Cool News
Deth reports in on Terry Gilliam's THE MAN WHO KILLED DON QUIXOTE and Gaiman's GOOD OMENS
Alrighty film fans, I've been hearing the good news that Gilliam's DON QUIXOTE is not following in the footsteps of Welles'. This one is gonna be made. Then on GOOD OMENS... Gilliam and Gaiman working together is... a divine combination brought forth by the Gods that El Cosmico talks with under the influence of strange cacti-ingestion. Here's Deth...
Hi Harry,
DETH here.
Just a quickie for Terry Gilliam fans.
The oft delayed THE MAN WHO KILLED DON QUIXOTE now looks like it is back on
the rails with money from Pathe in France. Gilliam has co-written the script
with Tony Grisoni who worked with him on FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS.
Can’t give too much detail on the story aside from saying it is very
Pythonesque and covers a lot of ground previously seen in other Gilliam
movies (madness, Knights, time travel, lavish visuals, etc.). Johnny Depp is
attached to star as Sancho Panza. The film could go ahead as soon as next
spring.
Gilliam and Grisoni are also attached to the adaptation of Terry Pratchett
and Neil Gaiman’s hugely popular novel GOOD OMENS which is being developed by
Samuelson’s and Renaissance in London. It is very early days on this but the
project has huge potential.
Hope this is useful.
DETH.
-
+ Expand All
-
..How about a little info on what the project is about to get us excited over? Or maybe I'm just the only one in the dark about this one....
-
Everyone's too busy on the Spiderman board ejaculating their desires for their own personal dream cast to have anything really useful and CONSTRUCTIVE to say anywhere else.
-
With all the reports on comic book-based projects in the works, it got me thinking of what could still be one of the most fascinating: Watchmen, of course.
The last thing I heard from Gilliam on this, in June, was that he thought they should just make it as a mini-series. A good idea, since a two-hour film would hardly scratch the surface. Maybe a pay channel or the BBC could broadcast it, keep it from getting cleaned up by the N. American networks. Anyone unfamiliar with Watchmen, a 12-issue comic book series from '87, would be doing themselves a tremendous favor by checking it out. The art's a little stiff, but the writing is brilliant. BTW,
anyone remember those rumors from about 10-11 years ago, of Arnold Schwarzenegger as Dr. Manhattan?LOL. The more things change... -
Dec 02, 1999 3:09:16 AM CST
kkrankk says: Read GOOD OMENS if you haven't already. It's funny
by kkrankk
and has angels, demons, nuns, devil worshippers, the Anti-Christ, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, Armageddon and lots of other stuff that make up contemporary England.
-
I've never been that impressed by the other attempts to film some of Terry Pratchetts works.
The books are so full of humour that cutting it down for film makes it look like just like the films that they parody.
I hope that they have a really good script with good backing on this one. It's a really funny book, and deserves the best treatment it can get. -
1) With the exception of The Fisher King (sentimental crap), all Gilliam's films so far have been great. 2) However, his last two films, 12 Monkeys and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, were a refreshing move away from outright Monty Python antics (animation brought to life). This isn't to say that a new movie in the old-fashioned fantasy vein can't be brilliant (and if Johnny Depp's in it it will be), but it is to say that it won't be a forward step for Gilliam creatively. 3) Watchmen shouldn't be made, not even as a mini-series. The comic book is that rare thing, so perfect it can't be translated into any other medium. Its realism and detail already resemble the material world in such a tangible way that a film or TV series would turn it back into fantasy and the point would be lost. 4) The subtext of Watchmen is anti-nuclear, based on the cold war hysteria of the 1980s. That aspect would translate awkwardly into a modern adaptation (even given the millennial angst of our times).
-
I just hope that this production will be better than the grotesque mess that was Fear & Loathing! I mean I've seen bad films, I watched The Postman, I own Batman & Robin, I sat through Deep Blue Sea and painstakingly forced myself through The Haunting BUT Fear & Loathing was the most annoying, Self indulgent, travesty of a film I have ever seen. I just hope that if Depp and Gilliam work together again that this time they don't make a cinematic monster. Gilliam should be forced to watch Fear & Loathing over and over until he apologises to the world then he should be forced by law to cast Paulie Shore in the lead of all future films he does.
