The Zero Theorem

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.

Terry Gilliam is back with one of his better films in recent years. It's also one of his more philosophical films, as it grapples with many deep questions, including the meaning of life itself. Gilliam calls "The Zero Theorem" the third instalment in his dystopian satire trilogy, which began with "Brazil" in 1985 and was followed by "Twelve Monkeys" in 1995.

"The Zero Theorem" follows the story of Qohen Leth, a number-crunching programmer at a large corporation called Mancom. While struggling with life in general, Qohen is given the job of solving the zero theorem, a mysterious mathematical equation that continually eludes his grasp. The task is complicated by some new personal relationships when he meets Bainsley, a tempting Internet stripper, and Bob, the 15 year old, genius son of the CEO of Mancom. Have they entered his life to help Qohen, or are they merely unnecessary distractions from his work? Qohen is often unsure about the answer to that question.

The world of the film resembles that of Gilliam's previous two dystopian satires, but this is its own film and it deals with some new themes and conflicts. I'd say the themes and questions are even deeper here, because Gilliam is struggling with the meaning of life itself. Anyway, it all works and leads to an intriguing and visually engaging story. "The Zero Theorem" gets a big thumbs up from me. You should definitely check out this one, especially if you're a fan of Gilliam's earlier work.

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.

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.

I seem to have an accidental tradition of seeing new Terry Gilliam at film festivals. Four years ago, I saw The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus at the Munich Film Festival which had an intro and Q&A by Gilliam, my first time seeing one of my favourite directors in person. It was quite a treat. This time at the London Film Festival I didn't go to the screening he attended, but it goes for any film that you see at a festival that the excited atmosphere enhances the experience. Parnassus held up on DVD and I'm sure The Zero Theorem will too, securing my opinion that he can make at least one great film a decade (since the 70s). Personally, I'm a big fan of Gilliam's bizarre chaotic style, it never fails for me, and this is his best use of it since the wonderfully disorientating Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

Although the outside world can seem more like Ron Howard's vision of The Grinch, as many have complained they didn't buy the retro-world Gilliam created here, I loved the immaculate production design and especially the visual effects for the scenes where our protagonist, Qohen, is trying to solve the theorem in video game-like scenes. This is probably his most on- the-nose existentialistic film yet given its direct and ambitious plot- line, but it's very cleverly and often emotionally done. It's like the incredibly profound reverend speech in Synecdoche, New York expanded to 2 hours about each of our individual purposes in life and how that search of meaning affects our lives. Both Zero and Synecdoche thrive off that irony and they're both brilliantly executed, Zero perhaps not having quite a punch in the gut effect.

I loved Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds and quite liked him in Django Unchained, premature second Oscar be damned, but otherwise I'd only seen him in Carnage and I'm still not too confident what he can do in a non-Tarantino film. It wasn't until watching The Zero Theorem where I realised how I'd never seen him play such an emotional character, even if he is very reserved for the most part until a sexual awakening. Unfortunately, his performance feels inconsistent. Sometimes he absolutely nails poignant character-defining scenes and reaches heights of Basterds, albeit at the other end of the scale. Other times, he feels awkward, over- rehearsed and not in the moment. It's quite strange and rather frustrating because his good bits are so good.

Perhaps it's mainly due to the writing as its mainly the attempts at slapstick that falter. The script has a running character quirk where he refers to himself as "we" or "us" as opposed to "me" or "I" and it's rather confusing as to what it means and puts an unnecessary barrier between us and Qohen when it could be incredibly easy for us to empathise with him. The side characters more than make up for his lopsided parts though. At first they can feel like one- dimensional gag characters, but slowly they develop in an intriguing and welcome way, especially Melanie Thierry and Lucas Hedges' characters. While many of the film's jokes don't really land, David Thewlis is one of the best comedic relief characters in a while and he undeniably has the best lines. Damon and Swinton make delightful appearances too.

Along with its existentialism, it has a fascinating theme of sex in the 21st Century with the influence of internet. Thierry's character is a paid tease, 'you can look but you can't touch,' though she has a heart, a good one. But you still can't touch. It certainly hits a nerve for these 'more connected than ever yet more disconnected than ever' times. I would give anything to have the virtual paradise the film offers from Qohen's suit in the poster. The film attempts to have 1984-like themes of government surveillance which aren't as interesting but fortunately after Brazil, it feels like Gilliam's style rather than an NSA reference. Although the first act struggles in tone, it certainly builds to something very rewarding. The Zero Theorem won't be for everyone, but it at the very least offers an interesting answer to the big question, what is the meaning of my life?

8/10