Terry Gilliam

Anteprima di Immaginario  Festival


martedì 24 novembre
2009
Perugia, Teatro del Pavone, Piazza della  Repubblica

Ore 17.30:
Incontro con il regista TERRY GILLIAM
A seguire proiezione del film
TIDELAND (Canada/UK 2005, 120’, 35mm)

Ore 21.00:

Anteprima Immaginario Festival.
Incontro con il regista TERRY GILLIAM
A seguire proiezione di:
STORYTIME (UK/1965, 5’)
THE MIRACLE OF FLIGHT (UK/ 1974, 5’)
THE IMAGINARIUM OF DOCTOR PARNASSUS
(Francia/ Canada/ UK 2009, 122’, 35 mm)
intervengono:
GIULIO MASCIARRI
Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Perugia
ALESSANDRO CAMPI,
Università degli Studi di Perugia
ALESSANDRO RICCINI RICCI,
Immaginario Festival

Gli ingressi sono liberi fino ad esaurmento posti

————————————————————————————————-

VUOI ESSERE AMICO DI GOODMORNINGUMBRIA?

scrivi a redazione@goodmorningumbria.it

————————————————————————————————————————

HOTEL RISTORANTE LA ROSETTA****

Centro Storico di Perugia  p. Italia tel. 075 5720841

larosetta@perugiaonline.com

————————————————————————————————-

“C’ERA UNA VOLTA” – GIOCATTOLI

di Lorena Tega

PROSSIMA APERTURA Via Vittorio Veneto – Gualdo Tadino

tel. 075 9140664

————————————————————————————————————————

OTTO Abbigliamento Donna

di Maurizio Giorgelli

via Bonazzi 8 Perugia tel. 075 5729084

————————————————————————————————————————

PARAFARMACIA EMALFARMA

di Emanuela Coreno e C.

via Settevalli 208/b  Perugia  tel. 075 5004777

————————————————————————————————————————

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus | Terry Gilliam, 2009

Terry Gilliam should be cherished. There, I said it. Such a statement certainly won’t endear me to the man’s detractors, of which there are many, but I firmly believe that filmmakers of his kind – that is, those who aren’t afraid to follow their vision – are part of a dying breed. Considering the near-universal failure of his two most recent titles – The Brothers Grimm, Tideland – one can be forgiven for wondering just how Gilliam now finds himself in such a position; not only did he manage to secure a $30 million budget for his new film, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, but it also boasts what is surely the most impressive cast we will see all year. It is a star-studded cast that was, of course, born out of tragedy: the death of leading man Heath Ledger on the 22nd of January 2008, around a third of the way through filming, suspended the project indefinitely. However, the tragedy provoked such A-Listers as Colin Farrell, Johnny Depp and Jude Law to sign up as replacements, who in doing so (also forwarding their wages for the role to Ledger’s young daughter, Matilda) practically guaranteed the completion of the film – something that Gilliam must have thought was beyond the realm of possibility at one point last year. While Ledger’s death was a tragic loss, not only to the world of film, it must also be noted that such huge setbacks are not unknown to Gilliam, who has encountered production problems alarmingly frequently throughout his career – his longstanding project about Don Quixote being the foremost example.

Fans of Gilliam and his unique approach to movie making will undoubtedly find something to love here. The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus follows a travelling theatre troupe through a grey, unforgiving version of modern London as they unwittingly stumble into a deal made between the Doctor and the Devil some centuries previous. Parnassus, whose pious form is portrayed by the brilliant Christopher Plummer, has recently lost a longstanding bet to the snide Mr. Nick (Tom Waits) and must now pay up by handing over his teenage daughter Valentina (Lily Cole) once she turns sixteen. All seems lost until the troupe stumble across a mysterious man who they find hanging from his neck beneath a London bridge – placed there by the Devil in order to instigate what is to be the very last chapter in the tale of the great Parnassus. This is the first collaboration between Gilliam and screenwriter Charles McKeown in around twenty years; the pair last worked on what was one of Gilliam’s most successful films in The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, which was nominated for four Academy Awards in 1988. The script isn’t a particular strong point, however, and neither are the visuals. Visuals that, coupled with the film’s London setting and Father-Daughter plot point, quickly bring to mind Dave McKean’s 2005 film MirrorMask. Like MirrorMask, and despite the huge budget, Parnassus lacks polish: it is understandably messy and suffers terribly from some  awful faux-English accents, particularly Ledger’s, yet good work can be found in the film’s supporting cast. With Waits, whose devilish voice is enough to make blood curdle, giving the standout performance.

Our Rating:

- Parnassus – 2009 – ♥♥♥ -

di

Terry Gilliam

La relazione dell’ uomo con l’ immaginario e i mondi di fantasia sono da sempre stati dei temi cari al naturalizzato britannico Gilliam. Fin dai tempi di Brazil si evinceva la sua sicura attinenza al genere e la spiccata capacità del regista nel trasformare le immagini in infinite fantasie senza alcun freno. Ed è è proprio su questa enorme potenza visiva che si incentra l’ ultima “fatica” dello scomparso Heath Ledger. Immagini che creano un mondo di fantasia attraverso uno specchio nel quale è possibile scegliere non solo tra bene e male, ma soprattutto sulla vera qualità dei sogni: se desideri senza confini che porteranno alla rinascita o semplici soddisfazioni temporanee che porteranno a bruciare nel fuoco eterno. Lo sfondo è una Londra odierna avvolta da atmosfere cupe, tetre e ciniche le cui strade sono attraversate dal carrozzone itinerante del Dottor Parnassus che si esibisce accompagnato da un nano, una giovane donna e un ragazzo nel suo Imaginarium. Per anni il dottor Parnassus si è divertito a giocare con il Diavolo celato sotto le vesti di Mr Nick (un perfetto Tom Waits) che però adesso è pronto a riscuotere il suo pegno: Valentina, la tanto ambita sedicenne figlia di Parnassus. Terry Gilliam ha dovuto affrontare non pochi problemi nella produzione del suo film: il principale è stato ovviamente la prematura e tragica scomparsa del suo attore protagonista Heath Ledger che lo ha portato a dover modificare la sceneggiatura inserendo tre nuovi attori (Johnny Depp, Jude Law e Colin Farrel). Quella della relazione tra spettacoli teatrali itineranti e mondo fantastico è stato un tema caro a Gilliam fin dai tempi de Le avventure del barone di Munchausen. Questa volta non si è risparmiato il regista americano naturalizzato britannico, dando sfogo ad un universo fatto di luci e colori maestosi e allo stesso tempo visionari e surreali si vola in universi in bilico tra la realtà e la finzione, tra la vita e la morte. L’ opera rimaneggiata è stata alla fine dedicata allo scomparso Ledger. I tre attori che si sono prestati a compensare la mancanza dell’ attore scomparso hanno devoluto i loro compensi alla figlia del giovane attore defunto. Mischia più volte le carte in tavola Gilliam lasciando allo spettatore la soluzione su quale realmente sia il senso delle visioni surreali del mondo immaginario di Parnassus. Resta il rammarico di non poter mai vedere quale realmente fosse il progetto iniziale di Gilliam di un’ opera che è in maniera decisamente evidente rimaneggiata e che seppur ben “rattoppata” dai “fasti” interpretativi del trio Farrel-Depp-Law ha proprio nella sceneggiatura, a tratti confusionaria, le sue più palesi lacune. Il mio personale dubbio è se questo ricorso ai tre attori sia stato realmente necessario ai fini del plot poichè almeno due tra loro sono protagonisti di bizzarre sottostorie che per quanto belle da vedere non risultano sicuramente necessarie. Decisamente alla fine si esce dalla sala un pò confusi: sia perchè le aspettative erano alte, sia perchè si è consapevoli che la morte di Ledger sarà la principale causa dei grandi incassi di questo film. La domanda è : sarebbe stato lo stesso successo se il premio Oscar per il superbo Joker di Batman fosse ancora tra noi nel nostro mondo reale? O il mondo immaginario del visionario ex Monthy Pyton avrebbe rischiato il dimenticatoio? Forse per i fan più accaniti di Gilliam non sarà così ma sicuramente non è lontano il ricordo del suo Brazil o dell’ ottima sua favola nera Tideland con i quali il genio creativo del regista americano si è forse confrontato in maniera più esaudiente. Insomma ai sicuri numerosi spettatori l’ ardua sentenza.

