User reviews

Cutting edge sci-fi film is interesting and absorbing enough to make it good entertainment. It's not so much about story. There really isn't much of one, and we don't ever get to know the characters *that* well. This is more a film about concepts - and imagery, of course. Marking a directorial effort for visual effects specialist Douglas Trumbull ("2001: A Space Odyssey", "Silent Running"), it definitely has the right look to it. Trumbull uses multiple aspect ratios in order to maximize the experience. Fortunately, he does give the proceedings a level of humanity, particularly as they pertain to a shaky marriage, and there are moments of poignancy during the narrative.

Christopher Walken and Louise Fletcher star as Michael Brace and Lillian Reynolds, two old- fashioned mad scientists working to perfect a virtual reality device that records human experiences. It can allow you to taste what somebody else is eating, for example, or feel what it was like for them as they rode a roller coaster. The people funding and backing Brace & Reynolds ultimately don't like the way they do things, and try to alter the course of the research. Michael becomes obsessed with checking out a tape made by Lillian, and figures out a way to sneak past the defenses of the computer program running the show.

Overall, this is an amusing show, with solid acting by all concerned. Fletcher is indeed a standout. "Brainstorm" is notable for being the last credit for co-star Natalie Wood (who isn't given very much to do), whose untimely death occurred during production. Supporting cast members include Cliff Robertson, a likable Joe Dorsey ("Grizzly"), and a young Jason Lively ("Night of the Creeps") as Walken and Woods' son. (Walkens' real-life spouse Georgianne, who usually works as a casting director, appears on screen here as Dorseys' wife.) The technical work on the film is of course first rate, with eye popping visual effects, effective production design, and a thunderous music score by James Horner.

Worth a look for fans of this genre.

Seven out of 10.

Brainstorm had a rocky road to completion. After Natalie Wood died before completion of shooting, the studio wanted to shut it down and cash in the completion bond. Trumbull had fought tooth and nail to get the film made to begin with, and when it looked like it would be snatched from the jaws of victory, he hunkered down and dramatically altered sequences to prove it could indeed be finished without Wood's unshot scenes.

The "recorded memory" sequences were even more vivid for us in Indianapolis who saw it at the Eastwood theatre. The Eastwood had one of the few curved Cinerama roadshow screens outside of New York and Hollywood's Cinerama Dome. Think of it as a smaller version of an Omnimax screen. Sitting in the front row, you were completely enveloped by the film, and the visual and audio effect when the "memory" sequences lit up were quite attention grabbing. Trumbull was at this time working on his ill-fated Showscan process for amusement park rides, and was very interested in audience perceptions of diffrent lenses and frame rates. Some of this is used in Brainstorm. It's just not the same on a TV set of any size.

The central core of the story - the recording of the death of Lillian and Michael's obsession to experience it - is a disturbing one, because it explores the very nature of life and death. It can satisfy or dissappoint, because Trumbull has put his vision of memory, experience, death and afterlife on film for everyone to take pot shots at. And they did. It's a shame, because the film is beautiful, thought provoking, and ingenious. Yeah, I know, it has all of that evil government plot boilerplate. Look past it.

(It even revels in the quirks of the researchers, showing the second thing everybody does with new technology is use it for porn.)

I really love these old fashioned, deliberately slower, type of sci-fi movies, that puts its emphasis on the science and takes a realistic approach with its story, no matter how ridicules it all often can get. These type of movies mostly got done successfully in the '70's and this movie actually also has '70's style written all over it. Yet it is as if this movie is holding back, which really prevents this movie from being a classic within its genre, even though all of the right ingredients and potential seemed to be there.

So you could call "Brainstorm" a bit of a disappointment but by doing so you are not doing the movie enough justice and you are not giving it the credit it still deserves. I really still liked it, despite all of its flaws, though some of those flaws can also be brought back to the difficulties of production at the time.

