The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Phantasmagoria is defined as “a sequence of real or imaginary images like that seen in a dream.” Or, simply a copy of the poster from this film would suffice. Terry Gilliam, of Monty Python fame, puts together a notable cast (for an unfortunate reason, namely Heath Ledger’s passing) and an intriguing story. These alone, however, do not a good movie make (not to mention the graphics aren’t very good – possibly intentional). And that’s what we get. More or less.
What makes this film so difficult to put a finger on is its wildly absurd and expressionistic(?!) imagery that fills the screen with something like an admixture of Candyland and Dante’s Inferno. Smoking a joint. In the back of a large caravan. Hauling (and housing) an eccentric traveling theatre troupe. Some of this we actually get. Some of it is implied. And the rest is simply at the volition of the viewer. (Though it probably would’t hurt.)
The plot is fairly straightforward: Doctor Parnassus made a somewhat Mephistophelean wager with the Devil thousands of years ago, and the negative end of the bargain is finally coming to fruition. He must relinquish any female progeny to the Devil when they reach 16, the age of consent (how kind of the Devil). Parnassus leads a traveling group of performers around England, barely scraping enough money out of people to make ends meet. On the caravan is Parnassus’s mirror, which, when stepped through, transports the individual into a land of their imagination. Hence, the name: imaginarium. Tony stumbles into their lives, and the rest is (really colorful) history.
This is Ledger’s final performance, though his final complete performance remains The Dark Knight. Due to Ledger’s untimely passing, Gilliam was forced to rewrite the character of Tony a bit. When he is in the imaginarium, his face alters its appearance, first to Johnny Depp, then to Jude Law, and, finally, to Colin Farrrell. The acting is good on all counts (Lily Cole is a fitting Valentina, Christopher Plummer a fine Parnassus – whatever that means – and Tom Waits is a convincing Devil) and since there is already so much going on in the imaginarium (and the film), this particular rewrite makes little overall difference to the “plot,” which essentially amounts to a hodgepodge of fandango and a dash of tomfoolery. Little more. Yet, again, little less, either.
In the scheme of things, this film will be quickly forgotten, which is fortunate for Gilliam, because it isn’t very good. But, on the other hand, it isn’t very bad either. It’s trying to say something (I think). The imagination, story telling, etc., are capable of transforming ourselves and others, no doubt a worthwhile theme. However, the particular route Gilliam chooses to traverse to tell this wacky story seems to be a conglomeration of several streams-of-consciousness placed end on end until the roll of the credits. As a thought experiment, it has some value, and there is certainly some merit even in its message. Ultimately, however, the film fails due to its inability to say much of anything by trying to do too much of everything. More or less.
Rating: 2.5/4 Stars