( Ledger davanti allo specchio dimensionale dell' Imaginarium)

(Parnassus ancora una volta sfidato dal Diavolo)

Terry Gilliam les ha vist de tots colors durant la seva llarga trajectòria com a director de cinema. L’únic nordamericà dels Monty Phyton va començar a dirigir amb la divertidíssima Los caballeros de la mesa cuadrada, juntament amb Terry Jones. L’etapa Monty Phyton va ser potser la més tranquila en quant a problemes de qualsevol tipus per finalitzar projectes.

Amb Brazil, la seva hilarant revisió de 1984 de George Orwell, Gilliam va haver de barallar-se amb els directius d’ Universal per temes de financiació. Amb El Barón de Munchausen, l’enfrontament, aquest cop amb Columbia, fou encara més dur: la pel·li havia tingut un cost de 48 milions de dólars, però la taquilla presentava uns beneficis de 8. Els Oscars per una vegada van fer justícia i la pel·li va ser nominada en quatre categories, a més d’obtenir 3 premis BAFTA. Amb El Rey Pescador, fins i tot va guanyar un Oscar, després d’obtenir 5 nominacions. Abans, Time Bandits havia sigut un èxit comercial inesperat.

Als 90, Gilliam va intentar dur a la gran pantalla Història de Dos Ciutats de Charles Dickens; però l’elecció de l’actor que havia d’interpretar a Charles Darnay i el desacord total amb el pressupost van tumbar el projecte. A part del que hem comentat dels èxits de Munchausen i El Rey Pescador, 12 Monos va recaudar gairebé 200 milions de dólars. Després d’aquests quatre triomfs, afegint el de la fantàstica Miedo y Asco en Las Vegas, al 1999 va començar el rodatge de The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, amb Jean Rochefort, Johnny Depp i Vanessa Paradis. Johnny Depp fou el primer en arribar a un rodatge sense l’actor protagonista, Rochefort, amb avions militars sobrevolant el set, climatologia totalment desfavorable (uns xàfecs van arrassar el set i van endur-se o espatllar part de l’equip). Quan va arribar Rochefort, la seva hèrnia discal va tirar per la borda definitivament totes les opcions de continuar amb el projecte. El documental The Lost in La Mancha ho explica tot.

Terry Gilliam va intentar fer-se càrrec del projecte Watchmen al 1989 i al 1996. Malauradament, sobretot valorant el resultat final del treball d’ Snyder, no va ser possible; el fet de que la visió de Gilliam estigués totlament allunyada del punt de vista comercial de les majors va impedir que l’obra d’Alan Moore tingués una adaptació amb el nivell que garantitza Gilliam.

Los Hermanos Grimm podríem dir que és la pel·li que més caché ha atorgat a Gilliam. No és la seva millor obra, però si la que més beneficis li ha donat. Fins i tot les famílies l’anaven a veure; la crítica especialitzada va parlar bé de la pel·li, els estudis estaven contents, i a part, Gilliam va conèixer a Heath Ledger. L’èxit amb els germans Grimm li va permetre dur a terme un projecte tan personal com Tideland, que no tenia res a veure amb l’anterior. Gilliam sempre ha anat a la seva, perquè té confiança en el seu treball; per això ha superat tots els contratemps.

El més greu l’ha superat amb The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus. Tots sabem que Heath Ledger va morir quan s’havia rodat el 45% del guió. El talent i les amistat de Gilliam van superar el drama de la mort d’un dels actors amb més futur. Johnny Depp, Colin Farrell, Jude Law, la capacitat d’improvisació i la genialitat de Terry Gilliam han permès que avui s’estreni El Imaginario del Dr. Parnassus. Un altre cop, Terry Gilliam surt vencedor: a ell no li importa guanyar, però detesta perdre.

En algún momento Terry Gilliam fue un gran héroe para mi. De chiquito me impactó mucho con esta peli llena de fantasía y de humor: The Adventures of Baron Munchausen. Peli que dirigió en 1988, cuando apenas tenía yo once años y cuando no había escuchado  nada de Monty Python, Time Bandits o incluso Brazil pero seguramente lo investigué de alguna forma porque después cuando dirigió The Fisher King en 1991 y luego Twelve Monkeys en 1995 poco después de haber yo entrado a la u ya sabía quien era. Lo conocía muy bien y lo admiraba hasta el fanatismo.

En algún momento sus pelis empezaron a espaciarse y después de Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas en 1998 hasta el día de hoy ha desarrollado tan sólo tres pelis (The Brothers Grimm y Tideland en 2005 y The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus en 2009 peli que aún no he visto). Muy triste.

Anoche me vi otra vez, Las Aventuras y fue sencillamente maravilloso recordar la ternura con la que aborda Gilliam el tema. Un humor sencillo, una aventura llena de juegos narrativos, dramáticos y actorales. Una fábula de un héroe en decadencia que logra ganarle una vez más la partida a la muerte.

El reparto igual que la peli es fantástico: John Neville como Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen, Eric Idle, Sarah Polley muy muy chiquita, Oliver Reed, Uma Thurman encarnando como ninguna otra la Venus de Botticelli, Jonathan Pryce, Robin Williams y hasta Sting.

No me canso de verla y volver a ser un niño encantado con esta maravillosa peli.

A few weeks ago we posted about all the crazy remakes in the pipeline right now from Hollywoodland that, at best, seem questionable.    Not to let ya think all we do around here is kvetch about things we just know will suck, here are some links to trailers that we hope don’t suck, and in some cases might be perfect antonyms to suck:

Where The Wild Things Are

Adapting a beloved children’s book for the big screen is, these days at least, a very dicey affair.  For more proof see The Cat In The Hat.   Once upon a time, Hollywood was actually good at this, even if they did make changes to the source material (see the original Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory with a brilliantly creepy Gene Wilder).

Having Spike Jones attached to this does ratchet up hope for a good flick considerably.  Then again, Tim Burton’s take on Roald Dahl’s Charlie  & the Chocolate Factory – though inspired – pales considerably to the original and is overall dissappointing.

Alice In Wonderland

Speaking of Burton, Mr. Dark n Scary (but not really) returns to his roots at Disney with another take on a children’s fave.  This time, though, unlike Willy Wonka, there is no real beloved film version of Lewis Carroll’s famous story.    Disney’s own take last time around, in 1951, has it’s moments but largely falls flat.  Burton’s take looks intriguing, even before one factors in Mrs. Burton Helena Bonham-Carter, hot actress of the moment Anne Hathaway, and resident whackado’s Johnn Depp, Alan Rickman and Crispin Glover.

