Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Dorothy Parker takes a look at the official Tim Burton Biography from the UK!!!

Harry's review of the Grinch:"Straight up, when this film is by chuckrussel	Jul 31st, 2002 07:13:28 AM
,nuff said!
I wanted to be first! by dr_buggerlugs	Jul 31st, 2002 07:18:54 AM

timmy! by chewy-chop	Jul 31st, 2002 07:59:32 AM
hell, I haven't even read the article but just wanted to be around the top of the talkback. Tim is pure talent, and I need ED WOOD on DVD. OK, PlanetOTA wasn't his greatest work but at least he tried some Sci-Fi. Imagine what he could do if he didn't have a half assed Apes script.
Just wanted to get a post in before the Burton haters arrive by darthflagg	Jul 31st, 2002 08:18:21 AM
I've spoken to one of the authors of this book, and I can tell he really put in a lot of effort. I also think Burton hasn't made a bad film yet. Yes, even Planet of the Apes was an okay blockbuster compared to most so-called event movies. I just wish they'd let Burton keep the monkeysex, then it would have been a much more interesting film
What by Ditko	Jul 31st, 2002 08:18:27 AM
...of such an early Biography? Ain
Dorothy Parker is MAN, baby!!!! by CleverUserName	Jul 31st, 2002 08:21:03 AM
...just kidding.
Tim Burton and Richard Kelly by GeneralZoddd	Jul 31st, 2002 08:48:07 AM
Tim Burton - Where did it all go wrong? No Really... He used to be up there as one of my 2 consistantly favourite working Directors, a filmmaker who I wrote half my dissertation about, defending 'Batman Returns' as a personal vision and a gleefully disguised twisted vision of how he saw society circa 1992, disguised as children's popcorn blockbuster. (The other half was on David Lynch's 'Fire Walk With Me'). Since then he has compromised so much, going for bigger budgets as his imagination shrugged off boundaries, but having to make small 'changes' to try to appeal to the masses, to ensure similar high budgets. Anyone want to argue? Ask yourself if he has put a single piece of film up there recently which has a shred of the emmotional impact of 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Ed Wood' or 'Pee Wee'. It's all about finding the personal vision and making us see it - not finding already developed charcaters ('Apes' or 'Superman') and changing them to 'Burton them up' even if it goes against the established look and feel. I honestly used to love Burton's films, and now, after Apes, I'm not going to rush out. Now, and I don't wish ill on anyone, but maybe the best thing that can happen is Burton stop chasing the big budgets and scale it down - sure he'll be seen as less of a successful hollywood player but he's once again be a great filmmaker. And what's up with breaking it off with Lisa Marie? That's a fine piece of ass! Richard Kelley is where it's at right now - SHAME ON YOU AMERICAN's for letting 'Donnie Darko' flop! Why did you not see it? IT'S A FRIGGIN' MASTERPIECE! One of the best debut's EVER!!! Zodd out
Yeah, what was the deal with the Superman project? by Chilli Kramer	Jul 31st, 2002 09:58:32 AM
Burton hates Kevin Smith. Smith doesn't exactly hate Burton, but doesn't care for him much. I'm not sure about this book much. Maybe I should leaf through it when I see it on the shelves.
Dick Kelly by Aronld Scazziger	Jul 31st, 2002 10:30:05 AM
Yes, Donnie Darko is one of the best debuts ever. Yes, it is a masterpiece. Yes, it was totally overlooked. Yes, event films suck ... always. Yes, Americans are mostly dorks.
it isn't a biography! by the barking dog	Jul 31st, 2002 10:38:20 AM
The Smith/Clive-Matthews book isn't a biography. I know. I haven't just read it, I'm listed in the acknowledgments (Mike Jackson of timburtoncollective.com). It's more an analysis of Burton's films, starting with some that even his die-hard fans have not seen, like "The Island of Dr. Agor" and "Luau." I corresponded with Clive-Matthews while he was writing the book, and let me tell you that it is indeed the most thoroughly researched look at his films. They obtained copies of "Stalk of the Celery Monster" and "Luau," which are exceedingly rare. They corresponded with some of his most frequent collaborators, like Rick Heinrichs and Glenn Shadix (who I've also had the pleasure of e-mailing -- very charming guy). This is definitely the book for fans who like Burton's films, but aren't necessarily interested in the psycho-analysis that Ken Hanke put into his films in his biography. I'm definitely biased, but I thoroughly recommend it!
