I checked it out, thought it was a great film. One of the best of the year. and a hell of a lot better than Gilliam’s past two films (they will not be named).
It seems like Gilliam’s career is going to make a comeback with this, then Don Quixote, then Zero Theorem.
His imagination is truly epic though I’m not sure how well the film has been doing.
I thought Zero Theorem wasn’t set.
I’ll see anything Gilliam releases.
That said, I found this very uneven. Moments of the old Gilliam magic, still the best magic around. I have to say that the use of Ledger substitutes made for an unfortunate lack of impact during the final Colin Farrell section. The stakes just weren’t high enough with the alternate identities.
Glad I saw it, though, and I’ll gladly see it again.
Like Roscoe, I’ll be willing to see anything Gilliam makes (though I’ve missed a few along the way). His work may be uneven, but he’s one of the most interesting film-makers we’ve got today, primarily because (it seems to me) he makes the movies he wants to see & assumes there will be others who will be interested as well. In that respect he reminds me of Tim Burton (and they are both committed fantasists as well).
@TMO
Zero Theorem is on hold right now until Don Quixote is done.
The script and it’s rewrites have been finished since 2005. Billy Bob Thorton is still on board. The film will pick up after Don Quixote is finished.
I’ve read the script, and I know it’ll be filmed because it will have a minimal budget as there are only a few locations and it’s just under a hundred minutes long. It will surely be made.
It’s kinda like Terry Gilliam’s Pi, but in the future and with a little romance and comedy. And talking Psychiatrist Holograms.
This was quite good, and Heath Ledger is far more cnetral to it than most people imagine.
Hey, Nathan, if you can provide a link to where I might read Zero Theorem, could you send me a pvt msg? Thanks.
No sorry, not unless you’re actually working in the industry. I don’t wanna get in trouble for passing it around.
But I can make another thread w/ an in depth review and synopsis of the project of you’d like.
No problem, Nathan. I figured that’s how it lay. I would definitely enjoy reading a synopsis.
Oh, I’m so excited to see Parnassus! It opens here in Portland on Friday at my favorite theatre! I adore Mr Gilliam, even when he’s a total eccentric mess… that’s part of what makes him so appealing and singular. Been one of my favorites personalities since I was 8 years old and first saw Time Bandits on the big screen- one of my great childhood cinematic moments. So glad he’s still at it…
It’s Brilliant. A mighty mess of a movie, but that is what gives it its charm. The way Law, Depp and Farrell are woven into the story is seamless, and Heath Ledger’s performance has been edited in to make it vital to the narrative. One of the best of 2009.
The introduction of Heath was bizarre and scarily resonant.
Also, there is a strange immediacy to the film’s take on transcendence, permanence…
I’m surprised not to find more enthusiasm for the film. Maybe because it plays too much like a Terry Gilliam movie as if Terry Gilliam set out very self-consciously to make a Terry Gilliam film. It is almost a compendium of his greatest hits – lots of Munchausen, but also some Time Bandits, Fisher King, Brazil, Python stuff, etc. Maybe that’s why there’s not too much to discuss about the film.
Well, that was definitely a Terry Gilliam film- very, very strange. I’ll have to see it again to really gather my thoughts /feelings on it, but my initial impression is pretty mixed. There’s lots of Gilliam’s old magic in it, no doubt, but much of the story is a bit muddled and confusing, especially in the climax(es). I thought most of it was great, but he kind of lets the visuals take over towards the end too much, mucking up what could be some good thematic material. But again, maybe I just need to see it a second time.
All the actors were terrific; I was even pleasantly surprised by Lily Cole. Heath Ledger is great and his character is probably central to what Gilliam is trying to get at in this story. The “substitute” actors were all handled seamlessly and it works well, but in the end, I have no doubt that it would have been a stronger and more complete-feeling film had Ledger been able to finish out his role. Johnny Depp was fantastic, but Colin Farrell’s part felt a bit underwhelming, and you leave feeling a bit cheated out of the more unified character arc that Heat Ledger would have brought to his role.
All in all though,criticisms aside, it was great fun and I want to see it again, and that is always a good sign. Certainly better than any other effects-laden adventures I have seen in years. I am definitely happy Gilliam is doing Don Quiote again, he was born to tackle that character; he just needs to calm down on the visuals and focus more on the story and characters next time around.
The very idea of Tom Waits playing the devil has my mind running in circles…can’t wait to see it.
I wasn’t sure if I really liked it or not when I saw it. I appreciated it right away but it took me a while to process it.
In retrospect, it is a GREAT movie; I’ll go watch it again and I’ll get the DVD when it comes out. I didn’t find it muddled and confusing at all, once one reads it as a Faustian tale, i.e. of the good old bet of the devil with God for the “Doctor” – combined with a bit of Rumpelstilzchen (demon requests child). It actually was very consistent in that way, and very ingenious how Gilliam picked up the tale where Goethe left it in “Faust I,” for example, i.e. at the point of the woman and baby dying; in Gilliam’s version, the baby survives and so the tale takes its course. (Of course, “Faust II” is precisely about exuberant fantasy that almost runs amok – they couldn’t even stage at the time when it was written.) I liked that a lot. I also enjoyed the cynical use of people’s fantasies – my favorite is “Barry’s”… The end where Dr. P begs for redemption in the sense of not needing to make more choices in a world that doesn’t exist anymore, moved me deeply. – Otherwise, I felt that visually it drew a lot from Ulrike Ottinger’s style, especially from “Freak Orlando” and “Superbia”. One should not underestimate that Anglo-American filmmakers (especially of Gilliam’s caliber) are aware of the work of their international colleagues… especially the director of “Baron Muenchhausen” and “The Brothers Grimm.”
Oooops, sorry, I meant to write “Superbia” not “Suburbia.” Not that the two concepts would exclude each other…
tmo
People get a chance to check this out?
I enjoyed it for the most part but I have some mixed feelings about it as a whole. It reminded me a lot of Baron Munchausen.
His dreamy, storytelling logic is so unique but not always successful for me at least.