The Fantastic Mr. Fox

Idiosyncratic Wes Anderson takes on perhaps the 20th century’s most beloved children’s writer Roald Dahl’s (author of many books beyond that chocolate factory one, and also author of one James Bond screenplay – You Only Live Twice – AND the screenplay of Bond author Ian Flemming’s own kids book turned silver screen gem, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang) The Fantastic Mr. Fox is the most unexpected match of auteur and kids animation I can imagine this side of Jean-Luc Godard making a claymation version of Babar.   (and that may be the longest run-on sentence I’ve penned yet for TLOS!)

Either way this one has the potential to be the most interesting and surprising of the fair of animation coming up.

A Serious Man

Lest you think all we do here is watch cartoons and eat cookie dough right out of the container, here’s the trailer for the latest from the Coen Brothers.   After going nearly 3 years between full lengths with No Country For Old Men following up their lone dissappointment (the remake of the Alec Guinness vehicle The Ladykillers), the brothers are back on track for a movie a year with this one, described as (shockingly) a black black comedy.

I love the Coen brothers, and have since I discovered Raising Arizona back in the video store I worked in in the late 80s, but really, has any of their films NOT qualified as a “black comedy”?   Still looking forward to this one.

Also noteworthy to report:  it appears chinese director Zhang Yimou (House of Flying Daggers, opening and closing ceremonies of last summer’s Beijing Olympics) will be directing a remake of the coen’s potent, spare debut, Blood Simple.

Wonder who will be expected to fill THAT GUY extraordinaire M. Emmet Walsh’s shoes.

[update/edit]

It seems I’ve already posted the A Serious Man trailer earlier this summer….  and so while I posted about this (and a video from it) back in the spring, here is an official trailer of

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

No, The Dark Knight wasn’t Heath Ledger’s last film.   The latest epic from Terry Gilliam apparently was.    From Jabberwocky (made around the same time as Monty Python’s Holy Grail) through the film version of  Hunter Thompson’s Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas, Gilliam was one of my favorite directors.      Then his attempt to make a film version of Don Quixote was beset with disaster after disaster and finally had the plug pulled (documented heartbreakingly in the documentary Lost In La Mancha).    Since then Gilliam has made mediocre fare (The Brothers Grimm) and then made what I can only term as a “fuck you” to film goers in general (Tideland).

I cannot recall before seeing a film from a director I loved so that appeared to be so loudly screaming “FUUUUCK YOU!!!!” to the viewer.   Filled top to bottom with vile and demented characters, Tideland centers on little girl Jeliza-Rose and how she copes with the tragedy of both her parents ODing (at different times) by going into a fantasty world.   But it’s view of humanity, despite Gilliams explanations that it’s ultimately hopefully about how children survive horror, is so dispicable and utterly without redemption, well, I’m not really sure what else to say about it.    I’ve only been able to sit through it once, and though I normally love watching Gilliam in particular over and over again, I don’t think I could sit through this again (and I have tried).

So, this will be interesting to view in light of all that’s come in the last 10 years or so of Gilliam’s career.   It received very mixed reviews at Cannes, but then even the best Gilliam films seem to receive mixed reviews.   Not everyone appreciates the man’s asthetic.     Anyhow, a new La Mancha project is back up and running for Gilliam (this time, according to IMDB, titled The Man Who Killed Don Quixote), so hopefully this film finds the man back in better spirits.  I, for one, am very hopeful.  I mean, it has Tom Waits for god’s sakes!  Tom Waits!

We are a rather fortunate bunch. Our grandparents only had two chances to see a film: either when it came out in theatres or if it popped up on television, which is what made the annual television screenings of The Wizard of Oz such a big deal. It was not until VHS revolutionized the industry and films could be watched whenever we desired. Combine this with the communication powers of the internet and a film that never got past screenings in New York can suddenly make a ton of cash and notoriety.

With such fortunes, I find it our job as film enthusiasts to promote our favorite smaller films as a counter-weight to the advertising juggernauts that rumble across our cultural plains.

After my previous blog entry on blockbusters I figured the natural companion would be a list of ten great independent films that may have missed your radar.

This is not a definitive list by any means. These are merely some of the best independent films that I have seen over the last decade. I would love responses with your own list as I’m always wanting to add to my own.

Tideland (2005)

I was hooked from the beginning to Terry Gilliam’s crazy tale about a little girl’s adventures with his bold, balls of brass introduction of awesomeness to the film.

Most of Gilliam’s work is polarizing and this is definitely another of those. One would immediately use words like “creepy” and “messed up” to describe the film. However, this comes from the film’s ability to walk in both the worlds of adults and children.

While watching the film you’re childlike, until the adult bursts into your brain carrying the fear of a danger that never comes. Gilliam plays our adult brains like fools, shooing us away while saying, “Go away mom, we’re just playing!” It’s what really makes the film.

The Machinist (2004)

It’s hard to talk about The Machinist without mentioning that it stars Christian Bale and he lost 62 pounds for the film, stopping at 120 pounds even though he wanted to drop to 100 (he then gained all the original weight back, plus 40 more for Batman Begins).

That type of dedication helps the film, as Bale’s emaciated zombie-body blends with the film’s moody atmosphere about a guy who says he hasn’t slept in a year. Better call Guinness about that.

Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (1999)

Before Forest Whitaker gained notoriety for Last King of Scotland, one of his best performances came from a little known film by Jim Jarmusch.

Ghost Dog is a hitman for the mob who uses the Hagakure: The Book of the Samurai as his handbook, but things go awry when the mob turns on Ghost Dog when he leaves a witness after a job.

This is a very simple, quiet film, paced by readings of the Hagakure and the RZA soundtrack. The themes of tradition being overlapped by new upstarts and duty to others make this a wonderful little film that doesn’t sacrifice itself on the altar of “CRAZY ACTION will make them buy tickets, right?”

*See also Leon: The Professional

Waking Life (2001)

There’s a lot to be said for Waking Life, but it really does speak for itself. Following Richard Linklater’s stories of conversations (see Before Sunrise), this film is all talk, with the main character becoming engrossed with on philosophical conversation after another. Combine the mental head trip with the crazy rotoscoping visuals and you’ve got a lot to think about for the day.

On a personal note, I found that watching it all the way through can make you miss things in the latter half simply because you’re overworked. After you’ve seen it once, re-watch it from the middle and get your enlightenment on.

*See also A Scanner Darkly

Mister Brooks (2007)

Since Kevin Costner practically did two apocalyptic films back to back (and both tanked), we haven’t seen a lot of him except for the random throw away comedy. His turn in Mr. Brooks as a serial killer tortured by his addiction brings him back into our favor.

Also re-surfacing is Demi Moore as the detective on his tail, reminding us why she was heralded as such an asset to presentations of women in cinema (that is until she did Striptease).

And finally, William Hurt, who continues to randomly pop up in great supporting roles (see A History of Violence) appears as the little devil on Brooks’ shoulder.

Combine all three of these great veteran actors and this film comes to life like Robin Williams in the 1970s (yes, that was a drug reference). Costner does the role justice and offers meditation on all types of addiction. Though everything is a little more interesting when people are being killed.

Brick (2005)

Every year Hollywood churns out another crop of comedies, some trying to cash in on high school experiences, never reaching the level of John Hughes intelligence and wit – that is until Brick.

Though not a “comedy”, this neo-noir set in the world of high school is funny, serious, endearing and overall fantastic. The film keeps the interest via the writing, which is dripping with cool and firing off like a tommy gun. When’s the last time writing kept you engaged with a film? It’s also hard to believe that the star of the show was that long haired kid on 30 Rock From the Sun.