Burton's next project by the barking dog	Jul 31st, 2002 10:41:33 AM
If you need my credentials, look at my other post. Burton's next project is an adaptation of the novel "Big Fish." I'd say it's going to be his most personal film since "Edward Scissorhands" or maybe "Ed Wood." Not a lot of chance for what people think of as the Burton filmmaking style, but the material itself has his off-kilter mark on it. I think the people disappointed with his post-"Ed Wood" work will appreciate it.
The Barking Dog by GeneralZoddd	Jul 31st, 2002 10:52:54 AM
Thank you. See even when a filmmaker disappoints me and pisses me off - All it takes is for me to hear a piece of info like you've just given, and I'm all excited again - guess once a fanboy, always a fanboy. But you know, each time it just gets a little harder, with each disappointment, that glimmer of hope gets a little bit harder to get any warmth from. Actually I'd be really happy to see some of his old work, like 'Hansel & Gretel' or some early Disney shorts. If you see what David Lynch has done on his site, you'll see how this could be done. Actually the fact that Lynch owns the copyright to his early works would probably have something to do with it, where The 'House of Mouse' I assume is keeping a tight grip on Burton's, of course not planning anything for it, or increasing their revenue and getting some artistic kudos, just sitting on it. Anyway 'Barking Dog' - whats the scope of the project? What budget is it likely to have, as stated above with Burton's new projects I'm judging budget to be inverse to personal vision and quality. Call me Zoddd!
Thanks Harry by Longfellow	Jul 31st, 2002 11:00:04 AM
I owe you one...
What I'd like to find out... by WizardX	Jul 31st, 2002 11:04:18 AM
Is that exactly happened between Burton and Danny Elfman during the making of Nightmare Before Christmas. Neither of them seems to talk about it at all, at least not in any interviews I've read. Thank bog they made up, at least.
Big Fish by the barking dog	Jul 31st, 2002 11:31:42 AM
This is for General Zodd... From what I've heard, "Big Fish" will actually have a fairly large budget, but if you read the book (more on the story in a sec) you'll understand why. Like "Sleepy Hollow" and "Planet of the Apes" (which I liked more than the average person, but it's still next to last on my list of favorite Burton films), it's a project that was in development for a while and he came in late. Steven Spielberg originally expressed interest in directing it. It's based on a novel by Daniel Wallace. It's a bit hard to find, but it's worth tracking down. It's short, but a very good read. It's about a man, Edward Bloom, who's lived a varied and colorful life. He's on his deathbed, and his son (it's told from his perspective) is trying to break through his father's tall tales of his wild adventures to find out who he really is behind the yarns and jokes. Most of the book deals with the tall tales, which are both poignant and funny. Since they are rather expansive, some of them are going to require rather elaborate special effects. There's a giant, for instance, and from what I've heard its part has been beefed up from the few pages it's in the book. There's also a couple giant floods that give a lot of character development, so I hope those are left in too. I haven't heard much about casting, though I do know one of Burton's "regulars" is in consideration for several roles pending casting of the leads. I can only see one person playing Edward Bloom: Christopher Walken. He's the only logical choice.
Scooby-Dooku by GeneralZoddd	Jul 31st, 2002 11:37:05 AM
Oh come on - you've gotta put at least 'Batman Returns' on that list, even if not 'Batman' - remember these were for kids! The 1st film was amazingly successful at the box office, and so the money-men at Warners gave him free rein on the second - just watch it again and see how much fun he's having, and just how critical he's being the western world. How the 'hero' has turned on the machismo to such a degree that he's borderline psychotic and hides behind fetish body armour, how the 'modern woman' does everything she can to compete in the business world, taking career before more tranditional roles - and she's thrown out the window by her boss! She the 'villian' thrown away as a baby (by an actor arrested in real life for SHOCK! HORROR! Masturbating) just because he's ugly, and take delight when he comes back to punish the people who never gave him a chance! And don't even get me started on the pussy jokes... Watch all this and remember - THIS WAS FOR KIDS! This is what the greedy money men at Warners were pinning their hopes of a franchise on - know this and smile, as you realize that Burton did the only thing he knew at THAT time - he made it personal and the film that interested HIM General Zoddd out...