Biggest 'inconvinience' for this movie of course was the sudden and tragic death of key actress Natalie Wood. It almost caused this movie to be stopped down completely but with some changes and rewrites the movie still got finished and released, just not in the way it originally got intended. It must be the reason why the movie ends so abruptly and the story leaves far more questions than answers.

The movie does really have a great concept of the invention of a device that can recored people's experiences and feelings and that can be played back by a different person that will feel the exact same feelings, smells and tastes. A sort of virtual reality, with the exception of that there is actually nothing virtual about the reality. The possibilities with this device are endless and sort of a shame that now almost 30 years later we don't have anything remotely close yet. I said that the possibilities are endless, yet the movie is doing far too little with it. It deliberately restrains itself it seems.

The movie just never reaches full potential, though it is obvious that somewhere deep down everything there is still a great movie to be found. But it remains a fact that the movie never reaches its full potential with its story. The story fails to intrigue and also fails with other things, such as its tension. Quite frankly I had no idea what was all happening toward the end and what the big 'conflict' that needed to be resolved was and how it got done exactly. There is a 'villainoush' plot in the movie that just never seemed that evil- or got explained good enough.

The movie got directed by special effect expert Douglas Trumbull. So visually this movie really doesn't disappoint and to be frank I think that it are still mostly the visuals and its effects that safe this movie and still make it a more than good watch.

But you also have to give credit to Christopher Walken of course, who basically never fails to put down a great performance and character. I really liked most of the acting in this movie and it seemed to be a very well cast one, with some truly great characters in it, that all interact really great and convincingly together.

The movie also features an early James Horner musical score. Funny thing about Horner musical scores is that basically it doesn't matter if it's anything from the '80's, 90's, 2000's or this decade, the all have the same sound and feature the same motifs. It's not big secret Horner often recycles his most early scores and the score of this movie also got heavily recycled by himself in many later movies. Still I'm sure his fans can appreciate his score for this movie and I'm also really not hateful toward it.

Really not as great as this movie potentially could and perhaps also should had been but nevertheless it remains still a good 'realistic' science-fiction movie to watch.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Absolute wonderful science fiction. This story is about two scientists(Christopher Walken and Louise Fletcher) that create a mind-boggling invention that rushes forward the research on capabilities and practices of virtual reality. A lot of word of mouth publicity on this being Natalie Wood's last motion picture and her rumored personal relationship with Walken. Somewhat disturbing story line, but very intriguing and fascinating. To be exact a second viewing makes the experience even better. Strap this one on and enjoy.

Walken is mysterious and sullen as ever, that's what we like. Miss Wood seems more like decoration and that is really sad considering her outstanding career. Fletcher as a chain smoking scientist is pretty clever. Others in the cast are: Cliff Robertson, Joe Dorsey and Jordan Christopher.

Christopher Walken plays a scientist who has been developing a brain reading machine. This device is capable of recording sensory experience and allowing others to play it back and re-live it themselves afresh. As is the way in most of these types of movies, the government steps in and tries to hijack this good-intentioned project for their own less humanitarian ends.

Brainstorm is an early sci-fi film to deal with the concept of virtual reality. In this respect it is quite forward-looking, as this idea was to become a staple of the genre - and to a certain extent in real life - in years to come. The virtual reality idea is looked at from a number of different angles in a fairly well-considered way. The film is overall a decent enough sci-fi film, if ultimately pretty forgettable. By some considerable distance, the most significant thing about it was the fact that one of it's stars - the great Natalie Wood - died before the end of shooting, so the film-makers had to utilise already shot footage of her to finish the movie. Brainstorm was finally released a full two years after Natalie died. While not a great film, it equally isn't a bad one to commemorate the unfortunate late actress.