The Fountain (2006)

This is probably one of the most polarizing films in the last ten years, one upped only recently by Synecdoche, New York. I would wager that this distinction is what either draws or pushes away prospective viewers. However, I would encourage everyone to try it.

Even if the quiet (and confusing) commentary on death and acceptance may not be your cup of tea, the amazing visuals (no CGI here folks) and haunting score by Clint Mansell will make you feel something. Each will walk away feeling differently.

*See also Sunshine and Pi

The Descent (2005)

At this point I think a lot of my friends see me as a prophet for this film. I happened to catch it on late night cable, was blown away, and continue giving people my copy to watch.

The film focuses on a group of girls who go spelunking, only to wind up lost and trapped with some vicious inhabitants.

Now from this synopsis you’re automatically thinking, “Oh yeah, dumb girls find themselves in peril and scream throughout rest of film. End.” Amazingly, that’s incorrect! The creatures don’t monopolize the film’s creepies, but the ways in which the characters react and change to the situation provide the real goods.

This is one of the few horror films in which women are portrayed strong, smart, and by people with acting chops, not just good looks. Also, be sure to watch the international version, as the ending is different for the US (surprise, surprise).

*See also Aliens for strong female characters

Children of Men (2006)

True, this film had a rather large budget for me to title it as an “indie.” However, it never got a great showing around town and most have still not heard of it.

Set in a future in which women can no longer give birth, the world is crumbling as the populations grows older and extinction seems closer. When a young girl is discovered pregnant it becomes the task of Theo to escort her to the Human Project, which urban legend has it, is a group of scientists who have been trying to cure the infertility problem.

I saw this on the big screen three times and it’s no wonder: Alfonso Cuaron’s limited use of CGI, immersive sets, and mesmerizing long takes make you feel the world in your bones. The film’s apocalyptic landscapes put the recent Hollywood attempts to shame (I Am Legend, Terminator Salvation) both visually and narratively.

This may just be the best dystopian film ever made (if anything compares, please tell me) and I consider this my absolute favorite film, right next to Fight Club. If you’ve seen Blade Runner and enjoyed The Road, you’re sure to love this film.

*See also Blade Runner, 28 Days Later, and Blindness

Half Nelson (2006)

When I think of indie films that beat the shit out of any summer blockbuster with a 200 million dollar production budget, I think of Half Nelson – because all the CGI in the world can’t get me as glued to the screen as damn fine acting with a well written script.

Sure, a lot of people know Ryan Gosling for The Notebook, but fans also remember him in The Believer (playing a Jewish Nazi….yeah, that’s not hard on the parents) and The United States of Leland. Gosling as drug addicted high school teacher, Ryan Dunn, spins between being the cool teacher you knew in high school, to being kind of a dick or just pitiful. Kind of like all of us when you think about it.

The film could just be another cautionary tales about drugs, but it lets Requiem for a Dream keep that position and focuses on the relationship between Dunn and Drey, who is also struggling to keep away from drug dealing after her brother’s sent up to jail for such a crime.

I will pretty much swear by this: there is not ONE thing wrong with this film. Camera work is personal, the music counts where it needs to, and the film’s ability to highlight the type of love and help these characters require remind us of our own frailties. You HAVE to see this movie.

Mentions:
A History of Violence/Eastern Promises
Both made by David Cronenberg and starring Viggo Mortensen. Fantastic stories about relationships and the damages of violence.

Collateral
Don’t bother with Public Enemies, just re-watch Mann’s best since Heat

Gone Baby Gone
Casey Affleck as a legit badass.

The United States of Leland
Another Gosling film with a ton of other great actors. If you liked The Perks of Being a Wallflower, you may like this coming of age film.

Jeliza-Rose

I can’t remember having thinking ‘this is amazing’ and then ‘this is really fucked-up’ so many times watching a film before. Tideland is that sort of film.

Gilliam’s not exactly my favourite director though I always try and check out his work and at times – like with Time Bandits or Brazil he can be utterly amazing. Tideland doesn’t quite match his best work though it is interesting. He apparently made it during a hiatus from the very Hollywood-sounding The Brothers Grimm which was kind of a recovery film for him (more on that later).

Tideland is a low budget small movie that I had been anticipating on the back of the reviews. I had actually been expecting something a bit different from what I had read – it’s very much Gilliam’s typical style and not the departure into areas of Lynch or Eastern European cinema-style weirdness I was expecting. It’s weird but it’s Gilliam weird.

There had been a lot of fuss about the drug scenes but for me they seemed a natural development of the world as depicted in the film and not really shocking at all compared to other parts of the film.

Tideland centres on Jeliza-Rose, a girl who inhabits the vivid fantasy life of many a child (she obsessively reads Alice In Wonderland). Unfortunately she doesn’t have a typical child’s life. She lives in anarchic squalor with two junkie parents, and she’s the most adult of the three, cooking up their fixes. This doesn’t really shock me but after recently watching The Wire and The Corner I’ve got a bit hardened to how druggie parents effect their children.

Early on her mother dies and her father, Jeff Daniels playing a more extreme version of his Dude from The Big Lebowski, takes her away to his mother’s house in the middle of the prairie – which provides plenty of opportunities for some breathtaking shots of the scenery. Unfortunately, her father soon succumbs to an OD himself and Jeliza is left alone with her dolls (well the heads at least), descending further into fantasy/madness with the dolls talking back to her. She encounters two more eccentric characters, the witch-like Dell and her brother the mentally disabled and / or brain-damaged Dickens. Jeliza’s fantasies leave her vulnerable to the real dangers these two represent. This is where the film does become uncomfortable and not a little shocking, with down-right horror elements plus the burgeoning ‘romance’ between Jeliza and Dickens.

It’s not up to Gilliam’s best but if you don’t mind being led into some uncomfortable places, Tideland has its own rewards. Not least the simply astonishing performance of Jodelle Ferland as Jeliza-Rose.

It's all gone wrong

As mentioned earlier Brothers Grimm was a recovery film for Gilliam after the disaster in trying to get his film, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, made. I’ve recently caught up with the documentary Lost in La Mancha which charts the downfall of that movie. Two documentary makers were hired to record the film-making process, presumably to end up as one of the extras of an eventual DVD. They ended up with a unique opportunity to film the implosion of the process in the creation of a major motion picture. Part of the dream was to make a film of epic scope with only European financing. Whilst a noble ambition this would leave the film-makers with a very tight budget with almost no room for manoeuvre if things went wrong. And they would soon go very wrong.

La Mancha is a great insight into the filmmaking process even before the disasters happen especially during the two months of pre-production as Gilliam goes from department to department overseeing the creation of his vision and we get a glimpse of the labyrinthine complexities of the financing.

When the filming starts then things get more entertaining… It appears the extras are unrehearsed, filming is taking place next to an air base with the almost constant noise of planes flying overhead. And to cap it all a storm of almost biblical proportions washes away a large amount of equipment and leaves the location unusable.

Then the leading man, the seventy year old Jean Rochefort, fails to turn up due to illness. Even when he makes a partial recovery it soon becomes obvious his poor health will make it impossible to film him on a horse. Yet more precious time is wasted.

Gilliam starts to look more and more distraught in his interviews, finally sitting in silence, his head in his hands. After only six days of filming the movie is shut down.

The film ends with Gilliam promising to resurrect Don Quixote out of the ashes, but this looks pretty unlikely. In the end it’s sad to see the all the props and costumes and sets plus the little footage that was shot and dream about what might have been.