My defense of Burton's post-"Scissorhands" ouevre by the barking dog	Jul 31st, 2002 11:55:22 AM
Sorry, I just love that word :) Burton's films -- if you look at the breadth of his career and not just "Edward Scissorhands" -- have not been about emotional impact. If I can be so bold to make a comparison bound to piss off film geeks and cineastes everywhere, he's like Stanley Kubrick in that sense, except he makes films meant to be ENJOYED. He makes films that suit his own tastes and that are often more about the visuals than about airtight plots, sharp dialogue, or emotional connections. However, he does consistently ply the outsider character that often seems to be a stand-in for himself -- nearly every character in "Batman Returns," Ed Wood in "Ed Wood," Richie and Taffy in "Mars Attacks!", Ichabod Crane in "Sleepy Hollow." With the exception of POTA, I think he has been able to make movies that retain his artistic sensibilities without losing his soul to Hollywood. It's easy to focus on POTA, since it is his last film and isn't really up to what we'd consider a film having the Burton touch. It still does, if you know where to look, but still, it's "Batman" all over again, a studio wanting the cred of an artist directing but not trusting them with the results. I don't think for a second that the best films of his career are behind him, because you can see a progression to his career, his growth as a filmmaker. Besides, if I can derail into the sort of psychoanalysis that Hanke goes for, I think that he thrives on chaos in his personal life. Lisa Marie may have grounded him personally, but I think his creativity as a filmmaker suffered for it -- the films most fans (not critics though) agree are his best, like "Edward Scissorhands," were made before their relationship. Now that he ditched her and is involved with "homewrecker" Helena Bonham-Carter, maybe we'll see some discord come back to his films. But I digress. I personally think that "Sleepy Hollow" was one of his best films, his love of stunning visuals married to a great story, with excellent performances and real emotions. (Well, maybe not so much with the emotions, and Miranda Richardson was kinda hammy, but still...) Anyway, talked too much. Like I said before, my site is www.timburtoncollective.com. It's probably one of the largest Burton fansites around. If you want some lively discussion of Burton's films, stop by the message boards. There's even a special section where J. Clive-Matthews (the co-author of the book in the article here) answers questions. And remember: Even in a time of intergalactic crisis, people still want to roll them bones!
Barkingdog 2 by GeneralZoddd	Jul 31st, 2002 12:06:07 PM
Thanks for all the info - I'm going to go over to your site now and take my rambling with me! zoddd
Sleepy Hollow? by Fearsme	Jul 31st, 2002 01:52:10 PM
I loved Sleepy Hollow, was i the only one?
General Zodd by Bryan	Jul 31st, 2002 02:31:43 PM
I pretty much agree with General Zodd but at the same time I think MARS ATTACKS! and SLEEPY HOLLOW are worthy of defending. (Sadly, I thought PLANET OF THE APES was pretty much worthless, save for the joyfully ridiculous ending, and constitutes his one genuinely bad movie). While they aren't the emotional movies Burton fans love (ED FUCKIN WOOD ON DVD NEXT MONTH!), and in that sense definitely seem to be a gradual decline from greatness, I think they, especially MARS, are good examples of the mainstream Hollywood movie filtered through Burton's brain. SLEEPY HOLLOW is the more normal of the two, but it has a strong modern-Hammer atmosphere that nobody else could have achieved, and an unorthodox approach with Johnny Depp's Ichabod Crane being an action hero who hides under the covers from a spider. (SPOILER: But how the hell was she going to collect the inheritance after faking her death?) MARS ATTACKS! is I think Burton's most subversive movie outside of BATMAN RETURNS. Yes, I was a little disappointed that the characters were so empty compared to what we expect from a Burton film, but it worked for the comedy, and watching those ILM Martians running around shooting lasers on a $90 million budget in a multiplex at Christmas time was beautiful. I mean come on, flaming cattle! It was a good time at the movies. I agree with you on BATMAN RETURNS although I think it's clear that Burton wasn't thinking of it as a kid's movie (only the clueless studio and McDonalds executives were). My own personal obsession in that movie has been with the mirror motif - Shreck lives above the city, Penguin lives below it; Penguin leaps off the same bridge he was thrown off as a baby; Selina comes back as Catwoman and re-enacts her daily after-work routine; the ending is the same as the first film but with Catwoman standing on the building and Bruce Wayne looking for her, etc. There are dozens of examples.
