Brazil

Starring Jonathan Pryce, Kim greist, Robert De Niro, Bob Hoskins, Ian Holm, Michael Palin.

Written by Terry Gilliam, Tom Stoppard, Charles McKeown.

Directed by Terry Gilliam

Genre: Drama / Comedy / Sci-Fi

Released: 1985

Running time: 131 mins

IMDb link: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/

Terry Gilliam has faced an uphill battle for almost the entirety of his filmmaking career. Despite the fact that he crafts unique, interesting, imaginative and exciting films, he never fares all that well at the box office. As a result, he often has a great deal of trouble in obtaining studio backing for his productions. In fact, his troubles with the filmmaking process have been forever preserved in a documentary, Lost in La Mancha, where his attempt to film a version of Don Quixote is foiled at every turn.

Unfortunately, it was no different for one of his earlier works - Brazil. It’s been widely told that, facing huge amounts of stress during the production of the film, Gilliam lost all feeling in his legs for a week. But despite combative stars and massive amounts of studio interference, Gilliam managed to get his work out into the world. And what’s it like? Well, it’s not too shabby at all.

Brazil can be described succinctly. It is, essentially, a Monty Python take on George Orwell’s 1984. This comparison isn’t meant as criticism. The working title of the film was 1984 and ½, but problems with Orwell’s estate forced the name change to the perplexing Brazil.

But for a more detailed plot synopsis: Sam is a middle-management government bureaucrat who dreams of breaking free of the oppressive system in which he finds himself trapped. In trying to correct a clerical error that’s resulted in a wrongful arrest, Sam gets his chance to escape when he finds himself branded a terrorist.

To be honest, I wasn’t all that taken with Brazil when I first watched it. Certainly, I found it visually spectacular, but I felt that the material was repetitive, seeing as it so closely resembled 1984 (even if it was given a more comically absurdist bent).

It wasn’t until I caught a late night television screening of it that I developed a true affection for it. For some reason, on the second viewing, it managed to stick itself in my brain. Perhaps, having already seen it, my expectations were different, and so I enjoyed the film more, as often seems to happen upon repeat viewings.

In any case, I realized how witty and insightful a film it was, with a genuinely breathtaking climax and final coda. Certainly, it’s a comic riff on 1984, but I ask you, what’s so wrong with that?

It’s a shame that Gilliam continues to have difficulties both with making films and their subsequent success, but so long as he continues to find both the energy to undertake these endeavours, and people game enough to back him up on them, we’re all the richer for it.