Is there any point in making or watching this movie without drugs?
It's a repeat of Munchausen from 20 years ago and says nothing different from those Jodorowsky and Fellini and all those other 'mind-expanding' movies from the 1970s.
It's claustrophobic, addled, egotistical and self-regarding, I tell you.
You opinion is as valuable as a dirty old gum wrapper. Compared with the masses of garbage that is produced today the 70's had a multitude of very fine films.
shareIt's interesting to see this thread, because I just finished watching the movie and I was thinking, "what is up with Terry Gilliam???" And soon after that my thought was, "Say no to drugs". I admit I just don't get Gilliam. I liked Twelve Monkeys, but it's not a movie I need to see again. He makes me think of Johnny Depp and how sometimes Depp does something weird just for the sake of being weird. There's no point to it (Alice In Wonderland is a great example). It seems like a peacock thing..."look at MEEEEE!!!!" I just want more substance with my style. I thought this movie had premise after the first fantasy scene which was so visually beautiful. I also liked how someone was picked who seemed to have very little in redeeming value and where this imaginary world would take him based on his true nature. But the movie seemed so bleak and long and plodding. I didn't have exceptionally high hopes for this movie, so it's not like I expected too much (sometimes having more reasonable expectations of a movie results in a movie being seen as a treasure). I almost always watch the DVD extras for movies, but with this one I skipped them all. :-(
share"Says nothing different from those Jodorowski and Fellini and all those other ´mind-expanding´ movies from the 1970s".
And what would that "nothing different" that it says, be? Also, what are those "other ´mind-expanding´ movies from the 1970s"?
"I tell you".
Indeed you do. Even though it remains unclear as to how is it "egotistical" or "self regarding".
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
I guess I say it's "egotistical" or "self regarding" because he has his name above the title.
And because all the films seem pretty much like repeats of the one before — just like those Woody Allen ones.
He is not a 'journeyman' director. He doesn't seem interested in different approaches or different stories.
Anybody can make a different story. Only Terry Gilliam can make a Terry Gilliam film. Gilliam did attempt to "cross over" with Fisher King and Twelve Monkeys, but he still couldn't get any Hollywood money to make his films, so he just said "screw it" and went back to making films like this and Tideland.
Did I not love him, Cooch? MY OWN FLESH I DIDN'T LOVE BETTER!!! But he had to say 'Nooooooooo'
[deleted]
[deleted]