Terry Gilliam - C/D, S/D

He says something at the end of the interview about how anything is possible if he keeps Johnny Depp on staff...if he makes a GOOD OMENS movie, will Depp play CRAWLEY? That would be good.

THAT WOULD BE AWESOME.

Just saw Tideland - I loved it. The actress who pays Jeliza Rose puts in one of the best performances from a child actor I've seen, I'm a little amazed at some of the comments upthread but of course views differ on such things. For me, it was a deeply moving film, and brought me to tears several times. Just thought I'd stick my neck out for this one, because sometimes I wonder if the critics realise what a brilliant director walks among us. It's not just the way he handles the material, or the actors, but also the material he selects in the first place. I think history will cover him in glory, even if many find him a bit hard to take right now.

Read some thing the other day saying he's still determined to finish Don Quixote.

Everything he's ever made has elements of Quixote so he may as well.

moley otm. Deeply disturbing but I quite liked it. Grimm was shithouse.

Um, so The Imaginarium of Dr Parnasssus will be in slight turmoil then.

Doesn't have the best of luck, our Tel.

YES YES YES YES

Law, Depp and Farrell to replace Ledger in film

Jude Law will appear as Heath Ledger's character, along with Johnny Depp and Colin Farrell, in the unfinished film, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, Law's spokeswoman said today.

They will all play the role of Tony in the fantasy film Ledger had been filming before his death.

It was not immediately clear how the role will be reconstructed for three actors.

DUH IT'S A GILLIAM FILM, LIKE YOU COMMON PRESS TYPES EVER GOT HIS FILMS ANYWAY

COMMON PRESS TYPES OTM, Gilliam movies generally awful

rong

brothers grimm was definitely a bit awful though

Masterpiece or horrible mess? Place your bets now.

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=23237

Sorry, here's one that works:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/sep/15/heathledger?gusrc=rss&feed=film

Watched both Brazil an Tideland this week, for the first time

Thought Brazil was great, another film I can't believe I've never seen before.

Tideland on the other hand, mm not really my sort of thing. It seemed very unsatisfying and no particular moment held any interest for me.

Tideland is tough going, whether you're revolted by the more confronting moments or just bored. I liked it but I doubt I could sit through it again.

Brazil is the best film ever, and I really really wish Gilliam would just give up now.

Yeah, i could see how Tideland would appeal to some people rather than me just slandering it as a crap film which it certainly wasn't.

I just loved Brazil though, an extravanganza of gilliamness.

Grimm Brothers, on the other hand, was balls.

so is Tideland really NOT a crap film? because the consensus seems to be that it is actually even worse than that, that it's affront to cinema and sensibilities, among the worst movies ever made

I liked it but I doubt I could sit through it again.

Brazil is the best film ever

― I'm Richard (Autumn Almanac), Thursday, 27 November 2008 11:07

^I'll go with this.

Brief bits on Heath Ledger and 'The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus' from Comic-Con.

Read somewhere that he's back at Don Quixote. Lost in La Mancha was so wtf with disorganization and mayhem I'm surprised anything survived of his first go.

was posted on the heath ledger thread and even though it does focus on ledger a bit, i thought this was a pretty good read on Gilliam and the film as well: http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2009/08/heath-ledger200908

can't help feeling sorry for the guy - has there ever been a more talented filmmaker with as much bad luck? seemed like him and ledger were really close too. :(

i'm pretty excited about this film, I think having charles mckeown back is the clincher for me, gilliam is spotty to terrible without him.

Roz- Welles maybe? Though a lot of Welles' problems were (however indirectly) of his own making...

Depp quits Don Quixote (again):

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gWqLREHQxBHCMhKCAdktrMpz_HFw

"He added: "I wanted to shoot Don Quixote next spring. He said he's not available and we have both agreed that I'm going to die soon, so it would be nice to get this film under my belt.""

this statement doesn't really make sense to me?

Trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lw2lUp1Cqz4

holy fucking shit

Just realized where I'd seen the young Parnassus' costume before

http://cdn.idolator.com/assets/resources/2008/03/mungolian.jpg

that trailer was spellbinding

i've watched it like 10 times now, i hate to type or even think something like this but heath ledger's death may have saved terry gilliam's career

I have to see that film.