-
This is very good news. I don't know anything about Don Quixote, other than that the name sounds familiar from somewhere, but if Gilliam is making it then I am there. As for Good Omens - BINGO! Wonderful. I don't know who would be better. Over at Corona Coming Attractions, they summarised Good Omens as "Monty Python's The Omen", which is a damn good description of the book, and shows how much we need a Python like Gilliam. But what is going on with The Defective Detective? Still in development hell? ***** www.homestead.com/vertigofilms/
-
A friend of mine has read the Don Quixote script and says it's great. Fear and Loathing is a classic and completely captures the experience of the book. Depps take on Hunter S Thompson is brilliant, as is Benicios's Attorney. Waiting in anticipation for the next Gilliam film.
-
I love Python, Gilliam, etc. He seems to be the only one of the remaining Python's who has any talent left.
For those in the US (oh, that's everyone d'oh) you won't have seen Cleese in a series of cringeworthily bad supermarket adverts. Another example of aging stars succumbing to total trash to pump up their failing egos and expanding waistlines. -
The Watchmen must never be touched. At least one great work should remain sacred in Hollywoods eternal scramble for more materal...
-
Hey, Dirtfish: The enemy is within. Good Omens will translate well to the screen, but the Gilliam/Gaiman dream project for me would be Sandman. Imagine that! But I could never curse any member of Monty Python for their current status, especially John Cleese, who was always my favorite. I wonder what Graham Chapman's last thoughts were...
-
While I hate the love affair with New York portrayed in this film(worse than a Woody Allen flick!), any film with a cameo by Tom Waits is worth watching. We did this film for a play in high school, and I was forced to be the Red Knight, since I designed the costume and was the tallest person in the class. It was a lot of fun, but I looked like a red stick insect. Sigh... These are the hands I've been given. I also can't stand Mercedes Ruehl, Amanda Plummer or Robin (look at me! I'm ALIVE!!!) Williams, but they are all superb in this film. It may be sentementalist, but I suppose I am too, gosh darn it!
-
This has to be a joke. Last I checked, Depp was neither short nor fat.
-
Every single time the name Johnny Depp comes up in a review or in the news, the name Dirtfish pops up to slam him in the Talk Back. I once again feel compelled to open my big fucking mouth to say Shut Up! What is wrong with you? F&L was a great trip into the gonzo and Depp and Del Toro were fantastic. Especially Depp who captured Hunter to the tee. If you own Batman and Robin you are obviously disturbed and in need of some help. You saw the Haunting which is another wonderful piece of shit that should not have made a dime, but somehow went on to damage some $70 million worth of brain cells. Why do you continue to slam Depp and always write his name in the same sentence as Norton's? I agree that Norton is fantastic, however I am a bigger fan of Depp's work. He could have done any of the roles that Norton did and been great, Norton, on the other hand would not have been right as Thompson, Edward Scissorhands, Don Juan, need I continue? Depp is able to play anything from the ordinary (Nick of Time), to the otherworldly (Edward Scissorhands). So please refrain from your ignorant blabber and go watch the horrors of the banality that is Deep Blue Sea. Have fun! Don't dare to indulge in anything that may actually be innovative or interesting. You really piss me off man, and now I must leave you.
-
I was often a supporter of Gilliam's tackling WATCHMEN, but the more I think about it, the happier I am he didn't get it made. As Tom Stoppard would be the first to tell you, Terry isn't really interested in narrative, and every one of his films bear that out (which is why, IMO, THE FISHER KING and 12 MONKEYS, both penned by disciplined storytellers, never quite come together.) Gilliam is right, however, that THE WATCHMEN would be better suited to mini-series length; although, I haven't a clue as to what network would dare touch it. Being that it's my favorite comic (nay, *graphic novel*) of all time, I took a crack at writing a treatment a while back. Then, the cold war ended, and it was suddenly irrelevant. And so, I believe, THE WATCHMEN shall remain in its original medium; untouched and forever brilliant.
-
Gilliam is the ideal director for this project. If anyone can make a halfway watchable adaptation of that boring piece of crap, it's him.
-
But I just could not for the life of me get into it. I just kind of sat there, watching the TV screen as these images flashed by. I don't know...it was just too weird for me and too fast and jumbled for me to try and get through it. I've never read the book, so maybe if I did I would understand it, but I've read stuff about Hunter S. Thompson, and from what I read I'm probably never going to read his book(s) in my lifetime or willingly sit down and try to get through F&L again.