Not to be a stick in the mud but there is a very simple (and goo by lostoptimist	Jul 31st, 2002 04:13:22 PM
It's called the Headless Horseman's motivation for 'haunting' Sleepy Hollow. That, and the pointless Windmill scene--Talk about a hollow, if not incomprehensible, not to mention unsuspenseful and pointless action setpiece that didn't even belong in the movie in the first place. Of course, that's just my opinion. Incidentally, I'd love to see Burton give a go at directing a James Bond flick.
barking dog's comments by thatguamguy	Jul 31st, 2002 04:40:46 PM
I'm sorry, I just got a good laugh out of "He's just like Stanley Kubrick that way ... except he doesn't care about air-tight plots, characters, emotional connections," etc. The reason people don't like "Sleepy Hollow" is that it took a truly classic horror story and made it into an incomprehensible mess that didn't even look all that good either. And "Planet of the Apes" was awful, just awful. This is coming from somebody who spent two years defending "Mars Attacks!" for all the things it did right, rather than pointing out all of the flaws. I loved most and enjoyed all of Burton's work up to "Mars Attacks!", but I still look on that as the turning point when he completely stopped caring about whatever it was he used to care about. Or maybe some of his depression wore off (though after "Ed Wood" flopped, I'd've expected him to get even more depressed). Either way, I'm looking forward to "Big Fish" being an enjoyable big budget flick, but if that one sucks too, that's it. Three strikes. But, meanwhile, I'll stick to Terry Gilliam for movies that combine brilliant visuals (far more realistic looking than anything in any Burton movie except for "Batman" and "Scissorhands") with points, characters, themes, and other things that are generally associated with good writing. (Of course, I wouldn't count on Terry to make tight plots either, but so few movies do nowadays that it's almost not worth lamenting.)
guamguy...you misquoted by the barking dog	Jul 31st, 2002 05:03:23 PM
You said I said this: "He's just like Stanley Kubrick that way ... except he doesn't care about air-tight plots, characters, emotional connections." That's not an entirely accurate quote. I was implying that Burton and Kubrick are similar because they eschew emotional connections in favor of pretty movies that meet their own sensibilities.
Dude... by the barking dog	Jul 31st, 2002 05:29:13 PM
TheDudeAbides, the short answer is no. It's an Internet urban legend. POTA was an incredibly harried shoot, and there was little time to shoot what they did get, let alone several other versions of the ending. They might have been written, but I've never read anything other than the ancient Sam Hamm draft (which was scrapped long before Burton came on board).
Sam Hamm's Draft of POTA by Choda Boy	Jul 31st, 2002 08:10:51 PM
Was the Hamm draft the one with the virus at the beginning? If it was I hated it. It complicated the set-up of POTA far too much. I read and I kept saying to myself, "Just get to the fucking apes already". The original was good in that it was light on backstory. If you call a movie "Planet of the Apes," then it would behoove you to get to the damn planet as soon as possible or risk pissing people off, but then that's just the screenwriter in me talking.
"The reason people don't like "Sleepy Hollow" is that it too by darthflagg	Jul 31st, 2002 08:23:14 PM
First of all, the original Legend of Sleepy Hollow story wasn't even technically horror. The whole thing was a prank played on Ichabod, wasn't it? I don't think that would have made a very good movie. Second, how can you say Sleepy Hollow didn't look good? The film was nominated for Oscars for costume design and cinematography, and won for production design. Even if you think the screenplay was crap (I liked it, apart from the convoluted mystery in the last act) Sleepy Hollow is definitely one of the most beautiful looking horror films ever made.
Mr. Abides by Bryan	Aug 1st, 2002 03:37:01 AM
Isn't it kind of stretching it to say that the ending was "almost verbatim from the book"? I agree that it comes to the same basic conclusion, but all the details are completely different. But I suppose there is no need to argue this. Although I didn't like the movie much at all, I loved the ending, which I think implied a much more entertaining and original movie for Burton to sink his teeth into. Too bad they didn't just do the sequel and skip the first one. In addition to having an obviously unfinished script (in place of the really smart one from the original) the remake was even disappointing on a visual level. The ape city was way too crammed together, an obvious sound stage and not in a good way (like, say, the pet cemetery in Frankenweenie). This "Big Fish" does sound like a good one for him, though. Let's hope it turns things around. (But why does this good news have to come with the bad news, posted on the same web site, that the ED WOOD dvd has been indefinitely postponed?)
