clearly not for everyone!

One of my favorite novels of all time is George Orwell's 1984, and Brazil is very much a comedic interpretation of that. Brazil shows us a hilarious exaggeration of the monotony of machine like run bureaucracy, and man's constant voyage to avoid responsibility. "That's not my department." Everyone seems to say. Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) is a low ranking government employee. When an error leads to the execution of engineer Archibald Buttle (Brian Miller) instead of terrorist Archibald Tuttle (Robert De Niro), Sam attempts to fix this, and inadvertently becomes an enemy of the state. Read that scenario again. This is a funny movie. It's a dark comedy/political satire, and almost every joke works. The nonchalant attitude of the government depicted in the film is where a big chunk of the humor comes from. It's a very smart comedy. Honestly if you like political satire, then Brazil is one we can all enjoy together.

The best things I can say about Brazil is that it truly has outstanding special effects, set design and lighting, but I felt the film didn't really know what it was. For me, it started out really strongly as a black humor film about a bureaucratic dystopian world, but then kind of went into action set pieces that I thought were kind of out of place. The strongest part of the film for me, is the first act of the film and just getting to know this kind of 1984-ish dystopian world where everything is paperwork and is filled with machines that don't work. I appreciated the dream sequences and Jonathan Pryce's performance, but overall I also thought the movie was too long and I kind of checked out after the 100 minute mark or so. Even though I did enjoy the film, as a whole, especially for the special effects and set designs, which are really something.

One of the truest statements about originality in art comes from T.S. Eliot: "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal." Terry Gilliam is one of cinema's mature poets. His "Brazil" features homages to numerous other films, ranging from "Modern Times" to "The Empire Strikes Back," and its plot is broadly similar to "Nineteen Eighty-Four." Yet the result is intriguingly fresh and creative.

The best adjective to describe the movie's tone is "whimsical." It's the type of sci-fi film with an almost childlike fascination with strange sights and happenings. Rarely has a film so pessimistic been this much fun. Many sci-fi films since "Brazil" have attempted a similar approach, usually with little success. The chief problem with most such films (e.g. "The Fifth Element") is that they get bogged down in plot at the expense of emotional resonance. "Brazil" avoids this fate: while the movie possesses psychological and thematic complexity, its plot is fairly simple, and the humor, quirky as it is, never relies on throwaway gags. Even the oddest moments have a certain poignance.

The story seems to take place in a fascist alternative world. It isn't "the future" exactly. The technology is weird-looking but hardly superior to anything in our world. Money transactions are sent through pipes in what looks sort of like a crude version of ATM. (One of the film's several nods to silent movies occurs after a character tries to stuff one of these pipes with wads of paper.) The pop culture references are positively retro, from the title song to scenes from the film "Casablanca."

The evil of the government in this film is driven not so much by cruelty as by bureaucratic incompetence, much of which is played for laughs. But some of the scenes look eerie today, in our post-9/11 world, and are good fodder for conspiracy theorists. Pay particular attention to the scene where the official boasts that the government is winning its war against "the terrorists." The movie is ambiguous as to whether there are any real terrorists, and we have a sneaking suspicion that the explosions are caused by the government itself. The plot is set in motion by a typographical error leading an innocent man to be arrested instead of a suspected terrorist. The movie is not about this man but about a meek government worker, Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce), who's observing from the sidelines. Robert De Niro has a cameo as the wanted "terrorist" whose crime, from what we see, consists of doing home repairs without the proper paperwork.

I have noticed that most of the classic dystopian tales are fundamentally similar to one another. But "Brazil" approaches the genre in a uniquely psychological way. Sam Lowry is different from the standard protagonist who rebels against the government due to noble motives. He doesn't seem to have any larger goals than his own personal ones. He isn't trying to make the world a better place. He's only longing for a better life for himself, one more exciting and romantic than the humdrum existence he currently occupies, where he's beset by an overbearing mother, a pitiful boss, and a dull job. In the midst of this bureaucratic nightmare state, he cares only about such matters as getting his air conditioning fixed and stalking a female stranger who physically resembles his fantasy woman--or so he perceives. The woman, as played by Kim Greist, appears in his fantasies as a helpless damsel with long, flowing hair and a silky dress who sits in a cage while he battles a giant Samurai warrior. The real-life woman he pursues, also played by Greist, sports a butch haircut, drives a large truck, and has a cigarette dangling from the corner of her mouth.