-
Agent Cole: Kubrick and Lynch are right alongside Gilliam in my favorite directors club. I think their styles complement each other, along with David Cronenberg, the Coen Brothers, Ridley Scott, Luc Besson, Tim Burton & Jeunet & Carot(sp?). Watching films by these giants of fantasy is like watching a childhood backyard paradise in motion. Anything that bends reality or throws it out the window is mother's milk to me. Mmmmm... milk!
-
...anything involving Charleton Heston! When society finally crumbles, who do you think will lead us into a new Golden Age? That's right: Bright Eyes! Give 'em Hell, Chuck!
-
Even though I'm a huge Terry Gilliam fan, for Quixote I am more eager for the Brizzi Brothers' version. Doesn't anyone out there have any artwork from this? It's the coolest thing Disney is doing by far. It would be so awesome to have all three of them team up and have Gilliam direct live action and the Brizzis do the animation! Too much coolness for one movie. Is the Gilliam film being produced by Chuck Roven's Atlas? (they did 12 Monkeys) Anybody know? Anybody know if the script is anywhere online??
-
Gilliam must have been attached to more cool dead-letter projects than any director in history. I hope he can make a picture perfect movie out of at least one of these great projects. Somebody once said that when Terry makes a flick, it's war. Always a struggle, always controversy with the studios, always conflict with the suits. But he dreams big and drinks from a fire-hose and all that so god bless him. But, FEAR & LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS is a good example of how, despite inspired lunacy and great active, visual excess and nihilism do not a story make. I read the book when I was in Jr. High and for some reason thought it was cool - more so, that Hunter S. Thompsen can be a good, observant, funny writer - but whatever - my brain hurts from all the drugs the baby boomers took. F&LiLV, like BREAKFAST OF CHAMPIONS, EVEN COWGIRLS GET THE BLUES, NAKED LUNCH, CRASH are all interesting books from the freak-flag generation, but became travesties of boredom on the screen. Like Sam Fuller always said about what makes a good flick, "it's the story dammit!"
-
even though most of his films have their flaws, let's just be glad that there's someone out there still screwing with convention & expectation, as well as visual style. But most importantly, his films have heart. I doubt anyone cried during 12 Monkeys, but there was a heartbreaking romantic angle that he pursued and worked perfectly into the sci-fi structure a la Philip K. Dick. Scorsese is another filmmaker whose films' flaws are often magnified because of the expectations we place on anything he does. But I'd rather these guys aim so high everytime and fall a little short than never try at all like the rest of the hacks in Hollywood. A quick note: The reason I don't enjoy Lynch as much as the 2 previously mentioned is that I struggle to find the heart in his films (The Straight Story and Elephant Man excepted). The masturbatory moebius strip fantasies of Lost Highway would have been palatable if there were any semblance of heart or personal relevance. On a final note, WATCHMEN will always be relevant until the people of this country rise up and take down our thinly-velied totalitarian government. Just because Reagan isn't president anymore doesn't mean we don't live in fear. Don't let blowhards touting the fat stock market lull you into a false sense of security. I think a 2 hr. 45 min (3 hours would never get the go-ahead from the studio) is enough to cover most of the sub-plots. The running commentary of the kid reading the comic book wouldn't fit in anyway, and that removes a large chunk. The film must be made only so that Burt Reynolds can pump up his muscles and finally win a best supporting actor Oscar for the role he was born to play, The Comedian. Have a cigar!
-
The majority of Lynch's films are all about heart! I understand Lazarus's finding it lacking in "Lost Highway," but the remainder of his films certainly feature love and a map of the human heart as major themes [Guys, one of the titles of his films is "Wild at HEART"]. The difference is, and in this point I agree with Agent Cole, he doesn't diminish the hearts capacity for both good and evil. "Blue Velvet" is largely a love story, albeit a love story that recognizes the limitations placed on mankind by our innate violent tendencies, our psychology, and our oft times conflicting desires. He recognizes that the human heart has the capacity for unconditional love but he does not deny the other factors of our make-up that continuously prevent it coming to fruition [as opposed to Cameron's limited vision in "Titanic" where external forces BEYOND the control of the individual affect the character's love]. Put perhaps more succintly, he outright refuses to over glorify, over sentimentalize or over simplify emotion [which directors like Spielberg, Cameron, and a lot of the other Hacks fan-boys worship as gods insist on doing]; love for Lynch is the real-life love that all of us can hope to experience: powerful, complicated, liberating, confining, hurtful or even deadly, etc. On another note: What's the deal with "living in fear under Reagan?" What's that even supposed to mean; living in fear under lower taxes, booming economy, smaller governement, and the collapse of communism doesn't really make much sense to me?!!? I agree with AgentCole, we should be living in fear with Clinton at the reigns; I wouldn't trust the man to clean my toilets...