the barking dog favorite word... by no-no	Aug 1st, 2002 08:57:20 AM
...is ouevre? Because you'll probably use it again, it's spelled oeuvre. You're welcome.
response by thatguamguy	Aug 1st, 2002 12:28:51 PM
You're wrong. A story doesn't need to be supernaturally based in order to be horror. The book is great, and is definitely a horror novel (or at least, novella). Second, if you're going to say that Oscar nominations mean quality, does that mean that Akiva Goldsmith is a good writer? Either way, anybody can shoot a movie well when they have a shitload of money, but all of the effects in "Sleepy Hollow" were garbage. I saw it with a group of people who liked it, and I asked them about the effects, and they said, "Oh, no, that was deliberate, Burton likes to call attention to the effects by making them look cheesy and not real." So I said "Mission accomplished, but that doesn't make it good." The CGI stuff (and don't ask for examples, because I'm just going by what I remember of a movie I saw and hated three years ago, but I remember there being shots where most of the City is CGI and looks flat and awful) was terrible. And don't get me started on Johnny Depp, who used to be one of the best actors around but hasn't been in anything worthwhile since "Fear and Loathing" [and I can understand why that movie doesn't have a lot of fans]. And how can you say the script was good until it threw in the mystery? The mystery is the only part of the script that even tries to tell any sort of story. The whole rest of the movie takes the name Ichabod Crane and sticks him onto a character that, if it wasn't a cliche before "The X-Files" was made, sure is a hell of a cliche now.
the guam fellow by Bryan	Aug 1st, 2002 02:14:57 PM
I think it is safe to say that Thatguamguy did not like the look of SLEEPY HOLLOW, but to most people it is a gorgeous looking movie. As far as the cgi effects, you could only be talking about the scene where the old woman's eyes pop out in what most see as a tip to Beetlejuice or Large Marge. If you didn't like it, that's fine, but I think a lot of people enjoyed it because this is a movie where Burton's sensibilities are a little bit subdued by the attempt to make a mainstream hollywood movie, so it's nice to see some eyeballs popping out in one scene. CGI shots of the city? There were some great digital matte shots at the end (or was it the beginning) when Crane was in the big city but the village that most of the movie took place in was all really built. I don't think SLEEPY HOLLOW is all that great, but one thing it doesn't get enough credit for is the humor. Most people seem to take it as a completely serious horror film, but I think Depp's portrayal of Crane makes it pretty comedic. I thought it was a very good performance by Depp, though not as impressive as Ed Wood, Edward Scissorhands, Fear and Loathing or even Donnie Brasco.
ITS NOT THE OFFICIAL BIOGRAPHY! by frosteey	Aug 1st, 2002 05:45:48 PM
You're wrong Harry.
Screw the Book... Heres my T.Burton Summary by MST3KPIMP	Aug 2nd, 2002 04:50:48 AM
He made alot of qsuedo-weird movies delighting poser-goth kids everywhere, he copied the styles of german expressionists and was hailed as a creative genious and "twisted". He basically ruined Batman.. He worked great with Pee Wee Herman and Winonna Ryder.. Ed Wood was great but as of late has been making generic hollywood junk.. THE END
"Last word?" - You wish Chandler Bing! by GeneralZoddd	Aug 2nd, 2002 11:50:04 AM
MST3KPIMP - no that's not it at all - spoken like a true Michael Bay fan. Tim Burton WAS a genius, I don't care where his influences come from, only a true idiot ignores the lessons and leaps that those have come before have made. Sure his style is German Expressionistic via Hollywood, but at least his sensabilities are there too, he's not just using the style for a 'cool' effect. Unlike Barry Sonnafield who is just doing a Tim Burton-lite - all style/ no substance. Actually what we should do is ask how much credit should go to his partner Rick Heinrichs, who has been his 'Art' guy on if not all, then most of his projects since 1982. So the last word is: The genius is on hold, but he's not left the building. CALL ME ZODDD!
