After watching “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus” for the first time, I had one thought: “WTF just happened?” So, obviously, I took advantage of the fact OnDemand’s rent-a-movie option, while overpriced, allows you 24 hours to review your film choice, and watched the movie all over again.

scene
After viewing 2, I resigned myself to the fact that there were a few factors I might not ever truly “get”. From the flute, to the hangman element, the possible reverse Oedipus complex (note that Scrumpy/Val is identical to her mother), the Michael Vick style house arrest bells on Val’s underage ankle, etc., there were things that I just chocked up to being special mystical details, and left it at that.

And while I was slightly confused as to whether Tony was truly guilty of that for which he was being accused (regarding the black market allegations), I think that detail was left obscure purposely because it didn’t matter – the bottom line was that he knowingly made one poor decision after another and it ultimately caught up with him.

hangman

In fact, such was the overriding theme for all characters in the film; my overall assessment was a kind of portrayal of life inasmuch as it being this ceaseless sea of decisions. Yes, that sounds trite on the surface, but what set this movie apart was that there was no one protagonist.

Everyone is the antihero.

Nearly every character harbors that tragic flaw of making “some” bad decision – each time with a different face – in succession: ones that may or may not have resulted in irreconcilable ramifications. While it starts with Dr. Parnassus and his bad decision (the first deal with the devil), he continues making these same bets with the Devil (named Nick in the film) as the story progresses… a deal for immortality, one to win over the woman for whom he fell, one in attempt to save Val’s soul, and the final bet in hopes to ensure Val’s return should Tony die.

at what price?
“But at what price?”

Every single character, with the exception of Percy, is met with these huge moral choices, many of which end ridden with vice and devoid of morality ~ which led me to feel that Percy was merely a symbolic manifestation of the Doctor’s reasonable, and less impulsive and indulgent “Id”:

cliff
“Times like these, the devil was never far away…”

He was small, had a similar name, lacked any vices, was always present to save the doctor when in danger, and as Parnassus told him once, “You’re never wrong, are you?”.

neverwrong

He was also present in the ending scene, after Parnassus finally caught a glimpse that his daughter was indeed well and thriving in the life she has dreamed to attain. While the devil is off to the right offering an an apple to a couple of nuns (very Eden-esque style, no doubt), Percy is urging him to continue “getting back to work”. It is the proverbial “devil on one shoulder (Nick), and angel of reason (Percy) on the other”.

apple

The symbolism of this ending scene kind of brought it full circle for me.

While we’ve established that the story initiated with and thereafter ensued as a tangled web of one bad decision begetting the next – what is notable is that that first deal with the devil was created and bet upon a soul not yet even born – One not yet even capable of reason, much less any of these choices her predecessors were already enacting and abusing.

In addition, during this covenant, Parnassus concedes that the devil “let him win” – The agreement was one in which the first to acquire “twelve disciples” to follow their belief system (the devil harboring the system of doubt and cynicism, and Parnassus championing imagination’s illumination of humanity). If that “twelve disciple” concept doesn’t sound familiar, the aforementioned end scene in which Nick offers the “forbidden apple”, should. You can’t help but start to see this as a battle of God versus the Devil, and achieve the overall feel that the first deal symbolized “Original Sin” being passed onto the innocent as a burden.

firstwager
As the movie came to a close, I made a mental rewind to the scene in which Tony approaches an inebriated Antoine, and queries him about the whole Imaginarium – what it meant? What was it’s purpose? Why did they do it? I’m too lazy to look up the direct quote but his interrogation was something to the effect of: “If he can do all of these things, and has all this power, then why not rule the world? Why travel around like this sideshow?”

what is it?
“He wants the world to rule itself…”

To which Antoine responds that “Parnassus doesn’t want to rule the world… he wants the world to rule itself.” This is very much a parallel to the Aristotelian concept of “The Prime Mover” – the God-like entity who doesn’t want to control or rule; just set things in motion and let the world guide itself.

Then, the bits started to come together a bit better for me. I realized that Parnassus’ character had to be immortal because he is supposed to be some manifestation of a Godlike symbol. And his Imaginarium is a microcosmic portrayal of the world itself – but specifically from the view of “free will”. Souls go into this ethereal world, where they are presented with two choices; If they make the right one, they become purified. If they make the sinful choice, Nick (the Devil) wins.

With regard to the story, if Parnassus can win enough souls who choose the pure choice, he can free his daughter (whose soul he promised the devil come her 16th birthday). With regard to the “bigger picture”, one could equate it to “another soul lost or gained” to goodness or sin.

Which makes the very end ever more interesting to me – with suggestions that transcend most religious questions that have been put out there heretofore. An entirely new spin on “which came first- the chicken or the egg?”. Prior to the film’s conclusion, Parnassus exchanges a smile with Nick (the devil). Up until now, the wrong choices made by the wise Parnassus seemed fitting. I mean, even Jesus faced trials and tribulations and queried why his father would forsake him.

smile

But the end scene was interesting, if inconsistent, to me… The grin he grants Nick serves as a reminder of the tragic flaw we all share; An acknowledgment of sorts – that come what may – we will always harbor some proclivity to make our various “deals with the devil”. Sell our souls? Perhaps not. But, we’re all subject to doing the wrong things and making the wrong choices. And this facial expression alone made clear that the sequential choices, right, wrong, or indifferent, would continue on for all of us until the end of time.

But if Parnassus is supposed to be God, how can that work? Infallible God – acknowledging that he too shares this tragic flaw?

The fact that it was Parnassus who smiled at Nick, generated some very interesting suggestions. In Christianity, it is supposed to be the devil who was an angel who fell from grace. Hell and everything that came with it, was because the devil was an angel who had been cast away from heaven – the heaven that came first.

Yet, in this story, it is the devil who grants Parnassus his immortality via the bet (aforementioned wherein his daughter’s soul was promised to the devil). So was his paranormal alter-reality (the Imaginarium) and the ability to peruse the minds of the mortals around him should they so choose to comply.

Given these factors, one has to wonder – if Parnassus is indeed meant to be a God like element in this story, is the idea supposed to be a suggestion of some more modern religious concept?

That perhaps there was no fallen angel who became a devil? No all omniscient, all powerful, all good God?

Just two entities who (while clearly more powerful than we mortals) are old as time, “mostly good”, or “mostly bad”, but nonetheless just as vulnerable to following a direction other than that for which they were intended? While Parnassus made many a bad choice, didn’t Nick also relent, give into “goodness”, and allow him to finally see his daughter one last time?

As I said, The Imaginarium is open to many an interpretation… this was just mine: A beautiful, if Socratic, film which raised more questions than it did answers. But one quote in the movie did resonate with me. Despite the fact that each decision warranted a consequence of some sort, each character also seemed to be redeemed at one point or another – offered at least one type of “second chance”. The hangman had another chance at life after his wrongdoings, Parnassus was given another chance at seeing his daughter after endless eons wandering through the desert, etc.

It took me a while to “get”, but I loved the movie. The idea of religion existing as a true balance, where neither powerful entity existed before the other, no one fell from grace, and nothing is pure or 100 percent either in goodness or sin is fantastic to me. The Imaginarium reminds us that we have free will – even God and Satan – which gives a whole new meaning to what “Tony” (as Barry) assures the first of five souls as he sends her off in a boat:

“Nothing is permanent – not even death.”
notevendeath

xoxo
<3~A