Twelve Monkeys Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x1040 | 12617.72 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x688 | 2870.48 MiB | 720p | |
|
448x256 | 700.6 MiB | divx | |
|
320x192 | 499 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
The future is history.
They're Coming.
An unknown and lethal virus has wiped out five billion people in 1996. Only 1% of the population has survived by the year 2035, and is forced to live underground. A convict (James Cole) reluctantly volunteers to be sent back in time to 1996 to gather information about the origin of the epidemic (who he's told was spread by a mysterious "Army of the Twelve Monkeys") and locate the virus before it mutates so that scientists can study it. Unfortunately Cole is mistakenly sent to 1990, six years earlier than expected, and is arrested and locked up in a mental institution, where he meets Dr. Kathryn Railly, a psychiatrist, and Jeffrey Goines, the insane son of a famous scientist and virus expert.
| Christopher Plummer | Dr. Goines |
| Bruce Willis | James Cole |
| Madeleine Stowe | Kathryn Railly |
| Brad Pitt | Jeffrey Goines |
| Bill Raymond | Microbiologist |
| Jon Seda | Jose |
| Simon Jones | Zoologist |
| Joseph Melito | Young Cole |
| Michael Chance | Scarface |
| Vernon Campbell | Tiny |
| H. Michael Walls | Botanist |
| Bob Adrian | Geologist |
| Carol Florence | Astrophysicist |
| Ernest Abuba | Engineer |
| Irma St. Paule | Poet |
| Joey Perillo | Detective Franki |
| Bruce Kirkpatrick | Policeman No.1 |
| Terry Gilliam |
8.00 out of 10 (93017 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Movie that leaves a strange feeling in your stomach
posted on 28 Aug 2009I must admit that I have never seen such a movie. I do love SF, but this was something new and fresh.Acting was great, movie in general was great, everything about it was really great.This move leaves a strange feeling in your stomach after watching it. Certainly, this one is not a classical Hollywood thingy, but really great thing.When you make masterpiece, time doesn't matter anymore. This is one of those great movies that will keep its place amongst the best there is in science fiction genre for all times.Watch this one, you won't regret it!
Inspired Insanity
posted on 25 Aug 200912 Monkeys is a rare treat that diverts from the traditional Hollywood fare one might expect from the film, being directed by Terry Gilliam (of Monty Python fame) and starring big-name Hollywood stars Willis and Pitt. However, rather than tell a 'time travel' story that deals with consequence and effect, 12 Monkeys instead tells an ambiguous tale of a central character walking a fine line between reality and insanity. The viewer can easily make a conscious decision while watching the film to buy into the time-travel story and Cole's plight, or they can interpret the film as the delusional visions of a clinically insane man. Gilliam's fantastic work offers evidence to support both interpretations, and the film can be enjoyed many times as the viewer picks up the many clues to determine their own interpretation of the events.The acting is fantastic; Willis plays Cole with both alarming savagery and arresting sincerity. Stowe is as talented as she is hauntingly beautiful, and her role as the non-believer gradually accepting an unbelievable reality becomes increasingly compelling, as we see her own grip on reality crumble as Cole's does. Pitt is outstanding; his delivery of complicated machine-gun dialogue is both funny and disturbing, and although his character takes a back seat for a large portion of the film, he nonetheless greatly enhances the film with his presence.12 Monkeys isn't a film that has broad appeal. Its imagery is largely very gritty and dirty - a stark contrast to the early scenes that are exceptionally stale - its story ambiguous, and there are plenty of simply bizarre scenes and characters. Still, it is a film that will reward the patient viewer with a clever and moving vision of a tortured soul and his heartbreaking struggle.
Into the Funhouse with Terry Gilliam
posted on 10 Aug 2009A visually stunning and mind-bending sci-fi movie from Terry Gilliam (of Monty Python fame).Bruce Willis is a convict sent back in time to uncover more information about a lethal virus that will eventually wipe out mankind. The film has an "into-the-funhouse" feel about it -- it's worth watching for the production design alone. It also happens to feel especially relevant right now, in a world that's obsessed with fears of diseases and epidemics (swine flu, anyone?) The cast also includes Madeleine Stowe as a love interest for Willis, and Brad Pitt, Academy Award nominated as a loony.Grade: A
Pretty good
posted on 04 Aug 2009Twelve Monkeys keeps you wondering throughout. Madeline Stowe and Bruce Willis are both good in this film and as a result we are left with a spectacle of emotions and a plot which unfolds consistently and very well. It's good to see an idea which has transformed well to film because sometimes a writer can think of a good idea and waste it.
why did this movie get made ??
posted on 14 Jul 2009talk about confusing..which this movie was.. i watched it and i was Totally lost.. it made no sense what so ever to me.. im wondering why Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt would want to be associated with such trash??i think Terry Gilliam should have just stayed with comedy and not even attempt to make this one.. what was he thinking?? the way things went back and forth just confused the heck outta me... nothing made sense at all.. i was disappointed in Bruce and Brad for doing such a turkey of a movie.. they were the reason i rented it too.. it was just Way to weird for my liking , i DONT recommend this movie to anyone ...