It's a testament to Pryce's performance that he commands our total sympathy the whole time. We feel for him and go along with the romantic adventure he attempts to create for himself. His nervous, stammering personality is one that would have been easy to overdo, yet Pryce strikes just the right note, especially as we begin questioning the character's sanity. At one point, another character tells him that "You're paranoid; you've got no sense of reality." But who wouldn't be paranoid in such a setting? The scene brings to mind the old joke that goes "You're not paranoid. Everyone really is out to get you." The movie inhabits such a whacky, surreal world full of strange people and sights that Sam Lowry almost seems sensible by comparison. Creating a character like this was a fresh, innovative twist on a genre that normally loses sight of human personalities.

It's not every day that a movie leaves me feeling conflicted. Normally, a rating will swing favorable or unfavorable and that's that; clear cut. But Brazil? I think I enjoy discussing the movie rather than watching it. And it's not as simple as saying it's too long, or it was a great idea just clumsily executed.

There are wonderful moments, scenes, and set pieces within this film and it will not fail to leave an impression. Much of what happens in this horrible future is far too absurd, just so comically awful and I love the sense of humor. I love that Gilliam's Orwellian nightmare is thanks to the pencil-pushers; misery through bureaucracy, paperwork über alles!

The look of this particular dystopia is both Blade Runner and that 1984 Apple commercial. This is a towering achievement in set design that cannot be ignored, and you could easily get lost in the background details. I think we can all agree with the visuals and overall aesthetic. That's not the problem.

It's the characters. Now don't get me wrong, part of why I love the first act is because of the supporting players. Bob Hoskins and Robert De Niro especially. But eventually we move past those people and the film focuses on the core love story: Jonathan Pryce's dogged pursuit of his dream woman Kim Greist. Pryce is perfect when he's interacting with his insane surroundings, but it's in his quest that the movie really sags. Again, it's not as simple as saying it's boring but the second and third acts pale in comparison to the film's earlier moments. As much as I wanted our protagonist to succeed and find happiness, that journey felt more grind than search. Once the final plot twist was reached, I felt like I'd completed something rather than enjoyed it. And this is a feeling I honestly did not expect.

Many years back, I read Jack Matthews' book on the making of this movie; itself more interesting to me than the actual film. That sounds callous, I know, but the time spent talking about Brazil I'd more engaging than the actual watch. It has a wacky setting, exceptional set design, but characterization isn't there.

For a comedy, I was tasked more than I was entertained. Deep down, I know I'll revisit this in the future (that's just me), but I also know I'll need to be in the right mindset for it.

I have to admit i have always had something of a problem with Terry Gilliam. And having a problem with Terry Gilliam and watching this film is kind of like eating something you're allergic to. The reaction is instant because this movie is just so much Terry Gilliam.

The word that i usually drift towards when watching one of his works is "absurd". It seems to me that the feeling of absurdity is what he always aims at. Usually he also hits his target. The question though is if this makes his movies good or not. Of course things are not that simple. It's always possible to admire or appreciate something without actually liking or enjoying it. That being said i can't really say i've ever enjoyed one of Gilliams films (i came closest with "Twelve Monkeys"), but i have admired a couple of them for their undeniable originality and intelligence.

"Brazil" was difficult for me. The Orwellian world in which it takes place is a very dominating factor in the movie. Although i perceived it to be about humanity (as are most such sad visions of the future) the humans here really take a backseat. The setting, this future world, is grand and painstakingly overworked. From the smallest hissing pipe to the greatest open space there is an attention to detail that speaks volumes about both vision and lack of budget restraints. Of course today the future in Brazil seems irreparably old and dated, but that is almost always the case with science-fiction and visions of the future and it didn't bother me.