-
ok, you are wrong about reagan. Reagan practically invented the budget deficet by asking for more money on his budget reports than what the Democrat Congress would allocate. I Forget what year, but the Democratic Congree submitted a budget of something like 512 Billion, and the budget was returned by Reagan, increased by exactly nine billion dollars. You can argue about who led to the fall of communism, but it is clear that Reagan led the country into unparalleled debt , and increased the seperation between the poorest 20% and the richest 20%. Supply Side economics failed, unequivalently, and Terry Gilliam has a unique vision that i like. Especially the anti-authoritarian bent to many of his movies.
-
The "lady in the radiator" is the heart of Eraserhead! As for "Lost Highway," that is a valid instance where heart is present in the film, but I don't think heart plays as promintent a role as is usual. I agree with Lazarus in that the notion of reality as a Moebius Strip is at the heart of the film so to speak!
-
"I don't believe in God, but I'm afraid of him." Y'all aren't afraid of Reagan, but then again, you didn't live in a Latin American country during his regime, when his foreign policy had the CIA traipsing around the world stopping those bad revolutions that were, you know, supported by the populace and democratic and stuff. If you were a dissident of oppressive thrid-world governments, you'd fear Reagan, because he'd have the CIA string you up by your thumbs.
-
An adaptation is a seperate thing from it's source material. Whether a movie's lousy or not, the book or comic series it's based on remains what it is. A shoe-horned, or otherwise, adaptation of Watchmen would serve to highlight the brilliance of it's original incarnation and gain it many more readers.
The subtext of the subtext of Cold War paranoia is strife, fear of apocalypse, which seems closer to what Watchmen is essentially, even pretty overtly, about--that and man's attempts at dealing with this. These themes are pretty timeless. This, and the fact that it takes place in the late 80's of an alternate universe makes any seeming irrelevance irrelevant.
I agree with you guys that Watchmen has already found it's perfect medium, but I'd find a well-done adaptation endlessly fascinating.
-
Terry Gilliam and Stanley Kubrick are my two favorite directors (followed by Woo and Tarantino, to give you some idea about my eclectic tastes). I personally think that "Brazil", "12 Monkeys", "2001", and "A Clockwork Orange" are some of the most brilliant and disturbing movies ever made. I liked "Fear and Loathing.." but it was only made for fans of the book...and if you didn't like the book, you weren't going to like the film. It is one of the best screen adaptation of a book (that remained faithful to the original material, unlike "Blade Runner" or "Apocalypse Now") that I've seen. That doesn't many anyone else is going to enjoy it though. But it was demented genius. And who the fuck is responsible for talking about Reaganomics?! Get thee hence, Satan! Also, what is the plot of "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote"? From the title, it doesn't sound exactly like they're doing an adaptation of Cervantes book (just like "The Fisher King" wasn't actually the legend of the Fisher King). It sounds like they're doing something completely different. However, whatever they're doing, the character of Don Quixote seems right up Gilliam's alley; twisted, demented, out of touch with reality, and yet, gleefully happy. Come to think of it, Sam Lowry from "Brazil" is very definitely a Don Quixote figure. I'm looking forward to this getting made...and let's not start looking for actors until we know what the plot is. If we geeks had our way, Depp, Norton, Gilliam, Fincher, Walken, Ray Park, etc, would be doing every movie on the market. -Loki
-
What you said about Reagan is emphatically untrue; a pure creation of the liberal media's attempt to demonize one of this century's greatest Presidents. It is true that the budget deficit did grow early on in the Reagan years, but it shrunk equally as much during the end of his two terms. Reagon intentionally grew the deficit when he drastically cut taxes in order to stimultate the economy. All of which worked brilliantly and started the largest trend of economic growth in this country's history thereby decreasing the deficit by having a larger pool of capital to collect taxes on. Supply side economics did in fact work, and still does work. The fact is we are still riding that trend to this day; and the economy has never ceased to grow since Reagan has been at the helm. Thanks to the accursed liberal media, Clinton gets all the credit for the 90's economic boom, when it actually began in the early eighties under a far better, far more gifted leader!