Die Welt ist eine Collage.

In den seltensten Fällen ist Zetern wirklich angebracht, denn die meisten Filme, die es in Deutschland nicht ins Kino schaffen, gehören dort auch nicht unbedingt hin. Ausnahmen bestätigen die Regel, und dass wichtige Titel der letzten Jahre wie Terry Gilliams „Tideland“, Oliver Stones „W.“ oder gar John Woos „Red Cliff“ keine reguläre Auswertung auf hiesigen Leinwänden erfahren haben, belegt vor allem, wie unsicher die Verleiher hierzulande angesichts eines übermächtigen Blockbusterangebotes aus den USA geworden sind. Große Namen vor und hinter der Kamera garantieren keine Erfolge mehr, und so sind DVD-Premieren längst nicht mehr auf billig abgedrehte B-, C- und Z-Filme beschränkt. Echte Entdeckungen bleiben jedoch rar und gehen im Überangebot verloren, das Monat für Monat den Markt überflutet. Umso nachdrücklicher lohnt es sich, auf diesen mehrfach ausgezeichneten Independent-Film aufmerksam zu machen, der in vielerlei Hinsicht Neuland betritt und auf bemerkenswerte Weise die Grenzziehung zwischen klassischem Erzählkino und Videoinstallation entschärft. „Tracey Fragments“ ist Romanverfilmung und narratives Experiment gleichermaßen. Wer sich schon immer gefragt hat, ob das Kino überhaupt in der Lage ist, die literarisch längst gängige Annäherungen an den Bewusstseinsstrom mit eigenen Mitteln zu leisten, findet hier einen interessanten Antwortversuch. Regisseur Bruce McDonald und seine Cutter erfinden das Kino zwar nicht gleich neu, aber ihr Konzept gerät so modern und medial übergreifend, dass es auf der Leinwand eigentlich völlig deplaziert ist.

Wie so oft bei schwierigen Fällen hat die Vermarktung (jedenfalls auf dem hiesigen Markt) wenig mit dem eigentlichen Film zu tun. Wer eine konventionelle Geschichte oder auch nur eine leicht konsumierbare Machart erwartet, wird bereits nach wenigen Minuten wieder aussteigen. Richtig ist: „Tracey Fragments“ kreist um ein 15-jähriges Mädchen (Ellen Page) und ihr emotionales Chaos aus Angst, Wut, Schuldgefühlen und Zurückweisung. Eines Tages verschwindet ihr kleiner Bruder, der sich für einen Hund hält (Tracey hat ihn hypnotisiert), und die Situation gerät endgültig außer Kontrolle. Ein marodes Elternhaus, ein transsexueller Psychiater, Kleinkriminelle und Menschenhändler bilden das Ensemble – Erinnerungen, Träume, Fantastereien den Resonanzraum. Als Grundton, wenn man so will, auf den sich alle Fragmente beziehen, dient die Psyche der Hauptfigur, und dass dort Dissonanzen vorherrschen, versteht sich angesichts des Seelenlebens eines Teenagers von selbst. Die Erzählform ist es jedoch, von der her sich dieser Film definiert, und die mag so manchen befremden, der von falschen Erwartungen geleitet ist.

Dass die Geschichte in Fragmenten erzählt wird, die erst in der Zusammenschau einen schlüssigen Halt bekommen, ist eine Notwendigkeit des Drehbuchs. Maureen Medved, die auch den Roman verfasst hat, hält sich hier weitestgehend an ihre eigene Vorlage, ohne entscheidende Strukturänderungen vorzunehmen. Erst der eigentlich filmische Anteil wagt den Schritt über die bloße Adaption hinaus und nimmt sich offensichtlich ein ganz anderes literarisches Medium zum Vorbild. Das Bildkonzept beruht nämlich auf einem Panel-Prinzip, wie es sonst nur in Comics auftaucht, und wüsste man es nicht besser, könnte man meinen, McDonald hätte eine Graphic Novel umgesetzt (die tatsächlich aber erst im Anschluss an den Film entstand) – und das kongenialer als alles andere, was auf diesem Feld in den letzten Jahren auf die Leinwand gelangt ist.

Aber auch dieser Eindruck stimmt nur auf den ersten Blick. Während im Comic die Anordnung der Bilder zu einem Gitter eine zeitliche Folge impliziert, nutzt der Film die Aufteilung der Fläche in einzelne Einheiten zur parallelen Collagierung unterschiedlicher Wahrnehmungs-, Gefühls- oder Erinnerungsebenen. Der Gedanke dahinter ist von assoziativer Natur, denn erst die Gemeinsamkeit aller Elemente einer Fläche bildet die Einheit des jeweiligen Erzählmomentes. Mal wird eine und dieselbe Szene in mehrere Einstellungen und Perspektiven aufgelöst, mal stehen die einzelnen Panels in keiner direkten Beziehung zueinander, sondern ergänzen sich erst auf einer Meta-Ebene.

Der Vergleich mit ähnlichen Herangehensweisen und klassischem Split-Screen verdeutlicht diese Idee. In „24“ etwa ist der Echtzeiteffekt die treibende Kraft: Die Aufteilung des Bildschirms in das Nebenher gleicher Schauplätze zur selben Zeit dient ausschließlich der Spannungsdramaturgie. Ähnlich bei Brian de Palma: In „Sisters“ zum Beispiel ist es weniger die Zeit, die den Figuren im Nacken sitzt, sondern dasjenige, was gerade an einem anderen Schauplatz geschieht. De Palma nutzt die Spaltung der Leinwand für den Suspense-Effekt, bei dem der Zuschauer bekanntlich mehr weiß als die Protagonisten. Mike Figgis unterteilt in „Timecode“ die Bildfläche gar beständig in vier gleiche Panels. Hier ist es die Erzählnotwendigkeit, von der her sich die gewählte Struktur ergibt. Denn erst durch die gleichzeitige Wahrnehmung aller vier Handlungskomponenten erschließt sich die Geschichte. Weitere Beispiele lassen sich nach Belieben aufzählen.

Mit keinem dieser Ansätze hat „Tracey Fragments“ auch nur das Geringste gemein. Am nächsten ist der Film vielleicht noch Peter Greenaways an Größenwahn grenzenden Letterbox-Variationen aus „Prospero´s Books“, doch fungiert dort die Aufteilung der Bildfläche mehr als ästhetisches Referenzsystem und weniger als Ausdruck der Innenwelt einzelner Figuren. Mit seinem assoziativem Ansatz kehrt das Konzept von McDonald in gewissem Sinne zu den Wurzeln des Split-Screen zurück. Abel Gance hatte das Verfahren in seinem 1927er „Napoleon“-Monument zur Allegorisierung eingesetzt und aus Bildern mit voneinander unabhängigen Motiven synthetische Einheiten angedeutet (berühmtestes Beispiel: der Kopf des Kaisers sui generis auf dem Körper eines Adlers).

McDonald verfährt jedoch weitaus weniger plakativ, zugleich aber auch merklich unbestimmter. Viele Collagen wirken beim ersten Ansehen fast beliebig, andere hingegen bloß ästhetisierend. Erst beim wiederholten Betrachten erschließt sich die ungemeine Präzision, mit der die einzelnen Panels zu Einheiten montiert worden sind. Fast ein halbes Jahr hat die Postproduktion in Anspruch genommen, und umso kunstvoller ist das Ergebnis geraten. „Tracey Fragments“ erschließt sich im Detail, unabhängig von seiner schnell nacherzählten Geschichte, erst durch mehrfaches Wahrnehmen. Die DVD ist dazu tatsächlich das ideale Medium. Abschnitte herauszuheben und gesondert zu betrachten, zwischendurch anzuhalten und einzelne Bildkompositionen genauer zu analysieren, ja Kapitel gar neu anzuordnen, dazu lädt dieser Film geradezu ein.

