Terry Gilliam's take on the end of Brazil, from NYT article 1986:
"Although ''Brazil'' ends with Lowry being destroyed by the heedlessly malign bureaucracy, Mr. Gilliam doesn't view that choice as irredeemably bleak. ''He escapes into madness, which I've always considered a reasonable approach to life in certain situations,'' says the 45-year-old film maker cheerfully. ''To me that's an optimistic ending. Lowry's imagination is still free and alive; they haven't got that. They may have his body, but they don't have his mind. The girl rescues him and takes him away and they live happily forever; it's only in his mind, but that's sufficient, I think. It's better than nothing, folks!''
Mr. Gilliam admits that the studio may have been correct in its insistence that audiences would prefer a sugar-coated ending, but that, to him, is beside the point. ''I'm more interested in saying something than I am in pandering,'' he explains. ''There's a lot of pandering that goes on, and it's bad for society, because people aren't being encouraged to think. I do think there's a terrible lack of responsibility out there. You can't talk about artistic values or social values or philosophical values; economic values are the only ones that count. This is a divisive film; people have quite strong reactions to it, and they argue about it, but at least it gets them talking.''
Mr. Palin claims that Mr. Gilliam did the film because it allowed him ''the chance to make what he's always wanted - really big explosions.''"
A few more quotes from the article:
"'"We were in this steel town on the coast, Port Talbot, a really awful place,'' he recalls. ''The beach was completely covered with iron ore, black and awful, and I was there at sunset, seeing these strange industrial shapes all over the place.''
At that moment an odd image floated into his mind. ''All I could see was this guy at sunset, sitting on the beach, fidding with his radio,'' Mr. Gilliam says. ''He's tuning in the radio and getting this wonderful Latin escapist romantic music that has nothing to do with the world he's in. As it turned out, that's not in the film, but it's still what the film is about.""
"''There were a lot of frustrations that had been building up about the world we live in, and I just wanted to get them out of my system: the over-complication and over-organization of life, the loss of humanity, things about dreams - your own dreams, the dreams you're sold, other people's dreams of you. That's one of the reasons I left America: I couldn't distinguish my dreams from the dreams that had been processed for me. Walking down a beach at sunset, I couldn't tell whether I was enjoying it because it was enjoyable, or because I'd seen it on too many commercials.""
Both his words and manner of speech seemed at first totally unfamiliar to me, and yet somehow they stirred memories - as an actor might be stirred by the forgotten lines of some role he had played far away and long ago.