Fairytales, folklore and mythology permeate literature, films, comics, art…many of the stories that entertain us today owe their structure, content, themes and ideas to the ancient oral traditions of various cultures. My favorites among these types of stories are those that delve deep into folklore, mythology and tradition and stay relatively true to the source material. Neil Gaiman and Mike Mignola have done this to great effect with The Sandman and Hellboy, respectively. The archetypes of fairytales are such that they lend themselves to whimsical, fantastical film making. The latest of these happens to be The Brothers Grimm.
I was excited from the very beginning about this film for many reasons. The source material is a favorite. The director is known for quirky, eccentric film making. And the look of the film, similar to that of films like Sleepy Hollow and Van Helsing, is one that I thoroughly enjoy. The problem with having high anticipation for films is that one can be easily let down if the film doesn’t deliver. I’m happy to say that for the most part this film met all my expectations.
The Brothers Grimm is in no way a biography of the actual men who recorded hundreds of fairy tales gleaned from the oral traditions of various European cultures. Instead it is fantastical tale of two con men who make their fortune preying on the superstitions of isolated villages. With the help of a couple of mentally challenged henchmen they secretly set up elaborate hauntings for which the villagers pay them to perform equally elaborate exorcisms. This all works great until they are forced to deal with a village whose hauntings are by no means manufactured by man.
Terry Gilliam, famed member of the Monty Python troupe and director of such films as Jabberwocky, Brazil, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas brought his unique talents to The Brothers Grimm and more than anyone can be credited with the look and feel of this film. His films, like the films of Tim Burton, tend towards the bizarre, the whimsical, and the quirky both in look and content. Far from being a straight forward scary adventure film, The Brothers Grimm is peppered with odd, eccentric characters and settings that mark it as a Gilliam film. The settings are dark, spooky and rich with texture. The enchanted forest and its decaying tower which are part of the main setting for the film are particularly well done. The menacing, moving trees are especially fun as they scamper like spiders and writhe like snakes and call to mind images of eerie childhood tales. I especially loved the tower as it looks strikingly like an Alan Lee drawing of a ruined tower in a cherished book I own entilted Castles (scroll a quarter of the way down to see picture to which I’m referring). Gilliam’s color palette, dark and moody but touched here and their with splashes of crimson, was excellent.
I was pleased with the cast of this film. Heath Ledger and Matt Damon inhabit the title roles. Both easily fall into that category in which they are liked by some and despised by others. I happen to enjoy both of these actors and, with the exception of Damon’s awful wig, they looked great as the Grimm brothers. Lena Headey was a great choice for the lead female. She was attractive but not cutesy which made her headstrong, fearless character Angelika more believable. Monica Belluci was the perfect choice for the beautiful but too briefly seen Mirror Queen. It was wonderful to see Jonathan Pryce back in a villain role. He has been a favorite since Something Wicked This Way Comes. Without question, however, the show was stolen by Peter Stormare as the Italian officer-executioner Cavaldi. His performance was eccentric, wacky, over-the-top and very fun. My only complaint is that early on in the film I had difficulty understanding his lines as his voice seemed to be drowned out by background noise. Other than this he was outstanding.
I would have liked to see more editing to the length of this film. Normally I don’t find movies too long but at almost 2 hours this film could’ve benefited from some early trimming, or perhaps a better use of the first act of the show. I feel they spent too much time establishing just who the Brothers Grimm were and it is time that would have been better employed fleshing out the Mirror Queen and Woodsman roles in the middle and end of the film. Despite an early action sequence the first twenty minutes of the film seemed slow and flat. Thankfully the film picks up after the introduction of Cavaldi and the subsequent relocation to the haunted forest. And make no mistake, even with the fairytale references this is not a film for young children. There is the presence of a typical happy ending but along the way some very dark things that happen to children and adults…things very true in spirit to the original Grimm’s fairy tales.
Gilliam does a marvelous job of weaving together elements from many of the classic Grimm tales into this film and I found it highly enjoyable. If you’ve enjoyed previous Gilliam films and/or you like the darker, quirkier films of Tim Burton then you should be entertained by The Brothers Grimm.
oh god – is it actually good? i mean, i felt flips in my stomach to see that Gilliam was going to make a movie called The Brothers Grimm. but then i saw matt damon and heath ledger and that it was an action film and and and and… i trust you, carl, and i guess i should really trust Gillian – perhaps i will have to see this film, afterall
I really liked it. But I am one of the few people I know who also enjoyed Van Helsing. Like VH it is a fun, dark twist on fairy tale movies. There are complaints that others have about the story, etc that just didn’t bother me. Rumor has it that there was alot of studio interference with the film, so much so that Gilliam stopped production for awhile and actually made another movie in between time so I’m sure that it would’ve been an even better film had he been allowed free reign. From what I gather from critics, it isn’t the most Giliam-esque of Gilliam films and this is generally thought to be because of the sutdio intererence I mentioned.