What did bother me however was that i didn't really know how to follow the storyline in Brazil. Of course one might say that the storyline was not the point here, and you might be right but i find that to be a problem in and of itself. Characters enter from the side without good explanations, things happen that i understood very little about and of course dream sequences were added and spliced in a way that sometimes made it difficult to know what was reality or dream. Probably that was also something deliberate.

In the end i think that me and Mr. Gilliam simply don't mix. His brand of very black comedy just doesn't strike the right note with me. It's absurd to the point where i don't know how to react. And here we have two hours of disjointed storyline and bizarre events that sometimes seem to have very little to do with each other. It's not the kind of black comedy you laugh at, and at the same time it didn't feel heartfelt in any real way. An impressive display of vision and budget no doubt, and with a surprisingly good ending (of course i count on understanding the story enough to judge), but lacking something to keep it all together.

Regarding the symbolism in Brazil, of course that's the point. Lowry's dreams are not all that unique. They are a result of the regimented world he lives in. Look at all of our modern films: the two dominant characters are the rebel and the ordinary joe living a mundane life who somehow escapes from it or begins to do outrageous things.

(That's why I hated Titanic, well, partially. Rose is breaking out of her supposedly constricted life. It's propaganda. It makes it appear that the "freedoms" we have now are exactly what we need in order to escape from the restriction of prejudices and ignorance. Rose tied herself into the ever-growing strait-jacket of modern political myths. But in order to glorify those myths Cameron had to denigrate our past and all that it stood for, making its adherents look like chauvinistic fools. The person I know who liked Titanic the most liked it for that reason - she wanted to escape from her own life and envied Rose. But such people always stop there. They live in their fantasies and never stop to investigate why they feel their lives must be escaped from.)

Another note about the samurai he fights is that it continued to suddenly disappear. Lowry initially didn't know what he was fighting, for one. There really is no definitive enemy to fight. We are boxing shadows. It is a system which has no heart or kill point. That's part of the frustration, particularly for those who can't think abstractly. Most of them lash out at "the media." They can't locate who they're fighting, and so they accept the lies.

Listen to the opening interview on the television. The terrorists are refusing to "play the game." The assumption is that they are simply jealous because someone else is "winning the game." Why play at all? Any hope of that is over though. The 60s was the last gasp of opposition and it got swallowed up. Now the nostalgia for protest is a marketing tool. Consumption is a replacement for thought. When you feel angst you go shopping. We've been convinced that our anxiety is caused by something other than what it really is. Commercials are not about self-gratification, but self-doubt.

I read an interview with Gilliam in which he said the reason he could no longer live in America is that there was an unwillingness to think about anything. In the end, you are fighting the conditioning you have received from your entire culture, in essence, fighting yourself and struggling to regain control of your own mind. Parallels between Lowry seeing his own face and Skywalker seeing the same in Return of the Jedi are illuminating.

The point that Gilliam makes in the end is that the enemy is ubiquitous yet intangible. Lowry wanted to run from it, go "far away," never realizing that you can't escape. We still think in terms of a locus of power. But Gilliam, throughout the last part of the film, continually crushed our naive hopes that somehow we can act out the fantasy that many of us may have, to get away, find the girl of our dreams and live in a trailer in a beautiful setting.

Because we have no fear of physical control, we assume that we are free. Some Americans still believe in the myth of rugged individualism. The system is built on lies and that's what Gilliam was showing. It's a "State of mind." You can't escape. The only place that you can be free is in your head. "He got away from us," as they say at the end. That's really the only hope we have left.

On a lighter note, I derive so much glee from watching Lowry's mother walk around with a boot on her head.

