Historical context

Apart from directing feature films, Terry Gilliam is best known as the animator who supplied the inventive and often surrealistic animated sequences for "Monty Python's Flying Circus." He made the move into directing features by co-directing Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1974) along with Terry Jones, also a member of the Python troupe. Gilliam's first solo directorial effort was Jabberwocky (1977), a medieval fairy tale told in the irreverent Python mode, followed by Time Bandits (1981), an iconoclastic tour of world history in the company of a group of time traveling brigands who happen to be dwarfs. The rich and quirky visual imagination that had informed Gilliam's animated segments for the "Monty Python" television shows became, if anything, even more pronounced in his feature films, meshing well with the fantasy narratives toward which he tends to gravitate. His visual style, somewhat reminiscent of the inventive and flamboyant visuals of Ken Russell, has become his directorial signature.

Industry context

Brazil is notorious as the subject of a contentious tug of war between Gilliam and Sidney Scheinberg of Universal Pictures, the American distributor of the film. Scheinberg saw great box office potential in the story of Sam's pursuit of an idealized woman, but felt that the grim ending would compromise the film's audience appeal. He therefore exercised a contractual technicality to assume control of the film and substantially alter its content. Because the version of the film delivered by Gilliam ran ten minutes longer than the length provided for in the contract with Universal, Sheinberg shortened the film and, in the process of doing so, created a much more upbeat ending than Gilliam had intended. Gilliam eventually produced a shortened (and therefore contractually sanctioned) version of his own, preserving his original ending, and embarrassed Universal into releasing his revised version by showing it to critics, who showered it with praise and awards even though Universal had not yet released the film. Consider how this episode reflects the ongoing conflict between creativity and commerce in the American film industry. Given his role in the process of bringing a film to market, did Sheinberg have a legitimate point?

Technical context

A film such as Brazil, which modulates between science fiction and fantasy tropes, naturally lends itself to the use of special effects technology. Consider to what degree Gilliam has depended upon such technology, and how the availability of such technology helped to shape his imagery.

How might the imagery have been different if the film had been made, say, 20 years earlier?

Generic context

Clearly, Brazil belongs to the broad genre of science fiction/fantasy, although deciding just how much is science fiction and just how much is fantasy is perhaps less clear. More specifically, the film belongs to a subgenre known as "dystopian fiction," which is the opposite of "utopian fiction." That is to say, dystopian fiction portrays a society (usually, but not always, a futuristic society) that has gone terribly wrong in some fundamental way. The film also belongs to the category of satire, which uses humor to expose human folly by holding it up to ridicule.

One of the trickiest aspects of setting a film in a world that doesn't (yet) exist is the problem of acquainting the viewers with how that world works without unduly slowing down the story to do so. How does Gilliam go about showing us how the world of Brazil functions and how its characters relate to each other?

What do you make of the opening title, which places the action of the film "somewhere in the 20^th century"? Since the film was made with only 15 years remaining in the 20^th century, why not set it in the 21^st century?

Rhetorical context

Science fiction in general and dystopian fiction in particular typically make use of extrapolation, identifying trends and extending them into the future based upon their past progression.

What elements of society does Gilliam comment on by means of extrapolation and satire?

What specific aspects of the world in which Brazil is set does Gilliam seem to object to most strenuously? How does he communicate this to us?

Aesthetic context -- Mise en scene

Brazil is remarkable for its visual eclecticism. Gilliam makes use of an astonishingly widc range of visual styles. Moreover, the transitions from one visual style to another are often quite abrupt, sometimes occurring within a single scene. Consider, for example, the scene depicting the arrest of Archibald Buttle, which shifts from a warm, cozy family Christmas setting to the harsh environment of a torture chamber in just a few seconds.

What specific aesthetic variables does Gilliam manipulate in order to bring about these sharp changes in visual style?

How does this variability of visual styles affect the viewer's response to the film as a whole? Why do you think Gilliam chose this approach rather than choosing a visual style and sticking with it throughout the film?