Up there with the best of science fiction
posted on 14 Jul 2009One of the all-time great science fiction works, as visionary and thought-provoking as Blade Runner or even Gilliam's own Brazil. Willis gives his best performance here, but he's outdone by Pitt's incredibly frenetic turn that's unlike anything he's done before or since. Even Stowe isn't out of her league here, though. The story is very layered and offers quite a lot to think about. The climactic scene is beautifully magnificent, and the last lines fit perfectly. The scenes in the mental hospital are creepy and yet so funny in their own way. Lots of dark humour on display here. Fantastic production design and suitably bizarre cinematography. In my top ten.
Great mental mouswheel! Everything I expect from Terry Gilliam
posted on 11 Jul 2009I thought Brad Pitt was no good. I was mistaken.I knew Terry Gilliam was a genius. Not disappointed.I still have my doubts as to Bruce Willis' acting ability. Call it Terry Gilliam's hand, but the three performances of the main characters (Pitt, Willis and Madelaine Stowe) are flawless. If everything else were no good (which is NOT the case) Pitt's performance alone would be worth the time spent.But what I really love about this movie is the going-to-the-past paradoxes and the way they get beautifully weaved into a convincing story that even manages to elicit profound compassion, hilarity, admiration for the characters, and so on.See it, rent it, buy it, whatever.
Bloody hard work
posted on 08 Jul 2009reading the description of this film on the cover sends a chill up me, as it's sounds a plot for the ultimate film. Even having seen it & not enjoyed it, it still sounds an amazing concept. In reality, it was very poorly executed.I spent so much of the film re-winding the tape to clarify what was happening. I'm not saying it was complicated, but it required far more than 100% concentration. There must have been a better way of tackling time travel than this.My biggest problems with this were the characters & acting. Bruce looked totally uninterested in his role & just ambled about (almost Stallone esque) grunting & mumbling looking thoroughly bored & miserable. Madeline Stowe's character was your typical unconvincing screaming woman, Brad Pitt weren't in it enough & when he was (though not through bad acting) looked like he was in a school play in the role of a character thought up in 10 minutes.It seemed a film that deliberately tried to be awkward & complex thus to appeal to those who like to see themselves above everyone else in intelligence (but who very rarely are). It was also made for your "sci-fi junkies and anyone who dislikes anything remotely mainstream.While I love your 'Back to the Future type films, I don't want all time travel films to be tackled like that. I like something a little more adult that requires more thinking & mystery. So, I should've liked this. Unfortunately, it just tried far too hard to be more complex.In any film you should be able to (in effect) place or imagine yourself in the role of one main characters.Sadly, there wasn't one single thing that Crowe done in Twelve Monkeys that any normal human, in his position, would've done. He never seemed to have any enthusiasm or rational ideas of how to convince anyone that he was from the future, barely made any references to having lived through the time period he was in, although this wasn't helped by him often being in a state barely able to speak. I never had an understanding of why Crowe was in prison in 2030 odd, infact only knew he was due to the cover of the video telling me. There was also the cliched "No-one believes the main bloke's protests" characters, made out as baddies.The 1st half of the film in far too slow, it picked up a lot in the 2nd half (although I'd had a kip in between), but even the 2nd half was let down by an ending the viewer could peg, infact almost knew, way in advance and an end scenario that I couldn't help thinking could have been avoided given how much was known already? Maybe that's the point that, it was unavoidable, I don't know?Of the people that give this 10/10 I can't believe any 2 of them have the same interpretation of EXACTLY what went on, particularly what would've went on after the film ended. That's not necessarily a fault as I'm all for interpreting films in your own way. It does however leave films like this open to countless plot holes or chasms, especially when you have a film like Twelve Monkeys that seems to ask the viewer to suspend disbelief but at the same time contains a highly complex plot.I would've liked to have seen more time devoted to the future, at the start of the film, as we never seemed to have enough understanding of it as the film went on. It wasn't an awful film though. I give it 5/10 and usually with films of that score I have an equal amount of good & bad to say about it. Whilst this has good points, it's just a subject that could've been tackled so so much better, slightly more straight forward, with better acting, more likeable characters & with scenery & cinematography less dark & depressing, it looked almost post-apocalyptic in 1996.I would point fans of these films in the direction of the TV show Jonathan Creek as how highly complex stories can be tackled in a way that is both straightforward, but requiring intelligent thinking.I have only watched this once though. I reckon with one or two more viewings, little things will become clearer, lines I missed will be heard and I'll have a fuller grasp of it but I can't see it going up any more than another 2 marks.A low 5/10
Smartest Time Travel Film of All Time
posted on 08 Jul 2009I must confess I have never been a Terry Gilliam fan -- wasn't one before I saw this movie, and haven't one been afterwards either -- BUT, with that said, for the two hours I sat in that theater (and the several repeat viewings at home since that time), I was very much a Gilliam fan.Simply put, this is one of the smartest sci-fi films ever made. Weird at times, yes, slow-moving and at times confusing, yes, depressing as hell, yes...but always smart, smart, smart. And even the weirdness, which I often find off-putting in Gilliam's other films, here generally serves to draw the audience into the same nightmare in which the protagonist finds himself. And the last thirty minutes of the movie are just classic. There have been few movies that have excited me as much as the last half hour of this film -- I recall actually pumping my fist as one by one every mind-blowing loose end in the film was pulled together and tied up in time for an absolutely perfect ending -- just brilliant work.This is not an uplifting film, nor is it an action flick. If you are looking for something to make you feel good, or for a quick action fix, this is NOT the film for you. But if you are in the mood to use that round thi ng perched up on top of your shoulders, I highly recommend this movie. 9/10
A most intriguing time travel adventure.
