The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

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)... (09/22/2012)

Nothing against an orgy of the wide-ranging imaginative, but you can't forget to tell a story. Terry Gilliam stubbornly creates "in his own way" to the point where his regularly repeated formula of an ending that flies in the face of most usual rules that it's starting slowly but surely to irritate me. The inventive first hour and the likable main characters against the backdrop of the right mystical plot are wasted when it starts to get entangled, change sides, and overturn archetypes. I can understand why such surprises are successful with the audience, but there was no great cinematic experience on my end, despite multiple great acting performances by Heath Ledger and his alter-ego a.k.a. the beauty Lily Cole. (04/30/2010)

What this film can't be denied is its utterly unrivalled originality. Some passages were so crazy and nonsensical at times that I believed them all the more. I have no words for the cast - they were a pleasure to watch. There were moments when I just marveled at the imagination of the creators. The film has great alternating scenes full of colour and bleakness and overall a steady balance. In short, it's basically a huge blizzard of imaginative figments of fantasy, full of "visual orgies" that cyclically builds and culminates in a rather surprising ending for me. (04/22/2010)

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. (02/01/2010)

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. (10/22/2022)