Eine begleitende Aktion hat diesen Gedanken aufgegriffen und das gesamte Rohmaterial öffentlich freigegeben. Junge Filmemacher waren unter dem Titel „Tracey: Re-Fragmented“ dazu aufgerufen, ihre eigene Montageversion zu erstellen. Eine immense Herausforderung. Umso ernüchternder erscheinen die vergleichsweise konventionellen Ergebnisse, von denen drei dem Bonusmaterial der DVD beigefügt sind.

Im Grunde gehört „Tracey Fragments“ eher als Videoinstallation auf die Art Basel und weniger als geschlossene Einheit auf die Kinoleinwand. Zum wiederholten Ansehen prädestiniert, entwickelt der Film eine Sogwirkung, die sich vor allem dann einstellt, wenn man einzelne Abschnitte in Schleife laufen lässt. Erstaunlich ist dabei, wie unprätentiös er angesichts seines experimentellen Ansatzes wirkt, und wie nah man seiner Hauptfigur nicht nur trotz, sondern gerade wegen der sperrigen Erzählform kommt. Ein großer Anteil geht dabei unbestreitbar an die damals gerade einmal 20-jährige Ellen Page, die nicht nur völlig in ihrer Rolle aufgeht, sondern auch jetzt bereits in der Lage ist, das Echo früherer Filme („Hard Candy“, „Juno“, „An American Crime“) mit einzubringen und ihre Figuren auf diese Weise zusätzlich aufzuladen.

Artikel © 2009 Thomas Lenz. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.
Filmplakat: Koch Media GmbH
Fotos © Tracey Fragments Inc.

Weitere Filmkritiken | Startseite | Impressum

Diese Filmkritiken könnten Sie interessieren:

დღეს დილით გაღვიძებისას სასიამოვნო ჟრუანტელმა დამიარა ტანში. მთელი დღე სახლში უნდა ვყოფილიყავი, რაც იმას ნიშნავდა, რომ რამდენი ხანიც მსურდა იმდენს დავიძინებდი. დავიმუხტე თუ არა საყვარელ საქმის კეთება გადავწყვიტე, ანუ ფილმის ყურება და თან ჭამა.  არც ისე ბევრი ფიქრის შემდეგ გადავწყვიტე ტერი გილიამის ფილმი Tideland მენახა. საერთოდ გილიამი მომწონს ძალიან, აქვს ის თვისება რომელსაც რეჟისორში ყველაზე მეტად ვაფასებ. ატმოსფეროს შექმნა შეუძლია ისეთის რომელიც ნებისმიერს მიიზიდავს და ჩაითრევს ფილმში. მისი პირქუში, სურეალისტური, ან სულაც ფუტურისტული ფილმების დიდი თაყვანისმცემელი ვარ. Monty Python-ის ფილმები კი ერთ-ერთი საუკეთესო კომედიების სერიაა ჩემი აზრით. Tideland ნანახი არ მქონდა.

მეზარებოდა რატომღაც, თან მეგობრების 90%-ს უარყოფითი შეფასება ჰქონდა მიცემული ფილმისთვის. ყველაფრის მიუხედავად ფილმი მაინც ვნახე და ვინანე კიდევაც. ძალიან სუსტი ნამუშევარია, არა ამას სუსტი არ ჰქვია, ეს უბრალოდ სირობაა. საერთოდ არაფერი არ ხდება ფილმში, ძალიან მძიმე საყურბელია და ტერი გილიამისთვის გაცვეთილი მომენტებია ნამუშევარიში. ისეთი კადრები რომლებიც ამ რეჟისორის სხვა ფილმებში უკვე მინახავს. არცერთი გმირი არ მომეწონა, მაგარი მეკიდა ვის რა მოუვიდოდა და საერთოდ ბოლომდე რატომ ვუყურე ვერ ვხვდები. რომ არა Fisher King გილიამს შევაგინებდი კიდევაც, მაგრამ ამ ფილმის რეჟისორობა მას უხილავ დაცვას სძენს, რომლის გამოც ენა არ მიბრუნდება შევაგინო გილიამს.

ყველაზე ცუდი ის არის, რომ ტერი გილიამის მიერ ჩემი ხასიათის მიფურთხებას მანჩესტერმა ზედ დაუმატა ამაზრზენი თამაში. ფეხბურთის დიდი გულშემატკივარი არ ვარ(უფრო ამერიკულ სპორტის სახეობებს ვწყალობ), მაგრამ დღეს მაინც ძალიან მინდოდა “ეშმაკების” მოგება. ეჰჰ არ გამიმართლა აქაც. იხმარეს ფერგიოსონის ბიჭები და საბოლოოდ დამიკარგეს ყველაფრის ხალისი .გილიამის გადაღებული ფილმს ჰგავდა მანჩესტერის თამაში, არანაირი ემოცია არ იყო ფეხბურთელების თამაშში და არანაირი სურვილი მიეღწიათ რამისთვის.

წავალ ეხლა ჩავრთავ Fisher King-ს. გილიამს ისევ თავიდან შევიყვარებ და ჩემს თავსაც ცხოვრების ხალისს დავუბრუნებ.

©ნიკა ესებუა(Leonard Shelby/Leito)

To call Ink a fairytale would be huge diservice to the film. The movie goes beyond the standard and over simplified evil versus good plot in way that keeps us mesmerized, mystified, and slightly creeped out. The Brothers Grimm would have approved.

Visually stunning, the story reminded me at times of  Terry Gilliam’s Tideland and Jan Svankmajer’s Alice (they too, have little girls who stumble into a wondrous kind of universe). Ink has a palpable delight that the previous films lack, and with an underground Gaimanesque Neverwhere feel to it,  makes it a truly remarkable film.

Written and directed by Jamin Winans, the creator of the short Spin, and produced by Kiowa Winans Ink is the story of a little girl, Emma, lost in a dreamscape. I’m hesitant to say more for fear of giving away too much of the plot, which plays off a Lynchian-like disjointedness. There are monsters of course, starting with Ink, a broken spirit dressed in rags who steals the Emma from her waking world. The Incubi, with their grotesque smiles, haunt our nightmares and seem to rule Ink’s most troubled desires.

Chris Kelly plays well the character of John, Emma’s father. He anchors us in the reality and paranoia of present day culture. In opposition to him is a blind man named Jacob (played by Jeremy Make). With his eyes taped shut, he is forever doomed to walk to the rhythm of both reality and dreams, knows the paths of the unspeakable and has the choice to “stop the flow” when needed. Liev (Jessica Duffy) is the storyteller, a Beatrice-like character who I didn’t quite empathize with until the haircut scene, and then I loved her.

Most of all, though, I enjoyed Quinn Hunchar’s portrayal of Emma. The first scene where she is playing with her father and begging him to rescue her from the pretend monster, I wasn’t sure if there might have been something  invisible there, tugging at her shirt. Then again, this movie is all about the seen and unseen–the haunting, cadenced movement between those worlds.

This is an ambitious first feature-length film, accomplishing an original and fresh visual narrative. The audience will forgive where it falls short, at times, in the dialogue.  It’s action packed enough to keep us invested and imaginitive to the point of really creating something….new. And in a tired world of information overload and disappearing time, isn’t that what we need right about now? To stop the flow, and remember the redemptive power of wonder.

