Rating: 
Summary: An excellent psychological thriller
Review: I was tempted to review this title as a sci-fi movie with a time-travel theme, but the truth is no matter how you look at it it's never really clear whether everything we've seen was reality or the warped product of one's man imagination. So here then is the view from the other side.12 Monkeys is the story of James Cole (played by Willis), a committed mental patient suffering from "mental divergence". In his mind, he is a time traveler from the year 2035. His world of the future has been devastated by a virus that wiped out most of the population in the late 1990s, forcing human kind to dwell in enormous, dark and hideous underground bunkers. In this future he is charged with traveling back to the past and discovering the origin of the virus. Cole transitions from past and "future" several times in his quest to seek the source of the virus. In the end Cole loses complete touch with reality and imagines himself in love with his psychiatrist (Stowe) while they work together to save the world. If you pay close attention you will notice similarites between the past and future that can't all be explained away as mere coincidence. For example, he is a prisoner in the past and future. Five scientest sitting behind a long table send Cole off from the future to find the virus, and five psychiatrists sitting behind a long table in the present evaluate Cole's condition. The guards from the past (one black and one white) bathe Cole in an eerily similiar way to the guards that bathed him in the future (also one black and one white). Cole's vision of the future looks flawed and twisted. The technology looks absurd and counter-productive (a metal ball of viewing screens?). The dialouge of the scientests is..odd, to say the least. Also, exotic animals are still alive and well roaming the streets of 2035 Philadelphia for the last 38 years. Pay attention at the begining and end of the movie and you'll see what I mean. Despite this there is more than enough evidence in the movie to suggest that Cole actually is a time travler and that the world is about to suffer a huge calamity, evidence that can't be explained by Cole's active imagination. It's this superb balancing act between reality and fantasy achieved by director Gilliam that makes 12 Monkeys an excellent psychological thriller.
Rating: 
Summary: Quirky apocalyptic time travel yarn.
Review: In the future there is a lot of cellophane. I always liked 12 Monkeys, in part because it's Gilliam and his weird hi-lo tech / grimy futurescapes are always interesting and also because I think Bruce Willis gives one of his better performances. 30 years from now scientists underground send Bruce back to hopefully weed out the reasons and logistics of how a virus decimated 5 billion people in 1996. Bruce, landing naked six years too early in 1990, is predictably carted off to the loony bin. While incarcerated, he meets Madeleine Stowe as his shrink and Brad Pitt giving a marvelously manic performance complete with wandering eye, as a fellow inmate who happens to be the son of a famous virologist. Plagued by nightmares which would ostensibly seem to deal with the initial outbreak of the disease, Willis soldiers on through capture, de-brief in the future, and re-insertion to the past. Many of the images of the film are dark, dank, bleak, absurd and humourous on one level, but there are some moments of sheer hope and joy that seem touching they're so out of place, like when Bruce weeps with pleasure hearing torch songs of the fifties/sixties. The relationship between Willis and Stowe is very interesting and tender, they alternate protecting and revealing vulnerabilities to each other. Like all time travel films, there are some paradoxes as well, especially with Willis at the end. This film can't be easily categorized or pigeonholed, it is an experience unto itself when viewed. But it is definitely recommended as a quirky sci-fi classic to own on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Why those who hate this movie are wrong - I SAY SO!!
Review: When approaching a subject such as time travel one has to decide which school of thought they attend. First School; Time is linear and will be altered by any outside interference. Easy way to think of it, Time is a single string, if you jump from the end of the string to the middle time in a way reorders itself and all reprecussions of your actions (from the middle of the string) play through the string to alter the end of the string. Or Time is non linear and/or branching: basically all choices you can make are played out through multiple strings of reality becoming a criss crossed spider web. This movie takes the first opinion and hints at the idea that time abhors being altered and will "right" itself any way it can. Theory: Hitler dies at birth, but is replaced by time with a new personality with the same agenda. Meaning Time has to be hammered/altered repeatedly like a piece of hot steel to force it to hold the shape you wish of it. That being said i will only say i thought the movie was a truly well thought out and intelligent take on time theory far better than most. 1 Note to those who review: dont pan something simply because you dont bother to take all possiblities into account. 2 If you have to watch a movie 2 to 3 times to understand the concept of the story or the twist ending, dont bother buying this without renting it first. Just go rent Navy Seals and drool to your hearts content. OoOOoOO Navy Seals!