Everyone knows this was Natalie Wood's last film, and that some of her scenes were filmed after her death with a stand-in you only see from behind. Director Donald Trumball, best known for his special effects work in Blade Runner, Close Enounters, and Star Trek, chose this time to build his story on plot and character development, a good choice given the enormous talent he had to work with. Trumball's battle with studio execs to finish the film after Wood's death, rather than claim the insurance proceeds and call the film off, ended his career in Hollywood, but assured that this gem would not be lost. It is somewhat ironic that Natalie's swan song should be a sci-fi movie, since she was hardly known for work in the genre, but she brings a grace and charm, as well as depth and beauty, to the genre that is usually lacking.

Most sci-fi films based on technology don't age well, and there are times where this is no exception. The idea of recording on tape, let alone making tape loops, must seem like wax cylinder recordings to today's MP3 generation. The tapes themselves were props borrowed from a film being shot nearby, and that film was itself a dismal failure. But the concept is timeless, and so well done that, all in all, the film still works as well as it did in 1983.

Lesser screenplays would have been content with the main story line; scientists invent a way to record brainwaves and play them back for a real life out of body experience, and for just such a stinker, check out Strange Days. But then along comes the incomparable, utterly fabulous Louise Fletcher, who, as one of the co-inventors of the aforementioned device, records her death when she suffers a heart attack while working late one night. For the rest of the film, people are either trying to play the tape or prevent others from playing it. Meanwhile, the technology gets hijacked by two-dimensional government lackeys trying to exploit the weapons potential of the invention.

One can easily pick out scenes of this movie to vilify or exalt, all these years later, and any object viewed over time eventually has a vanishing point. The almost slapstick scene where the assembly robots go berserk is one example of a scene that, while consistent with its contemporaries, is silly today. The death scene, though much maligned, is equally misunderstood, and provides the metaphysical underpinnings that elevate Brainstorm above mere gadget flicks. Brainstorm is about exploring experience, life, love, even death, from the point of view of others, and Academy Award winner Louise Fletcher allows us to do so through her consummate skill in presenting a death scene of sufficient awe and wonder to warrant exploration.

If you want to find out what else happens, watch the film, but when you do, don't ignore the beautiful, delicate interplay between Christopher Walken and Natalie Wood. Their careening relationship seems somehow tied to the invention they helped make, and there are sequences so beautiful that I sometimes take out the DVD just to marvel at them.

Despite changing styles in special effects, this is a timeless and beautiful story that transcends the genre and, with Walken, Wood and Fletcher, becomes more than just a story about shiny gold tapes that record brain waves. It's more about immovable objects and irresistible forces and what happens when they collide. Intrigued? Good. Go watch it.

A research scientist has been experimenting with a revolutionary brain-reading device. This wondrous machine is able to read a person's thought processes and translate these to videotape. When the scientist wants to study the brainwaves of his late partner, he finds himself seriously at odds with his superiors -- not to mention several ominous-looking government types.

This film had a bit of trouble with the production... there were budgets issues, studio interference... and most notably, an important actress (Natalie Wood) died in the middle of shooting and had to be cleverly replaced by her sister (did you notice?). Some say the acting is uneven, though that was not really an issue for me.

Despite the hurdles, this should be seen as a minor classic, even if largely forgotten today. As Wood's final film it should be honored, and Christopher Walken of course went from being an Oscar favorite to an international wonder. He is surprisingly normal in this picture.

Michael Brace (Christopher Walken) and Lillian Reynolds (Louise Fletcher) develop a device that allows a person to experience another persons experiences. With this headwear, one individual can experience the touch, taste, smell, sight, hearing, and even feelings of another. A person can even record their experiences for someone else to experience later.

The uses of a device like this are limitless. It can be used for sexual experiences, recreational experiences, you name it. The problem is that this device and its uses didn't excite me. The movie hinged on this device and the struggle over its uses and it didn't excite me one bit.

Furthermore, there were inconsistencies with it. As I said, one person can record his/her experiences for another to enjoy or suffer, depending upon the experience. Obviously, this is a first person experience, yet they'd be shown in first person sometimes and third person other times. It can be considered a small technicality but it drove me crazy.