Brief NYT blog thoughts on Parnassus:

The movie is Pythonesque but also Gilliam-y, with animated sequences involving giant unfurling tongues, cross-dressing troupes of singing men, burned-out landscapes and lavish dream worlds, and a storyline that hinges on the mystical/philosophical.

“On every level, it’s tragical and magical at the same time,” Mr. Gilliam said, introducing it at the screening at the Crosby Hotel.

“It’s not the film I set out to make,” he added later. “It might be better, it might not be better, but it’s different, and I actually love it.”

Fair enough; the stretch of having four actors play the same part is actually not the biggest imaginative leap that the film asks viewers to make. Surrealness has always been Mr. Gilliam’s best medium.

But “Parnassus” also includes several passages that seem eerie in light of the circumstances, including a parade of dead stars like James Dean and a speech about the virtues of dying young. Even weirder, those references were in the script from the beginning.

the CGI stuff in the trailers looks kind of meh to me.

really on the fence about screening this on Thursday.

I rescreened Baron Munchausen recently (a movie I had fond memories of)--its nonstop screechiness really wore on me.

had a similar experience w a recent rewatch of time bandits. describe it as one of my very favorite films upthread, and that was certainly true in my youth, but i found parts of it a lot more grating and draggy than i remembered (fact that my gf basically loathed it probably didn't enhance my enjoyment either). as much as i like michael palin, vincent and his pansy probably should have been left on the cutting-room floor. and as great as ian holm is, the napoleon section is too long by half. at least.

suppose gilliam's always been that way, though. he's so in love with all the wonderful parts that he seems to lose track of the whole. munchausen definitely suffers from that. trip to the moon is a splendid idea, but again WAAAAY too long. a similar journey to vulcan's underworld isn't anywhere near so brutally off-putting, but does go on a bit.

brazil seems like the only "pure" gilliam flick where he really keeps it all under control. i've seen it probably 8-10 times over the years, and it's still an all-time favorite, soul-crushing ending and all. and while i like the fisher king and 12 monkeys, they feel a little diluted compared to the lunatic work he'd done up to that point. after that i draw a line in the sand. have basically hated all three of his subsequent films.

so, uh, fingers crossed for parnassus!

and i dunno. goddamit, i STILL LOVE TIME BANDITS! goofy jokes and draggy bits included. fuck you, adult perspective!

Parnassus is patchy as hell (not a fan of the CG) but certainly enjoyable, and often surprisingly dark / ambiguous.

do tell!

you mean surprisingly dark/ambiguous for gilliam, or just in general? cuz, uh...

http://www.soundonsight.org/tiff-09-the-imaginarium-of-doctor-parnassus/

but i found parts of it a lot more grating and draggy than i remembered

this sums up my rewatch of Brazil a few years ago, but I can't remember which version I watched...

Those without tolerance for Gilliam’s flights of fancy won’t find themselves as new converts, though it is of a somewhat darker hew than some of his past work.

well, i caught this line, but it's nevertheless a rather surprising claim. i mean, gilliam's got one of the bleakest, most death-haunted and fatalistic filmographies i can think of - especially relative to other contemporary commercial directors. sadistic, even. the gilliam films that do permit a ray of light (the fisher king, the brothers grim) are the exceptions, and stingy with it besides.

i'm just taken aback by the idea that parnassus might seem exceptionally dark in relation to, say, tideland and brazil. (setting aside, of course, the small matter of its star's untimely passing...)

I suppose by "surprising" I meant that it's not nec. in line with the movies it most resembles, esp. Munchausen & Time Bandits, which are both tidier movies from what I recall.

Confession: I've never seen "Tideland," but from what I've read it's always seemed like a bit of an outlier in terms of approach.

in other news, Robert Duvall has just been cast as Quixote.

that's not a good sign

I still love Time Bandits and Brazil and Munchausen especially

http://blogues.cyberpresse.ca/moncinema/siroka/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/54724722_h15633137.jpg

u r kidding

My memory of Time Bandits is just so fantastic and awesome. Kind of scared to rewatch it. Like contenderizer I 'consider' it one of my all time favorite films.

HATED HATED HATED fisher king at the time, but I was almost delusionally depressed at the time so maybe a rewatch is in order after these 18 years.

Pretty psyched for Parnassus-- I love a mess.

he's crouching in that photo.