Brazil(1985) is a great SCIFI feature that's one of the most visually rewarding films to watch. The movie deals with a computer error that causes havoc for the protagonist, Sam Lowry. Sam Lowry is someone who dreams of living as an individual, away from the system of Big Brother. The movie is heavily influenced by George Orwell's classic novel, 1984. Brazil(1985) is the closest thing to a perfect adaptation of 1984 for the big screen.

Brazil(1985) is more well known for what happened behind the scenes than anything that happens in the film. There was a bitter battle between the director and producer that ended up in the cutting of the film much to Terry Gilliam's disapproval. As a result there are three cuts of the film(director, studio, TV). I've seen both the 142Minute and 132Minute version. In my opinion, the 142Minute edition is the definite one to watch.

Jonathan Pryce as Sam Lowry does a great act in showing someone who is imprisoned by the system. Robert De Niro plays Sam Lowry's alter ego, Harry Tuttle in an eccentric role for the actor. At first De Niro wanted the role of Sam's best friend but instead got the role of the spy Harry Tuttle. The film retains the forbidden love affair between Sam Lowry and Jill Layton that is an important element in 1984. A lot of scens that involved Kim Griest were cut due to the dissatifaction of her performance from the director.

Brazil(1985) is Terry Gilliam's masterwork and a well directed piece by the filmmaker himself. The set designs are dazzling and the depiction of city life is nothing short of amazing. The title song is one of the most famous tunes. Much better then 12 Monkeys(1996) because this is a more complete film. Brazil(1985) is part of a trilogy that includes Time Bandits(1981) and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen(1988).

This trilogy is really about the progression of life that begins in Childhood, continues in Middleage, and ends with Old age. Brazil(1985) is really about the uncertainties of middleage. The samurai dream sequences are a marvalous example of the symbolisms they provide for the movie. Bob Hoskins gives a dark humorous act as a government plumber. The dream sequences with Sam Lowry and his dream girl are beautifully romantic.

Brazil is definitively one of the top ten movies of all times. Its a sort of anti-Utopian spectacle, in the same fashion of George Orwell's 1984. The movie has a very complex sequence of events, which require more than one viewing for full understanding. In fact, the first time i saw Brazil, i didn't enjoy it much. But then i gave it a second chance, and the pleasure of watching it increased exponentially. The more I watch it, the more I discover hidden aspects and new ways to interpret this masterful creation. The scenario is extraordinary, mixing long pipe lines and a almost omnipresent Gothic atmosphere. If you didn't like the movie the first time you saw it, don't be by any means discouraged. This movie requires patience and an active role from the viewer. Finally, Brazil deserves special praise for all the dream-like sequences of the main character and the music fits in perfectly well.

Terry Gilliam's best movie, in my opinion, is a warped 1984, with Sam Lowry as a futuristic librarian trapped in the bureaucratic system. As Lowry, Jonathan Pryce has a brilliant chance to shine in the lead, which he does. In support, he has Kim Griest, Katherine Helmond, Ian Holm, Robert de Niro, and Bob Hoskins, amongst others.

Brazil is surprisingly violent - viewing it again recently after a gap of several years, I found the constant attacks, bombings etc., slightly sickening, although I'm sure that is the intention. Gilliam's films, like his Python cartoons, thrive on the grotesque, and Brazil is no exception. Lowry is a misfit, a square peg in a round hole, and like Winston Smith in Orwell's apocalypse, there is no place for him in his world. The bleak ending emphasises this very point, and leaves the viewer curiously empty.

This film, from start to finish, kept me uncertain about whether I was watching a long drawn-out Monty Python sketch, or whether I was watching a.complex narrative, written with the beauty of Stand By Me. The answer is, neither. I was watching Brazil.

With the most amazing visuals of any film I have seen made before 1990, a heart-wrenchingly beautiful soundtrack and an utterly absurd form of comedy, this is by far an entirely singular viewing experience. The camera angles were unlike anything i have ever seen before, and the acting was beautiful. I have very few complaints about this film.