PS: Ink is playing at STARZ Filmcenter in Denver until April 30th, so you still have a chance to buy tickets.

Así están las cosas. Seis meses lleva a la venta la película, y aún no tiene distribuidor. Los contactos que la productora Davis Films ha establecido con diferentes empresas, han dado resultados negativos, y parece que nadie quiere arriesgar por el trabajo de un Gilliam, que últimamente da la impresión que tan sólo rueda para recrearse él mismo con sus películas.

De momento, cuatro países europeos parecen atreverse a estrenarla (entre ellos, Francia y Bélgica), y esto será a partir de septiembre de este año. Pero para una película que ha costado 23 millones de nuestros euros, con poca salida cuenta para recuperarlos.

Pudiera parecer leída al pronto la noticia, una estrategia de taquilla para potenciar el interés, sobre todo, de los seguidores del malogrado Heath Ledger (muchos y muy fieles), y tendríamos que tener nuestras reservas, porque crear morbo alrededor del último trabajo del actor, en este momento es muy fácil. Pero, por otro lado, si yo tuviera una empresa distribuidora, también tendría mis reservas a la hora de comprar el trabajo de Gilliam, visto el estrepitoso fracaso en 2005 de su película “Tideland”.

El caso es que también nos ha ofrecido títulos interesantes lejos del grupo Monty Python (del que formó parte hasta que se disolvió), como “Los héroes del tiempo”, “Brazil” (tuve que verla una segunda vez para convencerme de que me había gustado), o “12 monos”, pero entremezcladas con irritantes films, como “Las aventuras del Baron Munchausen”.

Gilliam, después de la muerte de Ledger, tuvo que rescribir el guión de “The imaginarium of doctor Parnassus” para ajustar las escenas ya rodadas por el actor, a la película. En ese nuevo guión, el personaje del onírico Tony, sufre una serie de transformaciones físicas, lo que permite que su papel sea interpretado por Johnny Depp, Jude Law y Colin Farell, nombres también atractivos.

Sea o no, estrategia, casi podemos estar seguros de que finalmente se exhibirá en las pantallas USA, y también en las españolas. Entonces decidiremos si nos atrevemos a sumergirnos en el cada vez más desbaratado mundo de Terry Gilliam.

-

Fuente de la noticia: THR

-

Swanson 

Hoy, película interesante. “Tideland” (2007), de Terry Gilliam.

Tideland es luciérnagas en coches abandonados junto a la vía del tren; niños que preparan chutas a sus padres; Jutlandia, Munchausen, el hombre del pantano y Alicia En El País De Las Maravillas; sombras de monstruos proyectadas contra la pared, muerte en la cama, chocolatinas robadas; radios que no funcionan, viajes a ninguna parte; puestas de sol sin la abuela, maletas de colores; amigos imaginarios; Jeliza-Rose, Mustique, Satien Lips, Baby Blonde, Glitter Gal; ardillas en recovecos; fantasmas inoportunos, soledades repentinas y visitas inesperadas; BSOs inapropiadas; espiritismo travestido; ojos muertos y abejas; conejos en madrigueras; esquizofrenia aguda; pieles de goma, estómagos hinchados y moscas; soluciones radicales; Lisa, el submarino, las mandíbulas del tiburón, cebos (piedras y arpones no sirven); otro sueño; mercancías pagadas, secretos malinterpretados e inocencias perdidas; mermelada que se termina; una peluca; perros malos; cabezas, labios y piedras; olor a desinfectante, gorros de baño, el despertar del sueño; bendiciones en casas blancas, siestas con momia; amor mal entendido con niños pequeños; el final del mundo; cositas; chicas que no besan a otras chicas; ardillas parlanchinas; la cueva de la bruja, delfines de plástico; situaciones que incomodan al espectador, caos, Mustique otra vez, el baile de Ian; bendita inocencia; el ruido, la furia, redención y alguna que otra sesión de buceo en los campos de trigo.

Los hijos no deberían ser padres.

P.D.: perdón por el spoiler.

——————————————————————

En otro orden de cosas, tal vez tengas razón. Tal vez cada vez haya menos chicha aquí debajo y más ahí arriba

Lo consideraremos una vuelta a los orígenes.

Número de familiares en el extranjero: 1. ¿90 dólares en vino?.

My movies arrived today! Two weeks early!  They came all the way from that strange land across the ocean, specifically from Munster, Indiana and are formated in such a way that allows me to actually watch them on my computer! Hurray!  They are, of course, the films that I’m going to write about for my film and novel course: The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and Tideland.  Both are ‘collector’s editions’ so they have all sorts of helpful commentary and extra stuff with which to fluff up my essay, which much be loooong.  I’m psyched.

However, much as I would love to take this Monday and ‘work on my paper’, I have a whole list of things that I need to do.  I just finished cleaning the kitchen, which was my chore for this week.  And now I  must mosy up to Potsdamer Platz to get a library card from the Staatsbibliothek (the Staa-bi) because they have a TON of books (including a book on Terry Gilliam, of all things) and you’re actually allowed to ausleihen there and bring the books home with you… it is, as we would say, a lending library (as opposed to the prison library where books are deemed too dangerous to be let out -which reminds me of ‘Twelve Monkeys’ where Brad Pitt’s character is giving the tour of the insane asylum, “Games, here are games,”  points to games that are behind a locked grate, “…games that want to get out”…ha) ANYWAY.  Yes, to the library today, though these sorts of things always make me nervous because they involve a fair bit of German and also talking to someone who usually has a permanent frown on their face.  But well, so goes it.  I am ALSO going to finally send some postcards that I’ve been meaning to send for, oh, I don’t know, maybe four months.  Ouch.

And, I cannot believe I didn’t mention this yesterday but… IT’S FEBRUARY?  Yes indeedy.  How did that happen?  It’s almost spring here, for god’s sake.

TIDELAND สาวน้อยหลุด มิติมหัศจรรย์
เนื่องจาก ได้รับ E-mail จาก wordpress.com
ว่าเนื้อหาที่จัดทำนั้นมีผลทางด้าน ลิขสิทธิ์ จึงได้ปรับเปลี่ยน โดยจะไม่โพส link ดูหนังลงที่ Blog thai2entertainment.wordpress.com
แต่ลงไว้ที่ Blog สำรองแทน แล้วจะดำเนินการย้าย หนังทั้งหมดไปที่ Blog สำรองเทน ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก  Blog สำรองครับ กด……..