-
Dec 02, 1999 4:37:07 PM CST
WILL YOU POLITICAL A-HOLES GET THE HELL OFF OF THIS MOVIE TALKBA
by loki trickster
Please.
-
There was no political subtext present in Tony Danza's GOIN' APE. None whatsoever.
-
If you don't want to be called an asshole, agentcole, don't act like one. You guys were talking strictly politics up there, and this ain't a political forum.
-
If Good Omens does good maybe it will FINALLY draw some attention to Pratchett in America. It's about time that brilliant man got more credit. Maybe we can finally get some of those older Discworld books back in print.
-
FUCK OFF! Obviously there are a few people who are participating in the discussion since it doesn't seem to be one lone madman posting obscure messages by himself, so I have a brilliant idea -- JUST DON'T FUCKING READ THE POSTS! Wow, that's a difficult idea. It's assholes like you who create fucking concept of censorship...
-
NUCLEAR WAR a "sub-text" in WATCHMEN? NO. It is superexposed. It ain't a sub-text. It is is an expositively developed element of the story. WATCHMEN can be done at any age. It isn't about COLD WAR. It is about CONTROL. Or better: the loss of it. TERRY GILLIAM, LYNCH, CRONENBERG, KUBRICK, LEONE, LANG, MURNAU... They all are great!
DAVID FINCHER is far from great (in cinema) but is a very good director... if he doens't end like SCOTT(the talented one). -
One ALAN MOORE comic book that would do a good film is "V for VENDETTA". It would be the first art-house style comic book adaption from a major studio... Dream on, DODGE. They will probably do CRAP. "V" would be an SCHWARZENNEGER type of guy and the female lead SARAH MICHELLE GELLAR! Blarghs! ------ Better not be so negative. The WACHOWSKY script hasn't been used. The guys are major HACKS of screenwriting and worse yet as directors. It is a sign that film still can be good.
-
Gilliam rules but Time Bandits is still his best movie!
-
I love that book and I think Gilliam is ideal for this. Has anyone noticed the similarities between this and DOGMA? Has anyone seen the British mini series of Gaiman's Neverwhere? Should I get a copy? can I get copy in the US?
-
As most anyone knows on this site, asshole is a term that gets tossed around fairly lightly...so I didn't think anything of using it...I apologize. Still, you started a discussion of Ronald Reagan with absolutely no connection to anything anyone had been talking about at all (except that The Watchmen takes place in the 80s)...and YOU brought it up...read the talkback...you're the first to comment of Reagan Personally, I think Gilliam and Don Quixote are much more interesting than speaking about Reagan and supply-side economics. There's a reason I watch movies rather than read econ. textbooks (not because I'm stupid, but because movies are more interesting). I'd rather not discuss the merits of Kubrick vs. Tarantino...I like them both for completely different reasons. I'll wait to comment on how they compare when Tarantino gets a few more under his belt...one thing's for sure, Tarantino is definitely more willing to do throwaway movies. While his serious movies like "Reservoir Dogs", "Pulp Fiction", and "Jackie Brown" get his full attention, he still puts out scripts like "From Dusk Till Dawn" which are just kinda escapist fun. Kubrick always put his entire being into a movie (much to the actors' dismay). So in that little regard, Kubrick is better...but it just wouldn't be all that easy to compare them. -Loki
-
My favorite director!!! My favorite actor!! My favorite writer!! THIS IS TOO MUCH HAPPINESS!!! I'M GOING TO DIE!!!! I'M DYING!! I'M DYING!! I'm dead.
-
Johnny Depp is consistently the most ambitiously interesting actor working today.Every project I hear of him being attached to is intriguing. Years from now I'm convinced he'll be regarded as a staple of good art. Not everything he does is good, but never let it be said that his projects aren't apart from anything previously seen.