posted on 02 Jul 2009I have experienced this film many times since its debut and I am always entertained. The recurring nightmares and deja-vu, the confusion of identity, self, destiny, and conspiracy result in a thought provoking action/adventure/romance/tragedy work of art. The more I watch this film the more it grows on me.
Brilliantly spooky and weirdly compelling
posted on 26 Jun 2009Twelve Monkeys is one of the best movies I have seen, period. The imagery is complex and the storyline compels you to get involved in the movie, i.e. trying to figure out what the hell is going on. Gilliam is a masterful diector, drawing superb performances out of Pitt, Stowe and Willis. Watch for Willis' expressions throughout the movie, but especially in the insane asylum. Also for Pitt's over the top but still believable performance. There are some genuinely spooky ideas in this movie, and the soundtrack causes insanity when you can't get it out of your head. Overall a brilliant and disturbingly paranoid version of the future. **** out of ****
Brilliantly twisted, and some astonishingly good acting from actors I usually don't like
posted on 26 Jun 2009I really enjoyed this -- I'm a big fan of movies that mess with your mind and leave you with a lot of questions and ideas to debate, and this was a stellar example. But then, Terry Gilliam is always good at that (well, almost always. Let's just forget about Jabberwocky and The Brothers Grimm, shall we?).I particularly liked the way it handled the time travel theme and the avoidance of paradoxes -- the way events in the past and future intertwined and fed into each other.It was also really well done aesthetically -- the art direction was really great, and I wish I'd been able to see it on the big screen. The future scenes had a similar feel to Brazil in a lot of ways, and even the present scenes were often really visually compelling.But perhaps the most striking thing about it was that it featured two actors I normally don't much like, Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt, and they both delivered amazing performances here. Pitt especially -- I'd seen one or two films before that made me realize he could in fact actually act (contrary to what I'd originally thought), but this one really outdid them. I actually found myself asking my friends at one point "Are you SURE that's Brad Pitt?" This is probably the most memorable performance of his career (though admittedly that may not be saying too much).
what's real, what's deserved and what's regretted
posted on 23 Jun 2009I've seen this film many times through many years and the feeling of deja vu has always appeared. Even the first time I saw it now that I recall it, or maybe it is an effect of the film that makes time matter only in one's mind.So, is time important? in this film time is the least important thing, what matters the most is saving humanity from itself even if it is, or was, already too late...and also saving one's self becomes the most important thing, trying to save an unknown but remembered love, even when it is pointless, is important....The hero in this film has the impossible task of make his memories come true, the writing, the images and the players accomplishes all this in a beautiful way that keeps its spell despite time...time is not important.....
An intelligent comedy/thriller that rewards careful watching.
posted on 20 Jun 2009I remember when 12 Monkeys first came out on video, and I just never did get around to watching it. Well, I'm glad I waited so long, because the DVD version is so good. As good as the movie is, this DVD has the very best "making of" feature I've seen yet. It was done independently and in parallel with making the movie, and gives you a clear idea how this movie was made from concept through test screenings and finally release.The premise of the movie is complex, but involves a future, underground civilization sending people back in time to try and figure out an antidote for a deadly virus that had exterminated 99% of the world population. It moves back and forth, from "presemt" to past, and drops good clues about how everything fits in. Ultimately all is resolved, but you have to be observant. A great movie for real "movie watchers".The 3 main actors all do a fine job, but Brad Pitt as the semi-crazy character is so well done, and funny, that it is hard to imagine the movie with anyone else. Overall a really fine movie, I give it "9" of "10".