Rating:
Summary: terrific movie, a well done
Review: I'll admit up front to being a sucker for Terry Gilliam movies. That said, 12 Monkeys is a stylish and well-crafted movie, featuring an engaging plot, terrific performances from Willis, Pitt, and Stowe, great visual design, and a bit more to think about than your average summer blockbuster. The DVD edition has some terrific extras, uncluding "The Hamster Factor," a fun look at some of the struggles in the making of the movie, and Gilliam's voice-overs, which do a good job of making it feel like Gilliam's at your house for a screening. The screenplay for 12 Monkeys was inspired by Chris Marker's La Jetee, a short art film which is also worth seeing. Although it's nice that Gilliam and screenwriters David and Janet Peoples credited the inspiration for the film on-screen, it's worth noting that this is just a reflection of their integrity, not a sign that the movie is any more derivative than anything else.
Rating:
Summary: Improves on repeated viewings
Review: As with most Terry Gilliam films, this one is dense, somewhat complex, and often confusing. The upshot is that it never cheats - everything that happens is in character and within the logic of the world Gilliam has created. Unfortunately, the density causes the first viewing to be overwhelming, but adds to its replayability. It is a film enjoyed more the second and third time than the first. The story: an engineered virus is released in the 90's that eventually wipes out most of the human race. The remnants flee underground to a system of caves and sewers to escape the virus. Due to the rapid mutation of the virus, no cure or vaccine can be developed without a sample of the original virus from the 90's. Therefore, they must send someone back in time to obtain the sample; that person is Cole, played by Bruce Willis. Naturally, he is mistaken for a mental patient and locked up where he meets Dr. Reilly (Madeline Stowe) and fellow inmate Goines (Brad Pitt), whose father happens to be a molecular biologist specialising in viruses. This sets up the hunt for the perpetrators of the virus release, thought to go by the name of "the Army of the 12 Monkeys." Is it Goines and his animal-rights friends? Is it his father, the virus expert? Or is it actually Cole himself in some sort of time-paradox? We are left guessing until the end, and if you haven't been paying attention, it might seem that the story has cheated, but in fact it hasn't. You can't guess the solution (there isn't enough information), but it is logical. There are a number of great touches, one of which I'll mention here. Cole has nightmares about a shooting that he witnessed as a child. The people in the dream occasionally change faces, however, based on who Cole is suspicious of at the time. This is both misleading and accurate - memory is subjective, and it's only logical that a child's memory of a traumatic event would be fluxional. These types of details are the rewards of repeated watchings. Also rewarding are the performances of the three principles. This DVD version is of good quality, including a 90-minute making-of feature that is interesting in that it was filmed while the production was occurring, allowing an inside glimpse of the tension and creative differences between actors, director, and producer.
Rating:
Summary: Gilliam in top form with this science fiction flick
Review: 12 Monkeys has an unusual pedigree. It was inspired by Chris Marker's brilliant short film Le Jete; written by David Peeples and his spouse (co-screenwriter of Blade Runner, writer of The Unforgiven and Solider); stars Bruce Willis, Brad Pitt and Madeline Stowe and directed by Monty Python's Terry Gilliam. It was also released by the very same studio that tried to butcher his masterpiece Brazil during the 80's. Who'd have thunk? The plot is fairly straight forward for a Gilliam directed film: Bruce Willis is a convict sent back in time to find information on a deadly virus that destroys much of humanity. The survivors have to move underground (somewhat like in The Time Machine).This virus also insinuates itself into the environment making it impossible for humanity to return to the surface. Willis is to report whatever he finds out before returning home. For doing all this he'll receive a pardon. They want to find information on the 12 Monkeys the terrorist group that took responsibility for the attack and prevent it from occurring. Willis meets a therapist played by Madeline Stowe when he's taken to a mental institution in our world. It's clear that he's disturbed but is that due to the travel through time? Did his fragmented mind make up the entire story? Stowe has to deal with all of this when she is kidnapped later in the film. Willis has fallen in love with her and tries to convince her his tale is true. Now they're on the run from the police and must find out who is behind the 12 Monkeys and where they have the virus. The performances are sharp. Willis is particularly good at playing the sad sack time traveler condemned to wonder if he is insane or truly on a hero's mission. Stowe plays the therapist well and injects humanity into a role that could have been routine in the wrong hands. Brad Pitt plays his most bizarre and interesting role yet. I don't recall if he was nominated for an Academy Award but he should have been. Gilliam's direction is self assured and powerful. He manages to blur the real and imagined in such a way that we're not certain about Willis' sanity. This interesting group of talented artists have created a terrific movie. It's not for everyone though as Gilliam's dark view of humanity and his use of satire might not appeal to everyone. Gilliam and the writers have managed to make an interesting short into a full bodied motion picture.