-
I
struggled through Good Omens on
my sister's recommendation; I hated
every word of it. The only thing
that made me laugh was a footnote
about British currency -- one
little footnote in a 400+ page
book. Gilliam should have no
trouble with the material, since it's
already blatantly derivative of Monty
Python. In fact, it struck me as
being entirely unoriginal. I got
the sense that the authors felt
they were very clever since they
could write in the style of Douglas
Adams. Pity they couldn't channel his sense of humor along with it. -
Hey, where's ABKing? I want to tell him how I dream of Arnold Schwartzenager taking a massive poo poo on my face. It'd be all gooey because of the mammoth amounts of schnitzel and sausages he ingests. I would paint myself with Arnold dung and call myself Terminator 3. "I'll be back." Yes, and I'll be pooping up a storm.
-
I've taken alot of flak on this talkback about comments I made about Fear & Loathing and Johnny Depp, so I want to clarify a few things. First of Fear & Loathing I said that Fear & Loathing was an awful film, a self-indulgent mess. I was told that I had to read the book. Like thats an excuse! Why should I have to read the book to appreciate the film? Books & Films are two different things. You cannot say you have to read a book to appreicaiate a film. I don't remember Kevin Costner defending The Postman by shouting 'You have to read the book'. I have also heard people say that the book is a 'self indulgent drug-fuelled mess' and that Gilliam captured that superbly. Well then why did Gilliam try to film it? The book apparantly works and has now been proved unfilmable and Gilliam should have known better than to waste money trying to film it. As for Johnny Depp I do not have a problem with him. I think he is one of the most talented actors around today. I don't compare his acting with Norton's or Pitt's. I simply think that Depp is fast approaching 40 and when he looks back at his career he will see he has wasted his undoubtable acting talent in films that frankly should never have been made. His films with Tim Burton are superb. Both Scissorhands and Ed Wood are greats and they are the sort of projects that he should be do more of. The rest of his CV reads alot less worthwile. Crybaby is frankly an embarassment, Benny & Joon is a poor film, Whats eating gilbert grape is a good film but Depp is acted off the screen by Leo, Nick of Time is a commercial waste of time, The Astonauts wife belongs in space where no-one will ever have to see it again, Don Juan is a nice romantic Comedy, Donnie Brasco is good without revealing anything new, The Brave is so bad it can't get released, the only romotely interesting or Artsy film he has done so far is Dead Man. This record reveals nothing of the odd-ball artsy career that people seem to credit him with. Instead it reveals a waste of talent. Depp has picked and only has 3 or 4 good films to his name. Even Keanu has the Matrix! Depp should have done the Matrix or Fight Club but instead opted for the Astronauts Wife. I just hope that as he gets into his 40's he will begin to see that a movie career is a thing to treasure not to waste on poor badly conceived films. WAKE UP MR DEPP!
-
I'll be the first to admit that Good Omens wasn't my favorite Pratchett undertaking. I liked it but it wasn't as good as any Discworld novel.
The great thing about Pratchett is, well, like Harry was saying about the Toy Story 2 guys... He just gets it. He gets everything. I've never seen an author that can show how silly the whole world is and at the same time make you love it. He's a wonderful philosopher. Actually the Good Omens project doesn't make me leap up and down, just the idea that Pratchett's popularity may grow in the US. He's the best friend I never met. -
I'll give him another go. Any
recommendations? -
I don't know if anyone in the US has seen the animated adaptation of Pratchett's 'Wyrd Sisters' but I'm afraid it sucked. Don't get me wrong, I like Pratchett (though the Discworld series is getting a bit samey) and 'Good Omens' is the best of the lot, but I just don't think the books translate to the screen, in whatever form. It's not the dialogue that makes the books funny but Pratchett's sense of humour/the ridiculous which permeates the prose - yes, and those footnotes too. Even when the dialogue is funny, it may work on the page but probably won't when spoken. As Harrison Ford once said to George Lucas, "You may be able to type this shit but you sure as hell can't say it". The only way Omens could work would be as a far blacker comedy than you see in the book.
-
i met gilliam briefly a few months back and learned this -- the plot is about a disenfranchised advertising executive (like there's any other kind?)from the present (depp) getting thrown back in time and hooking up with quixote, who mistakes him for sancho, or poncho, or poochie, or whatever the hell the little guy's name was. he said he had his eye on some french or italian fella to play the don. yet another 'stranger in an even stranger land' or 'the mad leading the lost to redemption' tale from dear terry. oh -- also, when i met him, he was wearing the suit jacket that bridges gives to williams in 'fisher king', which i thought was pretty cool.
-
You simply cannot have a discussion about Terry Pratchett without me....but I guess you already did. Anyway Mr. Pratchett is not the most skilled writer I sometimes have to re-read a paragraph to get what he's saying, however he has a great ability to create wonderfull characters and really puts them in weird situations...mostly though his work is just a fun read...and what's wrong with that?
I love Douglas Adams too but would never consider him a great writer...great ideas great images, but still awkward at times. -
Dec 03, 1999 1:49:12 PM CST
I tied quarks to my hat it keep the flies away...but I forgot to
by darthdrippybits
Pratchett rocks...it's really for people who see the world differently...almost seperatly...ya know? Anyway it's just fun...I've seen the anamated adaptations ( TVO...I didn't pledge...hehehe...) they looked great but I didn't find them as funny...which hurt 'cause I had hyped my friends on them and they said they were lame and that I was lame...but really they are lame...this post is lame...bye.
-
Well, you have my partial apologies about the Reagan thing...Lazarus Long did in fact bring it up first...but you made it a political issue, while he was just referring to a point in time...he may have started the fire, but you fanned the flames. Of course, that conversation is over and done with (thank God), so let's let sleeping dogs lie. As to Tarantino, FDTD is simply a kick ass popcorn flick, with lapses in logic, etc, just to make the audience say "cool!" Personally, I think that "Res. Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" are two of the best films to come out of the 90s...in some ways, they help to define the post-modern 90s. And Tarantino seems to have put real effort in to the scripts to make it more than just a throwaway movie...an effort I didn't see in FDTD. I'd elaborate more, but I have to go to class now...maybe later. -Loki
-
When discussing Reagan and movies, one must never forget that he was one of the key figures in the blacklisting "commies" era of McCarthyism. An artless sellout of an actor and a stain on the medium of film.
-
Interesting comments about WATCHMEN. I once talked to Alan Moore about how he felt about it. He wanted it made, but also expressed the desire for a TV series. Most interesting were his thoughts about Dr. Manhatten- that he should be completely computer generated. Added to that Rorschach's mask should be constantly moving etc. Which is deliberatly meant to be disturbing. In the end Moore felt that six episodes, combining two issues in each (just like the French edition of the comic) would be ideal.
Certainly any version would lose a lot from the orginal text- but then again isn't that always the case with adapting to film? But I remember reading a comment by some Hollywood exec who was freaking out over WATCHMEN's 'use of sugar cubes' (which if you notice is a tiny detail but is perfectly done).
WATCHMANS basic theme- how would the world be if God existed and he was American?- is one that would work today I feel, and while the Cold War is over, the fear of 'them' is as timeless and universal as ever.
Oh, and in answer to the question (and apologies if this has ben answered I didn't see it)- Neverwhere is NOT available in the US. Which sucks- mind you what I wouldn't have given for Neverwhere to have a better FX budget!!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- THE DARK KNIGHT RISES TV Spot Has New Footage And Dialogue! UPDATED To Add Second Spot! -- 275 total posts 275 posts
- G.I. JOE: RETALIATION Delayed Nine Months...Thanks To A Force More Sinister Than Cobra!! -- 267 total posts 266 posts
- Gary Oldman Joins The ROBOCOP Remake! -- 139 total posts 139 posts
- Remember when I said I’d kill The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day last? I lied. -- 137 total posts 137 posts
- UPDATE!! What The Hell Happened With G.I. JOE: RETALIATION?! -- 133 total posts 133 posts
- Cats Beware!! An ALF Movie May Soon Come Our Way... -- 160 total posts 114 posts
- Who Is The Voice Of Batman In WB's Animated Two Part THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS? -- 167 total posts 101 posts
- Quint has seen the brand new Jaws restoration and demands that Universal do a wide theatrical rerelease this summer! -- 81 total posts 81 posts
- THE EXORCIST Is Being Remade... -- 71 total posts 71 posts
- TODAY IS THE LAST DAY OF SWEEPS AND THE SEASON!! Chat Here About The Finales Of REVENGE, MODERN FAMILY, MIDDLE, BITCH, IDOL, TOW, ROCKERS, SVU And SOLD!! -- 51 total posts 51 posts