The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

It's Gilliam's full-field fantasy that made a virtue out of a necessity (Depp, Law, Farrell), and while there’s really nothing to fault it for, it's not something absolutely worth loving. Rather, it’s "just" a marionette adorned with colorful ribbons in the hands of an aging yet solid puppeteer. 4 ½. (01/02/2010)

Oh, the old fool... again, he forgets that for all the intoxicating gloss, veils and crazy shapes, the whole show sways precariously in an ocean of thought and narrative confusion. But can you be mad at him for it? You can, although The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is levels above the botched film The Brothers Grimm. It’s him again - the whimsical, wasteful, restless child and a collage maker of the impossible... However, despite the excellent acting, his last work is one of his lesser films. However, I cannot hide the fact that this quality is still damn good compared to others. (08/01/2010)

What does it matter that the visuals are so charming and interesting when, story-wise, The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus is an utterly weak spectacle that, after a promising first half hour, gradually lost my sympathy until it stopped at the freezing point? At least the stars are visibly enjoying their participation, although I would be a thousand times happier if none of them had to help Terry Gilliam and Heath Ledger was still among us. More or less only for him, for Johnny Depp and for Jude Law I give the two stars (I don't mention Farrell, because I couldn't watch that long)... (22/09/2012)

Heath Ledger was resurrected to steal this his last movie. Against all odds, Gilliam successfully managed to bring the picture to a successful conclusion. Not completely first-class, but very good all the same. His imagination works on overdrive and I can’t help thinking that Parnassus is actually personification of Gilliam himself who time and again makes a bet with the devil about whether he will be able to finish his next story. The special effects, although not completely perfect, are spectacular and depict stuff I personally like to see in movies (temple carved into stone in the shape of Buddha sitting on some elephants, jellyfish flying in space, well who could resist that?). They nicely contrast with quite realistically depicted period London full of drunks and Russian mafia ;-). Heath’s stand-ins are incorporated really well into the movie and don’t interrupt its flow in any way. Even though “flow" is not exactly the right word because here and there it falls apart in Gilliam’s hands. Who knows if he really had managed shoot all of the scenes with Ledger that he needed. Don't believe everything you read. Especially “The Mirror". (02/02/2010)

I treated myself to another viewing of a film I saw years ago when my world was still all right. It only confirmed my belief that Terry Gilliam is a true visual artist. Admittedly, I wasn't looking forward to rewatching it, remembering that the story went slightly over my head. It turns out that I just needed to age for it like fine liquor. Nothing threw me off, confused me, or annoyed me this time, and I could enjoy this fantastic, wild ex-Python ride to the fullest without being distracted by a lot of unanswered questions. If the casting of four actors as Tony hadn't been a bare necessity and a last-ditch move, it would still have been a great idea, perfectly suited for this wacky film. My personal favorite was Tom Waits as Mr. Nick. It was a weird film, no question about it, but if you know Terry Gilliam's work, you know that it could have been a lot more bizarre. I simply had to increase my rating after all these years. / Lesson learned: I strongly don't recommend gambling with the Devil. (22/10/2022)