- Tideland, il mondo capovolto – 2005 -♥♥♥♥-

di

Terry Gilliam

Ho visto questo film in un atmosfera assolutamente insolita per la visione di un film. In un laboratorio orafo, con delle cuffie alle orecchie e su un obsoleto pc portatile. E devo dire che forse anche il mio personale “cinema” di proiezione di Tideland ha influito positivamente in maniera surreale nel gustarmelo. Tideland è una favola nera che somiglia più a un quadro di Dalì che a una scenografia cinematografica. Narra del “mondo capovolto” della piccola Jeliza-Rose (interpretata da una spontaneissima Jodelle Ferland) che dopo l’improvvisa morte della madre parte con il padre tossico per il luogo dove proprio il padre aveva passato la propria gioventù e proprio in quel luogo finisce per incontrare personaggi cosi bizzarri che sembrano appunto usciti da una favola. Lo stesso Terry Gilliam prima dell’inizio del film ce lo introduce con alcune parole rivelandoci che questo film è un vero e proprio viaggio che deve però esser visto con gli occhi di un bambino per essere veramente compreso. Certo di un bambino vittima di un’infanzia in qualche modo violata e non di un bambino che cresce sotto il solo influsso di Mickey Mouse o di Walt Disney. Ed ecco che la piccola Jeliza-Rose ci porta per mano nel suo mondo fatto di bambole-solo testa, di amici problematici che si credono essere cacciatori di squali che in realtà sono treni, di imbalsamatrici e di necrofili. Ho trovato la favola di Gilliam una sua personalissima rivisitazione in chiave gotica della ben più nota Alice nel paese delle meraviglie e un film ben curato con un ottima regia. Vedetelo se decidete di lasciare da parte il vostro buonismo critico per tuffarvi in un mondo surreale che potrebbe talvolta farvi sorridere , talvolta schifarvi o talvolta scioccarvi. Insomma in poche parole se volete guardare Tideland lasciate a casa i Taboo, e allora il mondo di Jeliza-Rose riuscirà a sorprendervi.

(Jeliza-Rose e la sua migliore amica Miss.Take o Mistake)


(Attenzione perchè il cacciatore di squali ha un segreto)

The title (above) comes from the William Blake lines I quoted in the previous posting. Here they are once more:

“I give you the end of a golden string

Only wind it into a ball:

It will lead you in at Heaven’s gate,

Built in Jerusalem’s wall.”

He’s talking about the imagination.

I saw some fairly good films over the holidays:

Charlie Wilson’s War was better than I’d expected, as was The Spiderwick Chronicles. I really enjoyed Hairspray — anything involving Christopher Walken is worth watching. I didn’t care for The Prestige. But the movie I want to talk about that really impressed me is one that I’m guessing a lot of people missed — which is partly why I want to talk about it:

Tideland (2005) was directed by Terry Gilliam, and it was written by Gilliam and Tony Grisoni. It’s based on a novel by Mitch Cullin.

I have no intention of giving away the plot here, but one reviewer referred to it as a gothic Alice in Wonderland (and in fact, in the opening moments, we hear the lilting voice of a young girl reading from Alice in Wonderland in a Texas accent — there are all sorts of deliberate, conscious references to Alice in this story).

Another reviewer described Tideland as “a poetic horror film,” and I think that’s accurate. Warning: although it has a child protagonist, the film deals with extremely dark subject matter and adult themes, so don’t go gathering your kids and popping Tideland into the DVD player to watch with them. Unless you have some pretty sophisticated kids.

What I like so much about the movie (aside from the haunting musical score, the skillful use of the stark, rural Texas landscape, and the brilliant writing, direction, and acting) is that it’s essentially a story about the imagination — particularly childhood’s imagination. It’s a fascinating study of how a child’s imagining transforms the grim circumstances she’s in, and how it makes them — at least for a short while — not only bearable, but eerily beautiful.

As we watch the film, we worry about the main character, Jeliza-Rose (who, I understand, is 11 in the novel, and the actress playing her was born in 1994, so was about 10 or 11 when the film was made — though I had the impression while I was watching it that she was several years younger than that). We are terrified for her — we hold our breath as she innocently makes her way through the unthinkable situation life has thrust upon her, as she interprets reality in her own way.

But at the same time, we can’t help but be drawn into Jeliza-Rose’s world; we can’t help but recognize its haunting, aching, restless, nostalgic, wistful beauty. Though most of us had childhoods a lot tamer and safer than hers, the filmmakers manage to capture something intrinsic to all childhoods, something universal about being eleven.

If you’re not too squeamish, and if you have a stout spirit, I recommend Tideland. It’s one of those films that leaves you not quite the same as you were (in a good way). It makes your canopy of experience a little richer — and may deepen your understanding of the role of imagination in helping us along on life’s journey.

Nor does imagination necessarily involve a complete break with reality. Although Jeliza-Rose is the most imaginative character in the story, she is also the most clear-headed and sensible: in an early scene, she prevents her father from burning down their apartment building.

Anyway, I think we can expect great things of Canadian-born Jodelle Ferland, who plays Jeliza-Rose.

Follow the golden string! Keep winding it into a ball! And thank Heaven for the capacity to build worlds of our own choosing — and for the child that is still, on good days, within us all.

El blog “Pasión por el Cine” ha solicitado la opinión de diferentes cineastas, críticos y actores respecto a las películas estrenadas en 2008. Entre otros, han contestado Nacho Cerdá,  Jordi Costa, Sebastián D’Arbó, Jesús Palacios, Debbie Rochon, Eduardo Rodríguez Merchán, Luis M. Rosales, Manuel Tallafé, Enrique Villén…

Ésta es la respuesta de Carlos Atanes:

“La visita más feliz de este año a una sala de cine fue la que experimenté gozando de Habrá Sangre, conocida en España por el ingrato título de Pozos de ambición (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007). No pude al verla ni ahora al rememorarla dejar de emparentarla con mi favorita del año pasado (amén de Tideland) El asesinato de Jesse James por el cobarde Robert Ford.

El motivo para emparentarlas no es único sino diverso: describen escenarios cercanos entre sí, paisajes estadounidenses de comienzos del S. XX y finales del XIX, el tiempo en el que personajes con la piel muy dura y las suelas muy gastadas, cabalgando a despecho de la inexorable ola civilizatoria sobrevivían o medraban en los postreros días de un limbo de alegalidad, forjando a base de tiros y martillazos los que serían los mitos fundacionales del inminente imperio cultural y económico americano.

Comparten también, la de Anderson y la de Andrew Dominik, interpretaciones actorales soberbias, bandas sonoras de pasmo (de Johnny Greenwood la primera, colocada siempre a “contrapelo” en el montaje, de Nick Cave y Warren Ellis la segunda), una violencia patética, descarnada e hiperrealista, unos escenarios casi táctiles, y secuencias antológicas dignas de ser colocadas en el Louvre bajo las alas de la Victoria de Samotracia: el incendio del pozo en la primera y la última media hora de la segunda, por desgajar sólo dos ejemplos. Pero comparten sobre todo una sabiduría cinematográfica que me retrotrae a los tiempos de los grandes directores clásicos, de Ford, Hawks y Huston, y también de Kubrick, de una sobriedad y una poesía muy raras hoy en día, asentada sobre unos guiones de hierro que trituran hasta el hueso y pulverizan esa frivolidad de los principios divulgados y aceptados hasta la náusea de la estructura formal de guión “correcto”. Esto las convierte en obras de un clasicismo marmóreo dotadas al mismo tiempo de una potencia innovadora inédita en nuestros días (precisamente como los clásicos de antaño en los suyos), perturbadora y no apta para espectadores estresados. Y todo esto me reconcilia (si es que alguna vez me irreconcilié) con el cine americano, que demuestra una vez más no sólo su superioridad incontestable en la fabricación de productos convencionales, que para eso dispone de una industria engrasada y un viejo quehacer artesanal fuera de toda duda, sino que puede permitirse el lujo, y se lo permite cuando le viene en gana, de saltarse sus propias lecciones (tan reverenciadas y mal imitadas por sus alumnos), para dar saltos mortales y sublimes en una vanguardia que dábamos por muerta y sepultada. La originalidad aún es posible, y a lo grande.

Diría lo mismo, y más, de Tideland, pero la vi el año pasado, se me ha pedido que hablase de una película y si me descuido acabo hablando de tres”.

Lee el resto de opiniones en Pasión por el Cine.