Ultimately, I think all the drama and hubbub of the movie was much ado about nothing.

I first watched Brainstorm when I was barely a teenager and was fairly impressed, an impression that lasted to date. For the first time, I'd seen a movie where someone was presented with amazing options, and the movie actually covered everything I'd have thought of. Unlike in those flicks where someone would get three wishes and never would wish to get as many wishes as they wanted (or happiness ever after, or instant death, or whatever), "Brainstorm" explores all possible consequences of the introduction of new, ground-breaking options:

A team of scientists comes up with a way to *really* share experience, to let each other in on how they experience the eternal essentials; love, life, sex; even death. And then, it doesn't stop there, taking into consideration the dark side as well -- what happens if you share your pain as well? What happens if The Wrong People(TM) monopolize the Amazing Secret(TM) first?

I love this movie. It ties up eternal questions and hopes with fun F/X and combines them into a touching and thrilling plot that makes other movies (mostly of the "cyberpunk"-era) like "Strange Days" that exploit a similar theme seem anemic in comparison at best.

One of the things I really liked about "Brainstorm" is that it feels related to "TRON". This is in more than just the technological/corporate themes, but also in the lab scenes and some of the (excellent) locations. Evidently, this is Natalie Wood's final performance (and it's a good one) but the characters are the least engaging aspect of the movie. It has its virtues, but there isn't really anyone here to latch onto; except for one, whose death really gives the movie some emotional weight (thanks to his/her performance).

It's the science fiction that takes center stage with this movie. What if two people can share sensory experience through telepathy? What happens when the money men take over the equipment to turn a profit? Even creating a mixtape out of sense data is intriguing. The ideas are the fun part. What's weird is seeing a bored Christopher Walken.

6/10

The first and last time I saw this movie was back in 1983 and I've wanted to watch it again many times since then. I just couldnt remember the title , until someone here on IMDB reminded me.

I used to explain the plot to the guys at video rental places, and they would just stare at me as though I had gone nuts......

I then recently saw Flatliners and felt the urge to watch Brainstorm again.....so I did..... and I found it just as good as when I first saw it.

Of course there are a few bad points, but it is the idea behind the movie and the way it is projected that leaves you .......feeling......and thats rare for a movie these days.

If you're tired of the usual stuff being churned out by Hollywood, watch Brainstorm.........you wont see anything like it.

I watched this film first when it came out in the theaters, around 1983 (maybe 1-2 years later for the dub), i would have been 12. I both loved it and hated it, it amazed me, terrified me, confused me, and bored me, all at the same time.

Back in 1983 this film was a disaster; both because one of the main actors, Natalie Wood, died during (but not related to) production (and quite possibly murdered). The film got put on hold for 2 years, sold to an insurance company, and when it hit the theaters (competing with Trading Places, Risky Business, Krull, Cujo, Wargames, Flashdance, Yentl, Superman 3, Rumble Fish, two James Bond films, the Twilight Zone movie, National Lampoon's vacation .. etc) it did really poorly, also due to a barebones promotional campaign.



The story is of two scientists, played by Woods and Christopher Walken, who build a Mind-Machine Interface. Obviously there are many buyers interested in the machine, some of which do not have the best intentions.



The film uses some interesting devices, such as the change of optics in the camera during real-life and machine- sequences. The sets are nice, the props are gorgeous, holding up even today. The script is ok, dialogue is average, the pacing is not great.

Christopher Walken is terrible. He had not adopted that weird, almost-stuttering persona that has used in the recent years, and is just really wooden in delivering his lines. All the supporting characters are fairly solid, but there are no standout performances.

The film was finished with a substantially reduced budget (due to what described above) and as such, some scenes are a bit confusing. They may be a bit more obvious today, but back in the 80s i didn't know wtf was going on.