Disappointing
posted on 06 May 2009The title promises so much, yet the film delivers so little. I wasexpecting, given the title, something along the lines of a LancelotLink, Secret Chimp, re-telling of the Last Supper, or a relatedJesus story. But instead the film holds off on real monkeys untilthe very end, and even then, it's a case of too little, too late. Perhaps if the budget had been larger, we would have morefootage of monkeys, instead of Gilliam's cheap substitute -stylised "graffiti"-art versions of man's closest and most humorousrelative. If you are interested in primates, then this is a film toavoid at all costs.
Monkey dung
posted on 24 Apr 2009Onetime cartoonist Terry Gillian has a vivid Gothic imagination, but also a long track record of proving that this alone is not enough to define a good film-maker. Unfortunately for Gilliam, his films are not just bad, but unusual and bad as well, and so while many bad film-makers have made fortunes, Gilliam has repeatedly lost Hollywood millions. 'Twelve Monkeys', a science-fiction thriller starring human ape Bruce Willis, isn't quite as bad as it initially promises to be, but features characteristically wacky editing and a self-consciously confused plot, as well as what must be Brad Pitt's most annoying role ever. Its visual richness can't hide the simple truth that it's insufficiently funny or clever; and what's sad is that the same can be said of most of Gilliam's other movies. As a set designer, he gets top marks. But as a director, he makes a pretty good cartoonist.
Complex and Riveting
posted on 18 Apr 2009This movie while not being a classic is still a fantastic gripping tale. When I first saw it in 1996 I was confused and overwhelmed by the concepts involved. But having just viewed this movie again am now of the opinion that it gets better each time you view it. The performances while more than adequate weren't overly memorable but it is the wonderful script and Gilliam's fantastic directing which makes this movie a great way to spend two hours.
Glaring Holes as big as a Giant Glazed Donut
posted on 15 Apr 2009Okay, Here is a ***********SPOILER ALERT************* I'm warning you!!!Now, on with the show.The film really intrigued me. But films can be blown by one small, seemingly insignificant detail that punches a hole in the plot and deflates the entire movie. This is my beef:At the end, near the airport, Bruce (what you talkin' bout) Willis is given a gun to kill boomer from 'saint elsewhere'. Apparently they want him dead before he releases the virus on the world. (And don't say they didn't give Willis the gun to kill him. What was he going to do, request a sample of the virus at gunpoint, then tell Boomer to 'go about your business'? No.)Die Hard man dies in his failed attempt. The virus is released. Lo and behold, The insurance lady comes by just in time to save the day. After the virus is released. I guess to get the original virus so they can develop an antidote in the future. Maybe to stop the further spread before Boomer gets off the plane in another country.So, dear readers, why are they bothering to give (what you talkin' bout) willis a gun to stop boomer at the last possible second? They can go to any time they want. They've done it before. Why not just kill boomer at any time before he takes the virus and be done with it? Run him over with a car on his 18th birthday? Accidental drug overdose while in college? Hey, you've got 40 years to work with, be creative!Think about it. Would you, wanting to stop a deadly virus from wiping out humanity, place all your bets on a 15 minute window of opportunity while Boomer is in the airport, or any of the 40 years of his life leading up to that point? Did they think viewers wouldn't be able to comprehend one more jump back to a different time, or did they just want to maintain the 'dark' part of their film, at the expense of the logic they themselves have set up?I've seen comments from fans of this movie that attack anyone who doesn't like it. I wanted to like it, that's why I bought a ticket. The problem is if you get your viewers to suspend disbelief for your movie, you need to give them a set of rules to believe in for the duration of your movie. You can't then suspend the rules you've set up and expect your movie not to have a fatal flaw, and this movie has a big one.
Wow, What An Ugly Story
posted on 26 Feb 2009Yech, what a horrible, sordid story. This is ridiculously disgusting, right from the start and leaves a bad taste in your mouth. It is a futuristic sci-fi story about a man "James Cole" (Bruce Willis) going back and trying to find out about a virus that killed five billion people and sent the remaining humans on earth underground. Suonds interesting but the first half an hour (at least, because I didn't last a whole lot longer with this) takes place in a cruel mental ward. Brad Pitt plays "Jeffrey Goines," an extremely hyper, disgusting person. Add in the gross scenes and profanity and this is an extremely unappealing movie to anyone with any sense of taste.
High Concept
posted on 31 Aug 2009A film for those firmly convinced that man is his own self-fulfilling prophecy. Twelve Monkeys benefits from the eccentric mind of Chris Marker and vision of Terry Gilliam. The shining point is the high concept: Bruce Willis, Madeline Stowe and Brad Pitt all demonstrate their acting prowess while still being somewhat out of character. The thrust of the theme still stirs interest three years later, and the unsettling tones pervade the film's atmosphere. For the viewer, James Cole falls somewhere between the Christlike figure and Nietzche's Zarathrusta. But then again, don't we all.