The Brothers Grimm

An unbelievable chaos and mess. Terry Gilliam doesn't have the visual potential of Tim Burton, and he doesn't know what to do with this fairy tale. The production design is awful and sloppy. The shot of the supposedly monumental castle Kost is rather laughable – the Czech Republic is probably a financially very good place for filming. The visual effects are tragic and the sets are so obviously theatrical that it's almost unbelievable. Many scenes are downright embarrassing, with zero emotions and actors that are disgustingly wooden. The cinematography is confusing and the direction doesn’t warrant a comment. Gilliam doesn't know where to go and keeps making one senseless move after another. In the final assessment, The Brothers Grimm is one big, muddled, unfocused and boring mess. Colloquially speaking: it's a shitshow. (04/09/2006)

The Brothers Grimm is a thoroughly routine historical fairy tale with nothing surprising or interesting about it. The film has a dark tone underscored by the gothic sets and busy camerawork, but in conceptual terms, it is overshadowed by Burton’s Sleepy Hollow. The characters and the story are mediocre with no ambition to be anything more than that. If this were a purely Czech film, I would say that we can equal Hollywood. But as it’s a big-budget Hollywood production directed by the otherwise always innovative and distinctive Terry Gilliam...no way. (10/08/2005)

Though the subject seemed woefully Gilliamian, its processing into a worn and uninteresting script with extraordinary consistency filtered out everything that went beyond the first plan. Gilliam was left with a visually engaging but desperately empty narrative about two brothers hunting down false ghosts until they find themselves face to face with the real supernatural. Thanks to the direction, it was not a completely reprehensible mess, but despite this fact, The Brothers Grimm offers little more than a lavish quest, decent tricks, uninteresting music, mediocre performances by the main characters and good performances by some of the supporting characters (experienced Gilliams Stormare and Pryce, and the great Bellucci). Instead of a carnival somewhere on the uncertain edge of rationality and irrationality, instead of the dazzling imagination and cinematic magic that Gilliam wields like few, all that remains is typical Hollywood with a flimsy script, colorful backdrops, and a few good gags (but weak-minded by Gilliam's standards). I understand why Terry had the worst shoot of his career... his worst film came out of it. Three stars for an immeasurable and futile effort to turn a fart into a ball. (11/13/2005)

This decadent fairy tale-non-fairy tale, set against the dark backdrop of a mysterious forest and a black-humored story proves that as Terry Gilliam grew older, it was as if he was entering his filmmaking adolescence and his only goal was to provoke. However, the film provokes cleverly, boldly, and entertainingly all at the same time, so anyone who has even an ounce of flair for a slightly "different" narrative will certainly enjoy at least the divine Peter Stormare, and as a bonus will be given one little white kitten! (02/06/2007)

Aside from the barely half-minute scene of a French dinner by the woods, there's not a shred of Gilliam in the entire movie. There is nothing by which you would recognize this as being his work. I'm exaggerating, but not that much. Terry made something that no one expected from a genius of his format - a well-done example of film-craft. Nothing less, but, unfortunately, nothing more either. (11/11/2005)