It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Absolutely the worst movie.

It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Well, I'm not entirely surprised at the number of bad reviews, because some of this is shocking and other parts perplexing, but on the whole, it is exceptional. It is a study in how a child protected herself from her unbearable reality by retreating into a fantasy world. She "bounced," to put it in Gilliam's words. Quirky, quaint, enchanting...or bizarre, horrific and irritating? Maybe all of the above? Gilliam suggested in the beginning that this all becomes very different seen through the eyes of the child--and that is certainly the key. Don't interpret it your way--interpret it her way. If it is not normalized, it becomes explicable. And a little sad, a little wistful and, yes, a little heroic, too. What allows this great concept to work is Jodelle Ferland, who delivers an amazing child performance. Gilliam wisely wraps the movie around her as well as her character. I liked it a lot.

This is a film about a prepubescent child and her imagination that must be viewed through the eyes of a prepubescent child. Furthermore, one must have appreciation for and the understanding of the capacity young children have for creative imagination if it's not stifled and crippled by adult imposed structure 24/7 about what to do, how to do it and when to do it while they're growing up. Thus we have an opportunity to experience, albeit in an abysmally poor and at times gruesome environment, the self-organizing imagination of a young girl as she copes with a world around her she cannot control much. The story is told from that perspective, even if it's not all in first person. Gilliam says as much in the short video Foreword on the DVD and Blu-ray distributions of the film. I do not know if this was in the theatrical release. Failure to do this -- viewing it as an adult -- greatly risks seeing it superficially with gross misinterpretations and missing the complete depth it contains.There is plenty of fact and fiction, with reality and fantasy. However, there are also plenty of clues, some subtle, that the young girl, Jeliza-Rose, retains full capability to distinguish between all of them, even though she consciously chooses to ignore some facts and realities because it's convenient. That she grossly misinterprets what she observes in a couple of scenes is the result of *not* being an adult and therefore does not have the knowledge and experiences required to fully understand what is occurring. Thus, she develops her own based on what she does know and has previously experienced. What would be repulsive to an adult, isn't necessarily so to a child of 9 or 10 that doesn't have the depth of understanding that would make it repulsive. This is often called "innocence" and it can sometimes spare children from trauma as their lack of comprehension about what they've observed allows it to blow by.View the film with the eyes and mind of a 10-year old child, leaving behind the worldly knowledge and experiences of an adult, and appreciate the resilient imagination and innocence of childhood as it copes with a world containing poverty, abysmal parenting, tragedy and some gruesome events, without losing basic sanity. Gets an 8/10 from me for its effectiveness in delivering that through Gilliam's direction, the cinematography and excellent portrayal of Jeliza-Rose by Jodelle Ferland, a difficult role for a child her age.

Just got done with this movie and I must say it drags on somewhat, similar to the way Fear and Loathing did for me. The dialogue is done in a way that it defies you to listen to it and absorb anything. I tried to watch Fear and Loathing 3 times and could never finish it. I finished Tideland, but it wasn't that great. I will say Jodelle Ferland and Brendan Fletcher are SUPERB in their roles as Jeliza Rose and Dickens, but it feels like 2 great performances in a boring, supposed-to-shock-me, Natural Born Killers-esque affair that has already been done. Then again, the film challenges me in that I am appalled that I am not appalled by the things I see here, so it has some social merit, of sorts.Overall, my feeling is that Terry Gilliam's best work is long behind him, like 12 Monkeys and Brazil, Time Bandits, Python, etc. I think sometimes filmmakers get older and lose their edge, falling victim to sentimentality, and it changes their art (usually for the worse, imho.) It is beginning to seem this is the case with Gilliam. I didn't like Imaginarium, either, btw. I saw That before I saw this.

This movie moved, repulsed and disturbed me. As I watched I found myself cringe, recoil in horror, dread for Jeliza Roses's fate and saddened by all the pain, misery and confusion that that child was exposed to, with no one to care for her but egotistical adults and deranged madmen. In an emotional level I responded tremendously to the movie and although a good deal of these responses were less than agreeable, the fact that this film produced such stimuli in my person proves that it has heart to spare- a mean, bashing, horrific,depressing and sad heart it may be but a heart nonetheless. I can only suggest this film to brave movie buffs who are willing to subject themselves to the one of the most bizarre, terrifying and moving experiences of their life. My congratulations to Gilliam for directing yet another brave and stimulating film... even if it may very well become yet another obstacle in Gilliam's already endangered film career.