Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site cad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!pesnta!hplabs!ucbvax!cad!grady
From: grady@cad.UUCP (Steven Grady)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: BRAZIL
Message-ID: <97@cad.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 13:48:07 EST
Article-I.D.: cad.97
Posted: Mon Mar 10 13:48:07 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Mar-86 00:18:25 EST
References: <1526@gitpyr.UUCP>
Reply-To: grady@cad.UUCP (Steven Grady)
Organization: UC Berkeley, CAD group
Lines: 23

>  Also, my impression of the antiquated computer terminals and such was
>that Gilliam was trying to envision "1984" the way Orwell did. If I am
>not mistaken, "1984" was written in the late 40's ?  I think the fact that
>they had computers yet still relied heavily on men with tons of paper
>and such adds to this since in those days, no one had any conception of the
>vast amount of paperwork that could be saved by the computer. I seem to
>remember that when one machine came out, I think it was an early UNIVAC (groan),
>many people said that only 12 of them would be necessary to do all the computing
>for the rest of time.

Something which I hadn't thought of, but which seemed obvious after
Gillim mentioned it after a showing here at which he spoke, was that
the idea was that, as it says in the beginning, the movie is set "somewhere
in the 20th century" (was that the quote?).  Thus there is a potpourri
of technology from every time, and the movie is not supposed to be
set at any one era.  There is 50's type technology (manual typewriters,
vacuum tubes, air tubes) along with 80's (crt's everywhere, etc).
There is clothing and decor from the 40's and 50's, etc. etc.
I felt like an idiot when I realized I hadn't noticed what he meant,
but it appears that many people haven't realized it either.

	Steven
	ucbvax!grady