not a misquote by thatguamguy	Aug 2nd, 2002 06:12:18 PM
an exaggerated quote; to compare the two in anyway other than they both make good-looking movies is ludicrous and, even in that, Burton's movie are live-action cartoons and Kubrick's are far from that. And, Bryan - the matte stuff was what I was talking about. Personally, I prefer it when the background doesn't look entirely two-dimensional and flat. Just because the screen it's projected on is doesn't mean the image should be. As I recall it, the lighting on the matted BG doesn't even match the rest of the shot. And Burton he wanted to make a comedy, or even a comic-horror movie, then why adapt "Sleepy Hollow"? Forget all that, actually; if it's supposed to be a comedy, it fails, because it's not funny, and most of its fans don't even think it is. "Re-Animator" is a movie that takes a comic approach to adapting a semi-classic (classic more for the author than the story). "Sleepy Hollow" is a comedy without jokes or laughs. And any movie with half that budget could've looked as good or better.
Sleepy Hollow/Big Fish by Moose of Heaven	Aug 2nd, 2002 08:09:15 PM
The thing that made Sleepy Hollow so disappointing to me was that the Horseman turned out to be a tool. Literally. I mean, he was a murder weapon. Nothing that terrifying or horrific in the end, you just have a glorified murder mystery. I'd much rather feel the horror of the walking dead ravaging and slicing the heads off the living, not some cunning little murder-for-money-and-revenge ploy orchestrated by someone else that happens to USE the Headless Horseman. I mean, how lame is that? But the movie was beautiful, you can't fault it for that. --------------- Barking Dog: thanks for telling us about Big Fish. It sounds like it'll be incredible if it gets done.
My problems with Burton (and yes, Superman is a big part of them by KingKrypton	Aug 2nd, 2002 11:51:12 PM
I have never liked Tim Burton as a filmmaker. I think this previous quote sums it up: "It's all about finding the personal vision and making us see it - not finding already developed charcaters ('Apes' or 'Superman') and changing them to 'Burton them up' even if it goes against the established look and feel." The problem with Burton is that he doesn't understand anything the quote I've cited points out. His films are badly plotted, poorly paced, boringly edited, and are too reliant on gothic sets that look like soundstages instead of real environments. The characters in his films are always cliche freaks with cookie-cutter "outsider" issues. After watching one Burton film, you've pretty much seen them all. He's extremely limited and repetitive. But above all else, his films have an arrogance to them, a condescension that says, "This is the work of a genius, you're too stupid to appreciate it." Every time I've watched a Tim Burton film (I've made a point for the past few years to avoid his work after having been disappointed time after time), I've felt like my intelligence was being insulted. That, and Burton is really in love with himself. Every time I see him being interviewed, he comes off as smug and pompous. And then there's his crazed desire to take established properties and radically alter them to suit HIS cookie-cutter goth style at the expense of the characters' integrity. This more than anything else burns me about him. The Superman situation was a case in point; every time anyone turned out, rumors and leaks kept coming out about Burton's plans to reinvent the character in his own image...and everything he proposed was a violation of the character as he had been established. He had no more respect for the character than Jon Peters does (in fact, they agreed on certain aspects of Superman that they wanted to get rid of), and had he been allowed to make the film I think Superman would have been destroyed beyond the point of repair. (Of course, there's still the Peters/McG Superman movie, which will suck equally bad at the opposite end of the spectrum....) I also think Burton's treatment of Batman was dishonest in a lot of ways, making Batman a killer and the like. It was about "hey, look at me, I'm such a genius", not about "this is the character, we're going to treat him with respect." This is why Richard Donner's SUPERMAN spoke to me as a kid and is in my opinion one of the greatest films of all time, and why Burton's Batman films turned me off. Donner treated Superman with reverence and love, and put his heart and soul into making a movie people would care about. Burton was just serving himself the whole time, treating Batman as if he was just the McGuffin for Burton's fetishes. Had Burton done Superman, the problems would not only have been compounded, but would have been even more visible since Superman is not the dark character Batman is. I normally don't begrudge a filmmaker for making a few mistakes, but most filmmakers grow and evolve. Burton just repeats himself over and over again and expects everyone to slavish him with praise. The man flat-out refuses to grow and evolve. As such, I find him to be perhaps the worst director in film history, because all he does is produce ego-stroking pap that expects to be held as genius, and with those films treats his audience like they're idiots. I'm amazed he's lasted this long in Hollywood.

Talkbacks

Dorothy Parker takes a look at the official Tim Burton Biography from the UK!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks