O Teorema Zero

I'm not very fond of reviews so i will be quick.

I love his movies. Brazil, Bandits, Munchhausen. They represent wonderful memories from my childhood. These are special movies. Not that I don't like the 12 Monkeys and the others, I love them. But those are special. Dream injections in VHS format they were.

The Zero Theorem? I really liked it. It felt like one of the special ones. Very little CGI, beautiful sets, great actors, crooked angles and a compelling story. I think most people will relate to the main character and his very explicit dilemmas. It is a satire of the world we live in today, as Brazil was back in the 80's. In many aspects they are very similar.

If you are a fan, watch it. You'll not be disappointed.

There's a black hole swirling at the bottom of Qohen Leth's (Christoph Waltz) soul. He's waiting for a phone call from God, explaining the point of it all. Because at the moment it seems like existence is an erroneous quirk in the cosmic standard of nothingness. Everything will return to nothing, so why make something of life? Love, in the form of romance (Melanie Thierry as Bainsley), friendship (David Thewlis), and parenthood (Lucas Hedges) provides Qohen with the answers, but he's too absorbed in his work on the "Zero Theorem" to accept it.

There are elements of David Cronenberg's Cosmopolis in Qohen's philosophical quest, in the oddball characters he meets along the way, and his perennial absence of feeling. And in the Zen imagery of a nude Waltz spiralling through the void, there's a bit of Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain. Both of those films were more coherent and emotionally engaging than The Zero Theorem, although Terry Gilliam's film grows on you, once you accept that it's not Brazil Part II. There are definite touches of Gilliam's 1985 masterpiece here, particularly the awkward marrying of archaic and ultra-modern technologies. But don't expect a script of Tom Stoppard wit, swerve, and clarity.

Waltz is a fantastic presence – which is necessary, because most of the story plays out in his home: an echochamber of a converted church, whose baptismal font now serves as a washing up bowl. We see him at work, attempting to order the universe via a 3D game block game, fighting against entropy; against the inevitable demise of conscious matter and with it the question: What does it all mean? The problem is, he's waiting for an answer. The very point is uncertainty, the propulsive force of our species.

Whether all this makes for a particularly cinematic experience, I'm not sure. The Cronenberg and Aronofsky films I mentioned were successful because, for all their vast questions, their focus was narrow and their plots simple. The Zero Theorem is at its best when at its least manic – perhaps, its least 'Gilliam-esque' – lost in the quiet intimacy between Qohen and Bainsley. Like Wes Anderson's latest, this feels like the film of an auteur fighting against two opposing impulses. The results, particularly when seen as a straightforward study of depression, are interesting, if not entirely successful.

Once again I find myself tired, weary, and insomniac struggling to find the words to describe a movie that has rooted itself in my thoughts for the better part of a week. I speak of course of Terry Gilliam's latest sci-fi venture The Zero Theorem (2013), which, even after a second viewing tonight, has left me bewildered, enchanted, and ultimately feeling hollow. Directed by Gilliam and written by Pat Rushin, The Zip-T, as they refer to it in the film, deals with that age old question of the meaning of life and whether or not everything is nothing or if nothing is everything.

While I imagine most of you dear readers will initially be turned off by that previous line of philosophical rigmarole, the first thing you need to understand about this movie and really the only accurate way to describe it is that it is a Terry Gilliam film. If you are unfamiliar with Gilliam as a director, you might have heard of a little known comedy troupe known as Monty Python. Gilliam was the only American member of the legendary group (though he has since renounced his citizenship), and the man behind the iconic cartoons and animations. While he has an extensive and cerebral filmography, I'm only going to confine myself to only referring to what has been dubbed Gilliam's Dystopic Triptych: Brazil (1985), 12 Monkeys (1995), and now the Zero Theorem. Gilliam's films are visually stunning and often characterized by being wildly imaginative and fantastical – generally being layered with satire, symbolism and surrealism.

True to his nature, the ZT is a visual and intellectual feast that is today what Brazil was in 1985; a surrealist commentary of the times. While Brazil was satirizing being a cog in the soulless bureaucracy, the ZT is treatise on dreams and the struggle of finding meaning in the digital world we live in. The film stars Christoph Waltz (Inglorious Basterds, Django Unchained) as Qohen Leth, or simply Q, who is a reclusive phobia-ridden programmer of sorts that believes that one day he will receive a phone call that will provide meaning to his life.

He lives in a burnt out church that he bought from an insurance company, and detests the vibrant and absurdist world he has to interact with on his daily commute to work. Preferring the solitude of his home, Q begrudgingly treks to his quasi-cubicle at Mancom, the 'big business' of the future, where he 'crunches entities' (basically playing a 3-d version of a Tetris/Sudoku hybrid). He is also joined on screen by that kid from Moonrise Kingdom, Lucas Hedges as Bob, and a ridiculously good-looking and often scantily clad Mélanie Thierry as Bainsley. Matt Damon also makes a few appearances as 'Management', often making a fashion statement and offering a few cryptic lines to Q.

Preferring solitude, Q is eventually rewarded with a home office in exchange for working to prove the Zero Theorem, which essentially is meant to prove existence is meaningless and from the chaos of the big bang, all of reality will eventually revert to nothingness. Pretty deep right? Well naturally Q finds the project overwhelming and is soon burnt out. Management enlists the beautiful Bainsley and wunderkind Bob to get him back on track, and in the process they irreversibly change the character and nature of Q.

While in my first viewing of the film I left satisfied, albeit a little confused, I find myself the second round feeling almost at one with the Waltz's character, intent on finding meaning in everything or nothing. Every scene in this film is so very dense with symbolism and subject to interpretation that I cannot begin to imagine what really goes through Gilliam's head when he directs. At times certain things feel extremely contrived like the fact that Q lives in a burnt out church, but they are all rooted in the Orwellian and Kafkaesque landscape that Gilliam so often likes to employ. Gilliam has a very unique visual style that rewards the audience with masterful set design that is complemented by what I'd call a 'Paranoid POV' type shot that is reminiscent of Carol Reed's famous crooked angle shots in The Third Man (1949).

The best way I can describe this movie is as a spiritual and existentialist journey that ponders the meaning of life and the nature of reality. It's fairly obvious that Waltz's Q is absolutely insane, but in that insanity he is also perceived as being the best candidate to solve these puzzles. The film features outstanding performances, most notably by Waltz, and admittedly I fell in love with Melanie Thierry every time she was on screen. The future Gilliam portrays is both unique and at the same time frighteningly absurd, although ultimately a distorted reflection of the world of 2014. Whether or not you find something meaningful from this film, it is the type to linger in your thoughts long after you've left the theatre. My friends will understand me as I excuse myself to go search for my own Shell Beach, and for all others I recommend you stop whatever you're doing and watch The Zero Theorem followed by Dark City (1998).

Read this and other reviews on DriveInZeppelin's website

Terry Gilliam has had a couple of motifs running through his movies. "Time Bandits" and "Brazil" (and also the opening sequence of Monty Python's "Meaning of Life") look at the desire to escape from our modern world, while "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen", "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" and "The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus" go for full surrealism (I'm not sure where "The Fisher King" fits among these). But with "The Zero Theorem", Gilliam completes an unofficial trilogy: dystopia. "Brazil" depicts a bureaucratic, Orwellian society, while "Twelve Monkeys" depicts a future where a disease has forced humanity underground.

In this movie, Christoph Waltz plays a programmer trying to find out whether or not life has any meaning (hey, an indirect reference to Monty Python's movie). But the society that the programmer inhabits is what caught my eye. It looks like a cross between "Blade Runner" and "Brazil", with a little bit of "Minority Report". Advertisements follow people everywhere. How could anyone even think about life's meaning in this setting?

I actually wasn't as fond of this movie as I was of Gilliam's other movies. It was slower than most of his movies. Of course, one could argue that the movie's philosophical element required it to move slowly. Maybe so, but I still prefer Gilliam's other movies more. Maybe worth seeing once.

This film is entertaining, but even though I like Terry Gilliam, there is just something missing. Possibly it's a point. The film has NO point. Maybe that's the point?

But for the whole length of it we are convinced there will be some kind of redemption, some kind of explanation, some kind of reason to watch the damn film in the first place.

Most of it just seems to be ticking boxes for Terry. Awkward protagonist, dystopian future, love interest, people in silly costumes, lots of colours, steam-tech gear, and strange delivery-people.

Yeah and... yeah, where's the point, again? One bit of visual eye-candy I liked was the data-representation system, but I can't describe it here, for the sake of those who haven't seen the film yet.

Look, it's not a crap film, it's just not blindingly evocative and moving. It's certainly no Brazil even though it has things in common (and its a LOT more cheerful). It's no Fisher King. It's not even a Doctor Parnassus.

One purely for the fans I think.