For a film set in the current period, there was a stronk SciFi vibe here. Some sequences are visually memorable, but unfortunately some other are really not, and the result is not great.

Still, it's a film i would recommend. See it and i bet you will be as confused, amused, perplexed, excited as i was, all at the same time.



My vote: 7/10

It starts as mildly sci-fi and soapy and ends as a caper with big dollops of slapstick.

It's so weird, it's hard to believe it's the same movie.

It doesn't help that the underlying soap drama wasn't very strong to begin with.

I find it surprising I never knew of this movie, when it's such a sci fi classic. It might look a bit old, in view of current technologies, but the message is still the same - what are we going to do, when we can finally interface our brains. And basically, we haven't achieved what the movie talks about, even though we have so much cooler gadgets to play with. So I guess it's still sci fi, 30 years later. And well, the end is amazing.

Very original, if different movie, about a group of scientists who invent an amazing communications device. Perhaps film director Douglas Trumbull could have used the material from writer Bruce Joel Rubin to better effect, but he elects to use "Brainstorm" to show off his particular f/x genius.

Christopher Walken is his usual obsessive self, always entertaining though, while the gorgeous Natalie Wood is as stunning and incredibly beautiful as ever. The supporting cast, which includes Louise Fletcher, are quite good. This was Natalie Wood's last film before her tragic and mysterious death.

Sunday, August 4, 1991 - Video

A device that records human senses and experiences naturally falls into the hands of people hoping to use it for nefarious purposes. B-movie idea given high-tech presentation, with the underlying theme of life after death ultimately sullied by co-star Natalie Wood's untimely death during the filming (it may still resonate with movie-buffs old enough to recall her demise). Wood's passing left the film's release in limbo; when it finally arrived, the narrative was a squashy mess, particularly in the crucial opening scenes which have a half-finished feel. Wood only gets the chance to shine in a marriage flashback, although Christopher Walken is very fine as her estranged husband and Louise Fletcher has her best role since "Cuckoo's Nest" as a tough, brilliant scientist with a bad ticker. ** from ****

Brainstorm is an amazing and beautifully crafted film, worth watching more than once. From the opening credits and the music that never quite resolves, it is one of those experiences that leaves one unsettled, but not untouched. The images, the stories, and the issues keep this film from succumbing to the temptation of being more science than fiction. The subtle performances and direction, although sometimes underrated, are intriguing and lend a sophisticated air.

Watch it as an experience rather than as a scientific treatise and you will surely have a great ride.

When this film was released in 1983, it felt secondary to the larger story and the mysteries surrounding Natalie Wood's death. It may be easier now to evaluate the work on its own merits.

The film has some major flaws. There are sequences that are confusing to the viewer. Partly because of this, the various story lines feel slapped together, not fused in a cohesive way.

It would be nice if the film felt like a fusion of sci-fi, romance, suspense, and spiritual revelation, but instead it feels like each of those elements roughly abuts the others, making if difficult to feel emotionally attached to the whole.

Still, there are some worthwhile performances, notably by Louise Fletcher and Natalie Wood. And the visual representations of brain activity are interesting. Best of all, the high-tech feel of the film is impressive.

In the end, the film tries to do too much. Its various themes compete with each other and each is cheated.

Sadly, Brainstorm is best remembered as Natalie Wood's last film, and unfortunately there is little to recommend the film itself. Despite an interesting premise, the film's focus is scattered and the film never follows through on many plot points. Brainstorm was a box office disappointment and Douglas Trumball's last feature film. The special effects, direction, dialog and acting are never more than mediocre and the result is a film that is both disappointing and forgettable. Brainstorm is derailed by trite domestic drama involving a miscast Christopher Walken and Wood while a clash between science and government intervention is played out by a pointless Cliff Robertson and Louise Fletcher who's no Bette Davis when it comes to smoking. Fletcher's smoking is so constant, and unconvincing, that one wonders whether the tobacco industry financed the film.