If you're fancying something new, and completely unlike anything you've ever seen before, then I cannot recommend this enough!

This is an imaginative , glamorous , chaotic fantasy competently made by Terry Gilliam . Set in a totalitarian future society in which a man whose daily work is controlling people tries to rebel by falling in love . This is very loosely adaptation of classic dystopian novel 1984 , George Orwell's terrifying vision comes to life, providing a peculiar retelling . Exciting rendition that picks up some motes of bleak despair George Orwell's novel along with a lot of hilarious moments . In a futuristic, state-run society controlled by a kind of "Big Brother" and whose people breaking the rules are detained , tortured and brainwashed for their crimes , there a bureaucrat called Sam (Jonathan Pryce) in this dystopic society becomes an enemy of the state as he pursues the woman named Jill Layton (Kim Greist) of his dreams and while a creative , shrewd plumber (Robert De Niro) appearing here and there . Sam's infatuation with Jill and his determination to save her leads him down nightmare corridors from which there's no getaways . It's only a state of mind. We're all in it together. It's about flights of fantasy. And the nightmare of reality. Terrorist bombings. And late night shopping. True Love. Have a laugh at the horror of things to come. Together they look to help bring down the party . Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past !. Suspicion breeds confidence !.

Dystopian and ironical story which contains a polemic denounce to totalitarianism . It is a workmanlike and sui-generis rendition of notorious novel that captures the desolation and misery found within those pages , though several liberties have been taken with the script . Marvelous special effects are visually stunning and magnificently realized with no computer generator. However, the net result too is more an amusement than the Orwell story , if only because the terror is leavened with streaks of surrealism humor and fantastic scenes . The film was made and released about thirty-five years after its source novel of the same name by George Orwell had been first published in 1948 . This is one of a number of dystopian , Orwellian and Kafaesque films made during the early to mid 1980s , the pictures include Michael Radford's 1984 , Ridley Scott's Blade Runner , Pink Floyd's The Wall , Season of the Witch , Giorgio Moroder version of Fritz Lang's Metrópolis and Terry Gilliam's Brazil . Main and support cast are frankly well . Very good acting by Jonathan Pryce as the tragic as well as comical figure who dares to fall in love within a totalitarian society while has his moments of thriumph on the way of inevitable doom and Kim Greist , she was perfectly cast as Jill Layton , her uncommonly bold , bravery as well as affecting performance , earned her some notoriety and a bit of a minor cult . And , of course , a large number of credited, prestigious secondaries giving attractive performances , such as : Robert De Niro, Katherine Helmond , Ian Holm , Bob Hoskins , Michael Palin , Ian Richardson, Peter Vaughan, Jim Broadbent, Barbara Hicks, Charles McKeown, Derrick O'Connor, among others. Impressive as well as brilliant production design has been rendered with meticulous attention to period detail , as well as colorful cinematography by Roger Pratt . The movie achieved box office enough , following over the years as the film's reputation has steadily grown. The motion picture was imaginatively directed by Terry Gilliam , an expert on wonderful , surreal atmospheres (Time bandits , The Adventures of Baron Munchausen , Fisher King , Doctor Parnasus). The film might be described as an extraordinary fantasy full of imagination and color . Rating : Good , better than average . Worthwhile watching .

Other adaptations about this classic magnum opus novel "Nineteen Eighty-Four" -whose title Orwell chose the title by inverting the last two digits of the year he completed the manuscript (1948)- are the following ones : Michael Radford's film¨1984¨ (1984) with Richard Burton , John Hurt ; ¨1984¨ (1956) by Michael Anderson with Edmond O'Brien as Winston Smith , Michael Redgrave as O'Connor , Jan Sterling , Mervyn Johns and Donald Pleasence . And for TV ¨1984¨(1954) by by Rudolph Cartier with Peter Cushing , André Morell , Yvonne Mitchell and Donald Pleasence . Furthermore, an American version , Studio one . ¨1984¨ , (1953) with Eddie Albert and Lorne Greene.