The Brothers Grimm (2005)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Eric A

  
  One of the few (if not the only) movie(s) I have walked out of in theaters. The film wants to go many places, but fails to go to any of them. Extremely boring, don't bother.

• Dead A

  
  This movie was entertaining yet it lacked something. It does have a lot of potential in it. It was like a mixture of different fairy tales. But somewhat, it just couldn't reach the awesomeness.

• danny d

  
  it seems like the people who dont know or dont understand grimms fairy tales were the ones who didnt get this film. i loved it, and although i have often wondered what the film might have been like had ledger and damon switched roles, this is a very fun movie and very underrated.

• Stephen M

  
  I've been putting off watching this for ages thinking I would hate it and, what do you know, I rather enjoyed it in the end. I can't help feeling sorry for Terry Gilliam though. Is it any wonder his movies are so scrappy given the production difficulties that invariably dog… More
  I've been putting off watching this for ages thinking I would hate it and, what do you know, I rather enjoyed it in the end. I can't help feeling sorry for Terry Gilliam though. Is it any wonder his movies are so scrappy given the production difficulties that invariably dog his work? On this one, having already fought unsuccessfully with the Writers Guild of America (again) to credit his co-authorship of the script, and having also struggled to find a distributor, Gilliam was forced to shoot his movie with a toxic atmosphere on set and an officious Weinstein brother in each ear vetoing his decisions. So, yes, it's messy, and the flimsy plot - which casts the eponymous brothers as mitteleuropean ghostbusting charlatans - never develops into anything more than an excuse to reference as many fairy tales as possible (with nods to Millais' <I>Ophelia</I> and Elizabeth Báthory, the Blood Countess), but visually it's absolutely gorgeous, truly one of the best-looking fantasy films you'll ever see. Perhaps the biggest flaw, for me, is that the movie, ironically, seems to work better whenever the Brothers Grimm themselves are off screen. Ordinarily I've got a lot of time for Ledger and Damon but their performances here are a little too frantic for my taste; Peter Stormare and Jonathan Pryce are even further off the scale. Much better are Lena Headey, as the gutsy heroine, and Monica Bellucci, practising her wicked queen chops.

• Conner R

  
  By far the closest thing that Terry Gilliam has gotten to doing something like The Holy Grail. This is just really fun and genuinely hilarious. The running gags about magic beans and character nationalities were what gave it the feeling of silliness that some of Terry Gilliam's… More
  By far the closest thing that Terry Gilliam has gotten to doing something like The Holy Grail. This is just really fun and genuinely hilarious. The running gags about magic beans and character nationalities were what gave it the feeling of silliness that some of Terry Gilliam's movies can lack at times. It doesn't hurt that Matt Damon and Heath Ledger are priceless together and work so well as brothers. There was no need to ever establish the relationship because it was so obvious in the performances. The story is so tied into the writings of the Brother's Grimm, but that doesn't make it feel stale in the least. You never feel as if you're watching a rehash of movies/stories that you've experienced before because the whole movie focuses so much on inspiration. It's so much fun to pick out which characters and subplots would become the full fledged stories we all know and love. Anyone who's a fan of just really fun fantasy/adventure movies cannot resist this particular venture.

• Mike S

  
  Quite all right, if also very flawed and uneven. Obvious studio sets and equally apparent CGI. Director Terry Gilliam, who is perhaps best known for his Monty Python movies, seems to have taken a downfall in quality in latter years. Granted that he's never made a movie that truly… More
  Quite all right, if also very flawed and uneven. Obvious studio sets and equally apparent CGI. Director Terry Gilliam, who is perhaps best known for his Monty Python movies, seems to have taken a downfall in quality in latter years. Granted that he's never made a movie that truly "wowed" me, but considering his capabilities, this is no doubt below par for him. What's fun about this film though, is that it incorporates so many of the real Grimm bros' fairytales. Rapunzel, Little Red Riding Hood, Hansel and Gretel and many other classics are interweaved into the plot. It's just a shame it all ends up being so lackluster. The prologue is a joke of an introduction and despite good efforts from Heath Ledger and Matt Damon, the story never ascends. In summary: worth a look, but nothing you'd regret missing.

• Kyle F

  
  It starts out, at the very beginning, looking like one of the best movies ever, then becomes unwatchable bad in the center. However, "The Brothers Grim" gets better at the end. Damon and Ledger are great, and you really can hardly beat a story about two bumbling people of no… More
  It starts out, at the very beginning, looking like one of the best movies ever, then becomes unwatchable bad in the center. However, "The Brothers Grim" gets better at the end. Damon and Ledger are great, and you really can hardly beat a story about two bumbling people of no notable skill or importance have to face off against walking nightmares.

• Chris W

  
  I really wanted to like this movie, and not just because I wanted to be different from my friends who didn't like it. I just can't though, and it's a damn shame. This should have been a really good movie, especially given the director, actors involved, and the concept.… More
  I really wanted to like this movie, and not just because I wanted to be different from my friends who didn't like it. I just can't though, and it's a damn shame. This should have been a really good movie, especially given the director, actors involved, and the concept. Conceptually, yeah, it is good, but specifics with plot, story, and the script itself is where there;s trouble, Ehren Kruger just isn't a good writer.That's the first problem. Aside from that, the film is also overlong, poorly paced (too slow) and, worst of all, it's boring and hard to care for the characters or what happens. I can enjoy a movie that favors style over substance, but only for so long. This is especially true when I still care what happens, even if substance is lacking. The best part of this movie is everything involving visuals: the art direction, set design, set pieces, and general visual look and style. Unfortunately, I feel as if all of this is overbearing here, becoming too much of a good thing. In the acting department, Damon and Ledger give it their all inspite of what they have to work with. Headey does more than look nice, which helps, and Stormare gives a typically off the wall performance, but all of the hard work the actors put forth is in vain-they can't save the picture.