I don’t think it is any better or any worse than Van Helsing if that helps you make your decision. For me the visuals were really splendid and I’d see this again in the theatre just to look at the forest scenes. But I’m weird that way…
I didn’t have any problem with the action elements at all. Like I hinted at in my review, I would’ve liked to have seen more time spent in the forest and more time spent fleshing out the characters of the Mirror Queen and Woodsman and if so it would’ve been a much better movie. As it is I’d give it 3 out of 4 stars.
Man, Brazil anyone? Carl, have you seen the Criterion version of Brazil? There’s like 3 versions on that collection. The first is what the studios released and he removed his name from it. The third was his original cut. Terry has so much trouble with studios!
The Van Helsing comparison is not a good thing, imo, but the rest of your review made it sound good. I’ll be going to see it.
i enjoyed it too.. especially Ledger & Damon.
but i just felt like something was missing to the story.
probably going to see it tonight — that or Broken Flowers — tough choice, Terry Gilliam or Bill Murray…
my expectations are not terribly high, knowing what gilliam went through to get a film out, but even lowered expectations for a gilliam film are pretty tall standards in general, & i’m sure i won’t really be let down. i hope.
if i am, i’ll blame you, carl v.
ps: my favorite jonathan pryce role was in Munchausen.
I know very few people who really liked Van Helsing but I am indeed one of them. I thought Jackman and Beckinsale were great and I loved what they did. It was an homage to the old Universal Monster Movies and I thought it worked beautifully. It had just the right amount of cheesiness to be a true nod to those movies and yet maintained a spirit of fun and adventure throughout. The sets were beautifully done and, like this movie, the color palette, lighting, etc were terrific.
Grimm is one of those movies that already has many detractors and no doubt someone who takes my recommendation to see it is going to think it sucks but that’s okay…I can live with it, Jenn See.
I have Munchausen at the top of my Netflix list…its been a long time since I’ve seen that one and I honestly can’t recall if I’ve see Brazil or not. I have Time Bandits on the list somewhere as well.
I think the ‘something missing’ was probably due to the way that the studios interfered with Gilliam. I liked the story but it is fairly easy to see how much better it could have been if Gilliam had free reign and didn’t feel compelled to stop production for awhile.
Incidentally, the movie he completed during his hiatus from Grimm, Tideland, looks like its going to be an excellent film. Click on the link and check it out.
I also liked this film. It was good not great. A little too long though. They should have cut about 15 or 20 minutes and that would’ve helped. The look of the film is wonderful and the performances are top notch. The story is just missing something. I think it is because they made too many references to too many stories and that ended up distracting from the main story. This is a great visual film for the big screen. This won’t seem the same at home. If your going to see it at all I would recommend going out to the movies. I would say it rates at 2 and 1/2 out fours stars.
I’m with Carl on Van Helsing. Loved it. Was it perfect no but I thought it was a fun summer flick which is just what I wanted when I went to see it. I wasn’t expecting something Oscar worthy. Movies are so subjective though. That what makes them so fun to discuss. 🙂 I also find how much one’s mood that day or one’s preconceived notion of film really effects people’s opinions. It’s interesting.
Amen to that!
Back in blogdom, so aside from just saying a quick hello, just letting you know that was the final encouragement I needed to go and see it.
Gilliam is a genius, but initially I was hesitant as I feared studio interference would scar me for life.
Glad to hear it’ll just be the mythical woods scarring me for life!!
loved Van Helsing too.. but that’s no surprise.
Welcome back Machine! And no, that doesn’t surprise me Angela.
Van Helsing was fun – i esp. liked how they did the creature from frankenstein, but that’s because i’m a huge fan of Mary Shelly’s original book.
i’d imagine studios have about as much trouble with gillian as gillian has with studios.
Great review, Carl. It made me decide I did, in fact, want to see it! Thanks 🙂
As much as I enjoyed Brothers Grimm…and I did…I get the feeling that a re-enactment of the mob scene from Frankenstein is going to happen once all of you see Brothers Grimm at my recommendation.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, you have not convinced me to see it! 😉
Yes, but you don’t generally like this type of movie so I would have to do some pretty heavy selling (i.e. lying) to get you to see it! 🙂
hmmmmmm. mixed thoughts on this one. sitting back & waiting for tideland. pondering, should i read it first? has anyone?
Didn’t know Tideland was a book. I don’t think I’d read it first, but that’s just me. It reminds me of a Big Fish type of movie and I was glad I went into that fresh with no preconceived ideas from the novel.
hey! im doing a research on these people and i wanted to know if you had any information on then, it doesnt matter. we had to pick an author and i picked them, and we have to do a three to five page essay on them. please can you give me some information, as much as possible.
thanks!!
What people, Megan? The actual Grimm Brothers?