The Brothers Grimm

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)

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)

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)

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. (11/10/2005)

The visual aspect is perfect, Gilliam knows how to work with the budget reasonably, but if I ever believed in creative differences during filming, it is precisely in the case of the Brothers Grimm. The curse is an incredible plot mess, where I sometimes can't keep track of how many digressions the story has taken. But when an unexpected action ride comes about an hour later, it's worth it until the very end, I root for both brothers and hold my breath during suspenseful scenes. In combination with the perfect portrayal of the villainous general, I ended up being reconciled, but otherwise, this woodland odyssey proceeded quite controversially. (04/14/2006)

If any other director had made a similar film, it would probably have received much better feedback, but Terry Gilliam set such a high bar with his previous films and fired up his fan base so strongly that the final impression is slightly hesitant. Gilliam himself denied rumors that the producer's interventions were responsible for the final version, as well as the fact that he couldn't work with his favorite crew. The Enchanted Forest contains a piece of the typical Gilliam atmosphere of mystery, but it does not reach the script and directing precision of Twelve Monkeys or the artistic eccentricities of Brazil, not even by a long shot. Although many details please the viewer's eye, the result is a fairy tale that is above average but not exceptional. Overall impression: 75%. (12/04/2007)

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)

A largely fragmented but still entertaining and visually appealing Gilliam. (08/18/2010)

I don't know. I probably never really understood what Terry Gilliam meant. The movie "The Brothers Grimm" contains digital effects that are dreadful, but also effects that are beautiful. It's a crazy fairy tale, which is composed of various stories from the Brothers Grimm, just like the main plot itself. It's fairy-tale-like and quite interesting, but also simple. The emphasis was therefore placed on the visuals, which at times are too overwhelming, showing how Gilliam wanted to indulge himself in the film and didn't pay much attention to the story, rather playing with various filters, tricks, puppets, CGI, basically everything he likes. In addition, he cast favorite actors (Matt Damon and Heath Ledger) in the main roles, which should be enough for him to make something that people will go watch and for him to try something that will not only be visually interesting but also meaningful. This fairy tale is not like that, and at times it's just too crazy and tries too hard to be interesting, so it stops being entertaining. What stands out a bit is the participation of Czech actors who not only have small roles but also play quite important roles, whether it's Miroslav Táborský or Tomáš Hanák. However, their performances did not earn them great recognition. The whole film is a bit of a waste because, in the end, it's eccentricity on top of eccentricity, and the whole thing is so oddly twisted that one doesn't know what to think. The film can inspire you, but only because you like Gilliam. And perhaps as a memory of the great Heath. Otherwise, it's just another fulfilled dream of one very unique artist who has always been closer to the visual aspect and its form than to the story. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/11/sahara-stormbreaker-syriana-andelsky.html (03/02/2013)