• Daniel M

  
  One of the hardest things about being a film fan is when a director you love makes a really bad film. We expect nothing but the worst from Michael Bay, Brett Ratner and McG, so that while their films are terrible this does not come as a shock. But when Alan Parker makes The Life of… More
  One of the hardest things about being a film fan is when a director you love makes a really bad film. We expect nothing but the worst from Michael Bay, Brett Ratner and McG, so that while their films are terrible this does not come as a shock. But when Alan Parker makes The Life of David Gale, or Tim Burton makes Mars Attacks!, or Ridley Scott makes A Good Year, it is almost unbearable. The knowledge of these directors' talent clashes with the experience of the films themselves, resulting in anger, despair and disappointment. Terry Gilliam's The Brothers Grimm fits into this category very neatly, although in terms of its problems it is unlike any of those mentioned. Where all three aforementioned flops were the director's chosen projects and therefore entirely their fault, The Brothers Grimm is closer to David Fincher's Alien 3 or David Lynch's Dune, potentially interesting projects undone by heavy-handed producers obsessed with hitting their target audience. Where Fincher wanted Alien 3 to be as dark and nihilistic as the original, the studios wanted a mainstream action film. Where Lynch saw Dune as a chance to expand his palette to create an immersive world, Dino DeLaurentis wanted a simplistic space fantasy that could cash in on the success of Star Wars. Both films have moments where the directors' true intentions shine through (Alien 3 moreso, it must be said), but for purists they remain so disappointing. It's not difficult to see why Gilliam would have been attracted to The Brothers Grimm. He is renowned for blending fantasy and reality together into one seamless whole, whether in the dream sequences of Brazil or the wild flights of fancy in The Adventures of Baron Munchausen. Many of his films are about the triumph of faith and imagination over the grim, restrictive realities we find ourselves in, a theme completely embodied in the character of Jakob Grimm. And much of his work, like Jabberwocky and The Fisher King, has a fairy tale element to it. Sadly, all these good omens are in vain, and simply make the end result all the more unbearable. Gilliam's clashes with Bob and Harvey Weinstein were wide-ranging, from the firing of cinematographer Nicola Pecorini for "working too slowly" to their refusal to let Matt Damon wear a prosthetic nose, for fear that it would "distract audiences from his star-studded good looks." These squabbles continued well into post-production with the supervision of ever-increasing effects shots. They ran on so long, that Gilliam was able to shoot the whole of Tideland before The Brothers Grimm was even released. The result of all this in-fighting, regardless of its cause or extent, is that The Brothers Grimm is not a Terry Gilliam film. It is a mainstream film which just happens to be directed by Terry Gilliam, with a visual style which is severely compromised and often completely derivative. Some moments seem to be cobbled together from Gilliam's previous work, in some kind of bizarre, ham-fisted self-parody. The woodland catapult feels like a lift from Time Bandits, while both the odd technology and the Grimms' armour seem to have escaped from Brazil. Elsewhere there are clear rip-offs of Sleepy Hollow (the look of the village), Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (the torture scenes), and -- most insultingly -- The Lord of the Rings. The derivative visuals can be traced to the film's over-reliance on CGI in place of more organic effects. Despite the lengthy post-production, which saw the release date pushed back almost a year, many of the effects look ropey and unfinished. The wolf's transformation is no great surprise because the wolf runs in such an odd way that we know it's a man underneath. The trees' moving branches, which seem to have escaped from The Evil Dead, are not threatening enough, nor is the scene of the horse devouring the child. Even when things get impressive, like the Ice Princess regenerating and then shattering into mirrored glass, we simply don't care because all the bad effects preceding it take us out of the fantasy and leave us feeling inert. In any case, Théoden's regeneration in The Two Towers is far more impressive, being quicker and largely unedited. But it's not just the bad effects which make this a stinker. The script is really third-rate, never managing to do justice either to the characters or the fairy tales. It was written by Ehren Kruger, who also wrote Gore Verbinski's abysmal remake of The Ring, and in its worst moments the film does feel like Pirates of the Caribbean. The storytelling is incoherent, the dialogue is flat and incomprehensible, and the actors have the distinct look of not knowing what is going on. The goofy comedy is especially out of place, being completely at odds with Gilliam's sensibilities. In Time Bandits or Baron Munchausen, dark and forbidding worlds are created into which humour is introduced to add depth. Here we have lots of bad slapstick, with people falling over each other in various mirthless ways. On top of all this, the film is completely miscast and badly acted. Even before we get to the individual actors, there is the issue of accents. Both Grimms speak in 'natural' English accents, which would be fine if everyone else did the same. Instead we have Jonathan Pryce nearly swallowing his words in a French accent, and Peter Stormare being impossible to understand as an Italian. Heath Ledger is quite simply all over the place, babbling his lines and stumbling around aimlessly, just as he did in The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. Matt Damon looks completely at sea, and Lena Headly is far too glamorous to play Angelica (Gilliam originally wanted Samantha Morton, but the Weinsteins effused in yet another act of genius). All the supporting cast look less like characters than rejects from the local freak show; the acting is hammy and over-the-top in a way which quickly stops being funny The Brothers Grimm is a soul-crushing experience for anyone who loves Terry Gilliam, or indeed anyone who appreciates genuine artistic talent over the demographic obsessions of studios. The film as a whole bares a strange resemblance to Army of Darkness, which stripped out all the colourful darkness of the earlier Evil Dead films to create a goofy mainstream romp which ultimately falls flat on its face. All of the darkness and real substance of Gilliam's greatest work has indeed been stripped away, and all that is left is a hollow shell vainly pumped full of cheap imitations. Even if one goes in with the lowest expectations -- say, having just seen Doctor Parnassus -- the overriding emotion will be either anger or despair. It's a real calamity in Gilliam's career, and based upon his subsequent work, he has yet to recover from it.

• KJ P

  
  It was very interesting! It put a new taste in new age movies, and I liked it quite a bit!

• Anthony L

  
  It was like Sleepy hollow, Shriek and Fear and loathing in Las Vegas rolled into one but without being that good. I don't think Gilliam realises but people act a certain way in his films, maybe its his doing, I'm not sure but its annoying. Yes he is a python but that… More
  It was like Sleepy hollow, Shriek and Fear and loathing in Las Vegas rolled into one but without being that good. I don't think Gilliam realises but people act a certain way in his films, maybe its his doing, I'm not sure but its annoying. Yes he is a python but that doesn't make you John Cleese!! Aw, it was ok, I thought everyone did very well, i just expected more from such a great director!

• Lorenzo v

  
  <i>"Eliminating Evil Since 1812"</i> Will and Jake Grimm are travelling con-artists who encounter a genuine fairy-tale curse which requires genuine courage instead of their usual bogus exorcisms. <center><font size=+2 face="Century… More
  <i>"Eliminating Evil Since 1812"</i> Will and Jake Grimm are travelling con-artists who encounter a genuine fairy-tale curse which requires genuine courage instead of their usual bogus exorcisms. <center><font size=+2 face="Century Schoolbook"><b><u>REVIEW</u></b></font></center> The Brothers Grimm seeks to give us the "real story" behind the classic Grimm's Fairy Tales such as Hansel & Gretel, Jack and the Beanstalk, Little Red Riding Hood and Rapunzel without compromising the mystical or enchanted aspects in each of those stories. Just like the fairy tales represented in the storyline, to truly enjoy this film requires a temporary suspension of disbelief; but in the end what makes this a satisfying experience is that, along with the characters in the story, we enter into this tale as skeptics and walk out the other side as believers. This movie was filmed in true Terry Gilliam fashion and features the kind of fantastic creatures and special effects we have already seen in Time Bandits and Baron Munchausen. The PG-13 rating has little to do with strong language or sexual content (both noticeably lacking) but some of the special effects scenes may be too scary for young children.

• Alice S

  
  Kinda pointless. Does this adventure beget Grimms' fairy tales? Do the fairy tales help the Grimms in their adventure? Neither. There is no magic and no comedy, just a poorly conceived mish-mash of fairy tale tropes.

• Film C

  
  i like this movie it wasnt given enough credit really i think its funny and watchable and with great imagination

• xGary X

  
  Terry Gilliam once again puts his post modern spin on Gothic fantasy, and once again it's very much a matter of taste as to whether you are going to enjoy it. The Brothers Grimm are reinvented as a pair of con artists who set up fake hauntings and ride into town to banish the… More
  Terry Gilliam once again puts his post modern spin on Gothic fantasy, and once again it's very much a matter of taste as to whether you are going to enjoy it. The Brothers Grimm are reinvented as a pair of con artists who set up fake hauntings and ride into town to banish the demon for a modest fee (kind of like a Medieval Ghostbusters). Until one day they are caught and sent to investigate a series of child kidnappings and realise that it's the real deal. All of Gilliam's trademark touches are here, including a lot of humour, some gorgeous production design and a quirky spin on existing myths and fairytales. It's kind of like a buddy action version of his heroic failure The Adventures Of Baron Munchausen and Heath Ledger and Matt Damon have some real comic chemistry as the bumbling anti-heroes, complete with amusing Spinal Tap-esque English accents. The plotting is a lot tighter and more focused than Munchausen though, and it has a lot more narrative momentum. It does lose a little impetus for the climax as it's a little overly convoluted and relies too much on the bad guys; Peter Stormare hams it up mercilessly and despite looking the part of the fairest of them all, Monica Bellucci is actually pretty bad as the evil queen. But it is very entertaining and certainly did not deserve the unwelcoming reception it got from some critics. If you liked the similar Sleepy hollow, I see no compelling reason why you shouldn't like this too.