Rating:
Summary: Frightening.
Review: Good Science Fiction (weather a book, a movie, tv, whatever) has the power to make us look at ourselves as a society. The events in this movie metaphorically mimic events in our everyday lives. Even though we have not yet discovered time travel, all of the other events in this movie could happen, which is absolutely frightening. This is a dark movie, not for everyone, which has a deep high-minded script and plot (it may take a few watchings to fully understand this one.) The cinematography, directing, and acting are wonderful. Bruce Willis proves that he can do other movies besides his normal action type. He also proved it later in The 6th Sense, but I think this is one of his best performences. As for Brad Pitt, it is his best performance. It's so real that by the end, you'll think he's crazy. Another important thing to note is to buy the DVD, but not the DTS one. The non-DTS version has an insightful long documentary on the making of the film, the DTS version does not have this. Plus the Dolby Digital sound is excellent in itself. Most Highly Reccomended.
Rating:
Summary: Depressing destiny
Review: This is one of those movies which you almost hate watching, simply because it's so infuriating in that you know what will happen. You know (spoiler coming up) that Bruce Willis will fail, you know his recurring dream is his future, you realize that this will be changed. But still, you have to watch. I suppose this review sounds far too much like a bad car wreck, but the fact remains that this is one of the most enthralling movie of the 90's, and an excellent entry into the more serious works of Brad Pitt. An excellent movie, well worth repeated watching. Look for an extremely interesting Astor Piazzola piece.
Rating:
Summary: Very cool
Review: This is not only one of Terry Gilliam's best movies but one of the finest time-travel films ever made. The story is great -- and in its logical tightness, it's right up there with the first _Terminator_ film (and the classic Heinlein stories 'By His Bootstraps' and _The Door into Summer_). The casting is amazingly good for 1995. Remember, this was before Bruce Willis was known as anything but a wisecracking action hero, and Brad Pitt hadn't yet turned into a national obsession (he'd already been cast in this one before _Interview with the Vampire_ and _Seven_ were released). In fact, when I first watched this film, I thought Pitt had been horribly miscast -- but it turned out I was wrong, as repeated viewings demonstrated. (Madeleine Stowe is terrific as well but that was no surprise then or now.) You probably already know the premise. James Cole (Willis) is a convict in 2038, and in exchange for a complete pardon he 'volunteers' for a time-travel mission. In 1997, see, most of the human race was wiped out by a really nasty virus, and the scientists of Cole's day want him to go back in time and collect some samples of it so they can get cracking on a cure. But something goes wrong . . . That's all I'll say, except to note that everything gets neatly wrapped up at the end. (And I mean everything. If you think there are loose ends, watch it again.) The screenplay is the work of David and Janet Peoples, so it's no surprise that it's well done; David Peoples was one of the writers on _Blade Runner_ (and he also wrote _Soldier_, which is set in the same world as _Blade Runner_). The dialogue is crisp and the exposition clear and swift. (In fact, it's arguably _too_ good: the film is supposed to be, in the beginning at least, ambiguous as to whether the time travel stuff is just Cole's schizoid fantasy, but thanks in large measure to the convincing screenplay, most of us know from the start that it's the real thing.) Of course it's Gilliam who brings all this together. If you've seen _Brazil_, you've probably already seen this one too -- but if you haven't, see both.
Rating: 
Summary: rare, but still typical?
Review: This is a really great movie. But, there is a but. I did not like the plot, where someone from the future goes back to the past - and the future results in something because the future is somehow involved in the past. That makes no sense, and there was some other logical breaks. But a really great movie after all, exiting, intelligent, good actors and all that. The 7.9 in imdb is deserved - and I recomend it, if you like sci-fi back in time movies - because it is typical that way.
| 
