When "12 Monkeys" first came out, and I went to see it at the theater, it struck me as too convoluted and too confusing for my frail 14-year-old mind. But there's one thing I always remembered, and that's how the story gradually becomes better and more captivating as the climax approaches. That sounds obvious, but it really isn't. Even now, nearly 30 years later, I'm still deeply impressed of how clever and tightly the puzzle pieces fit together near the end. In the field of Sci-Fi and mysteries, far too many movies are tense and compelling for as long as the mystery stands but fall apart when it's time to come up with clarifications. "12 Monkeys" doesn't fall apart. It only gets better.
The set-up and premise are pure Sci-Fi and apocalyptic genius. At the end of the 20th century, almost 99% of the world's population died from a devastating man-made virus. A good 40 years later, although never specified, the remaining survivors live underground while the cities are bewildered and overrun by wild animals. Convict James Cole is sent back in time to collect information, but incidentally arrives in 1990 instead of 1996. But even there, in a mental asylum, Cole first makes contact with the people who are suspected key-players, like the lunatic son of a virologist and a psychiatrist that will eventually help him when he travels back a second time; to 1996.
The script is even more complex than it sounds but, contrary to what my 14-year-old self remembers, it's straightforward and relatively easy to follow. And, as praised already everywhere, the performances of Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt are phenomenal. In fact, you'd almost think it's the perfect Sci-Fi/thriller, but unfortunately there are several aspects that annoyed and upset me. "12 Monkeys" is, in essence, a time-traveling film, but this part is really underdeveloped. James Cole appears in 1990 (or in 1996, or 1920) and vanishes just as easily, but the process and technology behind these travels is never shown. In this particularly downbeat and minimalist future, I personally find it highly unlikely that the complicated art of time-travel is mastered. If practically the entire world's population died, then I assume the handful of scientists and intellectuals that survived had better things to do than to develop a method to travel through time, no?
The set-up and premise are pure Sci-Fi and apocalyptic genius. At the end of the 20th century, almost 99% of the world's population died from a devastating man-made virus. A good 40 years later, although never specified, the remaining survivors live underground while the cities are bewildered and overrun by wild animals. Convict James Cole is sent back in time to collect information, but incidentally arrives in 1990 instead of 1996. But even there, in a mental asylum, Cole first makes contact with the people who are suspected key-players, like the lunatic son of a virologist and a psychiatrist that will eventually help him when he travels back a second time; to 1996.
The script is even more complex than it sounds but, contrary to what my 14-year-old self remembers, it's straightforward and relatively easy to follow. And, as praised already everywhere, the performances of Bruce Willis and Brad Pitt are phenomenal. In fact, you'd almost think it's the perfect Sci-Fi/thriller, but unfortunately there are several aspects that annoyed and upset me. "12 Monkeys" is, in essence, a time-traveling film, but this part is really underdeveloped. James Cole appears in 1990 (or in 1996, or 1920) and vanishes just as easily, but the process and technology behind these travels is never shown. In this particularly downbeat and minimalist future, I personally find it highly unlikely that the complicated art of time-travel is mastered. If practically the entire world's population died, then I assume the handful of scientists and intellectuals that survived had better things to do than to develop a method to travel through time, no?