• David L

  
  I don't quite understand the negativity surrounding this film. Sure, it's no Brazil or Twelve Monkeys, or even Fear and Loathing..., but at the same time, it's not the hollow car-crash that many other reviewers would suggest. Without question, it is a flawed work - one… More
  I don't quite understand the negativity surrounding this film. Sure, it's no Brazil or Twelve Monkeys, or even Fear and Loathing..., but at the same time, it's not the hollow car-crash that many other reviewers would suggest. Without question, it is a flawed work - one that smacks of Hollywood compromise and a script that was tinkered with as the film went along - but it's by no means without merit. The production design, costumes and cinematography are all exquisite throughout, whilst the over-the-top performances and the variety of bizarre accents and actions favoured by the cast simply adds to the sense of pantomime excess and the macabre fairytale glee that Gilliam seems to be going for. Some have called the story a mess, but to be honest, I hardly had the time to notice, with the whole film wrapping me up in the sense of over-the-top spectacle and gleefully dragging me from one visually sumptuous set-piece to the next. It helps that the basic set-up of the story is an interesting and imaginative one - with the central premise falling somewhere between Ghostbusters, The Frighteners and Tim Burton's adaptation of the legend of Sleepy Hollow - with the basic idea of a fairytale myth that is approached by the filmmakers as if genuine fact being juxtaposed by a story involving two con-artist characters who work against a narrative backdrop of the supernatural, folklore and a genuine fear of ghosts, spirits, witches and goblins. This creates a nice interplay between the lead character's skepticism and the naive fear of the surrounding villagers. It also makes sense when we analyse it in conjunction with the re-casting of the brothers as manipulative tricksters, which is a nice touch and further presents the idea of toying with an audiences' preconceptions of an event in order to elicit a greater degree of dramatic tension, etc. The Brothers Grimm never comes close to that level of genius, though it does offer Gilliam the chance to play around with his beloved fairytale references, whilst simultaneously opening the film up in a narrative sense in order to incorporate elements of action, drama and adventure. Throughout the film, Gilliam packs each frame full of wonderful little sight gags and moments of unbridled imagination, the kind of which we haven't seen since films like Time Bandits and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, with the whole film rolling along from one over-the-top set-piece to another, whilst the disparate strands are tied together by the likable lead performances from Matt Damon and Heath Ledger. Perhaps most audience's problem with the film is that they've become too accustomed to Gilliam films in which fantasy erupts from a vaguely real setting, like, for example, The Fishing King, or his biggest hit so far, Twelve Monkeys. Even Fear and Loathing... fell back on the drug motif, which somehow makes the fantasy elements more plausible? Here, the audience is required to take a number of leaps. Firstly, to accept the appearance of witches, then to accept that the witch is a con, only to then have to re-accept that no, the witch does exist, but there's something else going on as well... a subtle mucking around with the audience's preconceptions of the fairytale genre and of the universe in which those stories play out. Yes, it's all flawed, and the film will never be another Brazil (why should it? We already have Brazil. Why do we need another one?), whilst the apparent involvement of the Weinstein brothers probably put a strain on Gilliam to retain his more outlandish visual tendencies, whilst simultaneously pushing the film towards a more PG-13 style popcorn audience. The fact that Gilliam has yet to disown the film (and has defended it against the critics in at least two magazine interviews) suggests that the film is at least somewhat close to what he originally intended, which should be enough evidence for those fans crying foul of the Weinstein's for ruining Terry's vision. For me, The Brothers Grimm was an enjoyable film filled with great visuals, production design and the kind of over-the-top performances that are perfect for this kind of film (Peter Stormare and Gilliam regular Jonathan Pryce are both a great deal of fun in their roles as the pantomime villains). I can appreciate why some people would take exception to the film; for a start there are Hollywood actors attempting British accents (Ledger sounds more like his native Australian whilst Damon has clearly been to the Johnny Depp school of British accents, turning in something that sounds halfway between Captain Jack Sparrow and our own Michael Caine), a director with a track record for costly flops (the unsung Baron Munchausen) and outright failures (his aborted The Man Who Killed Don Quixote); and the fact that there's been more reports about on set wrangling than anything approaching unanimous acclaim!! To me, the only great flaws are the obvious ones that plague most contemporary Hollywood movies... firstly; the film is geared for the youth market (but the film is just too dark, too violent and a little too reliant on mood and atmospherics), whilst the overly used CGI effects are shoddy, obvious, poorly rendered and will no doubt date the film terribly in a few years time. On another note, it's also a shame that the eye-catching Monica Bellucci is given so little to do here; the producers should have given Gaspar Noe's Irreversible a look to see just what she's capable of!! Regardless, if you can overlook the poor CGI and the larger-than-life performances, The Brothers Grimm offers an interesting story, great scenes of action and humour, and those trademark Gilliam moments of visual wonderment. To sum up, It might not be perfect, but its a fun movie to watch despite its flaws

• Al S

  
  One of the coolest and most imaginary and most original action-adventures in years. Matt Damon and Heath Ledger are fantastic. They are such an exceptional and enjoyable buddy team with amasing chemistry. Peter Stomare is marvelous. An enchantingly fun good time. Frequently funny and… More
  One of the coolest and most imaginary and most original action-adventures in years. Matt Damon and Heath Ledger are fantastic. They are such an exceptional and enjoyable buddy team with amasing chemistry. Peter Stomare is marvelous. An enchantingly fun good time. Frequently funny and endlessly thrilling. You'll be thrilled and amused by every inch of this terrific movie. A magnificent mixture of fantacy, action, horror and buddy comedy. Great action, great laughs, great chracters, great speacial effects and great storytelling. It's pure magic. A wild ride of extroadinary genious from Director, Terry Gilliam. There is no way why you shouldnt enjoy this movie.

• Jens S

  
  Being a Terry Gilliam film great art work, set design and camera work are given, and all those are excellent, even though most of the set is visibly built on studio stages. That makes for a rather fantastic atmosphere though. The story starts with a rather nice idea: The Brothers… More
  Being a Terry Gilliam film great art work, set design and camera work are given, and all those are excellent, even though most of the set is visibly built on studio stages. That makes for a rather fantastic atmosphere though. The story starts with a rather nice idea: The Brothers Grimm as frauds and con men who have to deal with a real curse all of a sudden. And although the mystery of the disappearing children, the wolf man and the old tower are nicely knitted together, using ideas from the well known fairy tales, the movie is neither as funny nor as exciting or scary as it could be. That's partly because of rather flat and uninteresting minor characters, but mostly because the script just could have been a bit more imaginative. That's still entertaining, but the pretty decent showdown ends in chaos that doesn't exactly make much sense. Good, but had the chance to be much better.

• Kylie B

  
  the plot of this film appealed to me because I hadn't before seen a reworking where they integrated the teller(s) of the tale into it. <br/> <br/>The plot in itself was reasonable. While I'd never before imagined the Grimm Brothers as traveling con men it seems… More
  the plot of this film appealed to me because I hadn't before seen a reworking where they integrated the teller(s) of the tale into it. <br/> <br/>The plot in itself was reasonable. While I'd never before imagined the Grimm Brothers as traveling con men it seems reasonably justified within the film. I was slightly less happy about the presence of the 18th Century French army, and I'm pretty sure that they could've found another way to bring the Brothers to the actual enchanted forest and keep them there. I'm guessing the French were there in order to be little more than a figure of fun, the Americans not being too fond of the French at the point the film was made. <br/> <br/>Just about every fairy tale cliche was shoehorned in to the plot: wicked queen, glass slippers, kissing Sleeping Beauty, Red Riding Hood, werewolf (less common but is there), trail of breadcrumbs...I could go on. This overpopulation of fairy tale cliche didn't really hurt the film that much in my opinion, but made it fit more into the canon that it was involved with. All these competing images make for some very nice visuals - but also create two of it's biggest flaws. The Gingerbread Man, for example, was ridiculous and not in keeping with the tone of the film (which was trying to take itself seriously despite the content and occasional comedy). I could say the same for the horse swallowing the girl, but aside from the clumsy after-effects I thought the idea was actually a pretty good one. <br/>There was also an overabundance of rooks, which could produce part of the Brothers Grimm Drinking Game: down a shot every time you see one. Of course this encounters problems as in a couple of scenes there are at least 10 in a group (so maybe only take a drink when you see less than three in shot, or a close up of a lone rook). <br/> <br/>Acting was fine. A lot of the actors I recognised, and were all well versed enough to know what they were doing (or at least look like it). I would like Mackenzie Crook to do something other than be part of a common comedy double act though, I like him.

• Dean !

  
  A pretty good fantasy adventure incorporating many ideas from childrens stories. Good mix of action and humour.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings