comment #1

Balthazar says ...

I don't see how this film can be anything but another fascinating disaster for Gilliam, poor chap.

comment #2

EOTW says ...

It'd be cynical if Ledger's performance wasn't so breathtaking. I huffed and guffawed way back before he died, when Nolan was tellnig the press that he Ledger was incredible in the film, groundbreaking. I guess I dug his work in BROKEBACK so much ,I just couldn't see the same guy as Joker, but I was wrong. I was skeptical unti li saw him enter the frame on Thursday night. This won't sound genuine, but the idea that Ledger was dead didn't even enter my mind for at least 90 minutes, I was so caught up in the ride.

And, yes, the Gilliam thing, like his recent work, will be a fiasco at best. I seriously doubt that even being Ledger's last perfromance (complete or not) will make much of a difference (at the box office).

If you haven't seen it, i HIGHLY suggest you see his work in my fave pic of last year I'M NOT THERE. He was so great in that.

comment #3

BurmaShave says ...

Yeah Gilliam has become so anti-establishment he's now just talking out of his ass.

comment #4

Chase Kahn says ...

Why don't you try be relevant again, Mr. GILLIAM...

comment #5

Vitesse98 says ...

I thought Ledger was indeed riveting in "The Dark Knight," but he didn't exactly light up the screen in "The Brothers Grimm." So I'd say, in terms of anticipation or box office, it'll largely be a wash. And given Gilliam's recent track record, a disappointing, uneven, incomplete-feeling wash.

comment #6

Dan Revill says ...

I guess that Gilliam ceases to appreciate the irony by blasting Warner's he is in fact helping Ledger's chances. And considering almost nobody saw his last movie he could use a little Ledger Oscar talk. Anyhow is WB really the ones forwarding the talk? Certainly they're not gonna squash it, but it seems to be justified in this viewer's opinion.

comment #7

erniesouchak says ...

Ledger was a gifted actor, but his Joker is, in its own way, as hammy and affected as Nicholson's was, only it's played straighter. I suspect there would be no Oscar talk if the poor kid weren't dead, and for WB to talk that up is definitely cynical.

comment #8

D.Z. says ...

"Nonetheless, and no matter how Gilliam-esque Parnassus turns out out to be, Ledger's name on the marquee will certainly boost business. "

Doubt it. If it makes money, it'll be due to Depp. Ledger was never a box-office draw, even for TDK.

comment #9

Aris P says ...

"Ledger was never a box-office draw, even for TDK."

Christ, I can't believe what I'm about to say, but DZ is 100% right.

Rabid, obsessive compulsive, I-was-there-this-weekend! mania is the draw to TDK's record-breaking numbers, nothing else.

comment #10

CinemaPhreek says ...

As much as I like Gilliam and most of his work, his determination to keep the Ledger footage in the film simply reeks of either crass exploitation or blind devotion.

If the part was never intended to be played by 3 people, then why is it now? Just so Ledger's final performance will not be lost or so Gilliam can have bragging rights to it?

By these actions, I already suspect the film will be another of Gilliam's "failed but interesting" projects.

Christ, when did he last have decent film, 10 years (LOATHING), 13 years (MONKEYS)?

comment #11

Terry McCarty says ...

D.Z. wrote:
Doubt it. If it makes money, it'll be due to Depp. Ledger was never a box-office draw, even for TDK.

Disagree. Ledger, if alive today, would have been blessed with TDK being the mainstream-starmaking film that PIRATES was for Depp or, to give a more recent example, IRON MAN is for Downey (so much so that the nonhit CHARLIE BARTLETT now has a sticker on DVDs-for-sale touting Downey's performance in a supporting role).

comment #12

D.Z. says ...

Phreek: I think it's more like he a need for closure than anything else. After all, if this ended up being another "Lost in La Mancha", he wouldn't be able to find any work.

Terry: Being in a popular tentpole film doesn't automatically guarantee success. After all, Pirates didn't do a thing for Bloom's career, and he's closer to Ledger's age than Depp. Also, what Depp and Downey do for their roles is add themselves to their parts; that's something I feel that Ledger always lacked. I'm going to be generous, and say he did a good job as The Joker, but that he doesn't own the character the way Nicholson or Hamill did. I think the reason is not due to him personally, but due to Nolan's desire to focus more on Joker's "philosophy" than to allow Ledger to be different from the other variations of Joker. What you're stuck with is an analysis of the guy, rather than a new take. That's also why I feel Eckhart stole the show, since he really played both sides of that character(no pun intended) so well that it made me forget about Tommy Lee Jones' version of the guy. [Though that isn't a hard thing to do, I guess..]

comment #13

frankbooth says ...

Ernie,

Hammy and affected? It's the Joker! he's a deranged clown from a comic book. How understated can an actor play him before he becomes a completely different character?

comment #14

scooterzz says ...

word is that gilliam's remarks had more to do with roven than ledger....

comment #15

pcc says ...

this just seems like a more modern version of ed wood having some footage he shot of bela lugosi and then after lugosi died wood used a chiropractor with a cape covering his face to finish filming his scenes in "plan 9 from outer space." depp, farrell and law are simply gilliam's chiropractors with capes

comment #16

EOTW says ...

He'd a been a 20 mil man Saturday morning, it's true. but as one can see from BROKEBACK on, he made the choice, in his own words, to have the kinda career he could be proud of instead of what everyone else wanted hi mto have. So, yes, he'd be "The Depp," but I bet he would've headed for the hills when someone offered that much for his next big flick. The guy was class in that regard.

comment #17

Mcflyboy says ...

DZ, Depp and Ledger comparisons are very fair. Depp wasn't considered a real box office draw until the first Pirates film, yet his post-Pirates, non-Pirates record isn't bulletproof. Depp movies make money when the whole package works, but he'll always have these smaller films that don't stand a chance. Ledger was already on a similar path. I don't really think Depp headed toward the hills that PCC claims Ledger would have ran away from but....

I remember when Gilliam announced the Dr. Parnassus recasting that I didn't feel like it was an attempt to exploit his death...it seemed like he was trying to honor an actor he admired and worked with. The fact that he had to retool the script and that three name actors stepped in just seemed to be a show of respect to Ledger and Gilliam. But after reading his comments, I'm not so sure. This Ledger Oscar campaign isn't just Warners' doing. People love this performance, post-mortem guilt aside. I, of course, haven't seen the Gilliam film and it may be fantastic but If he had recast and archived the Ledger footage, he would be more credible.

Then again, I think being not alive should disqualify you from this whole mess. I absolutely feel a great performance should be acknowledged, and Ledger gave one, but considering this fiasco and the position it puts the other potential nominees in...come on! Make a special award for this or something.

comment #18

Bob Violence says ...

Maybe -- just maybe -- Gilliam is keeping the Ledger material to prevent this from becoming yet another prematurely aborted Terry Gilliam project. Crass or not, I doubt there is a single investor involved with this who would go along with the idea of replacing all of Ledger's footage.

comment #19

corey3rd says ...

Ledger is a cable sensation. What weekend can't you find A Knight's Tale on the dial? and it was getting this much action before he died.

Depp can't completely open a film and put it into $100 million club when he's not in pirate garb. You'd figure enough secretaries would flock to the theater to see him in the Libertine. But they didn't. He's only as big as the boys in marketing inflate him. He's yet to have his Tom Cruise Cocktail moment.

Gilliam lost his mind years ago. Begging for cash to help promote Tideland from the people in line for the Dailyshow?

When it comes to a Best Supporting Actor nomination, Heath does the job. He boosts the film. He insures that this long film plays fast, tight and locomotive.

comment #20

romeoisbleeding says ...

I am a huge fan of Ledger and hope he gets the Oscar for TDK but honestly I thought he was the worst part of I'm Not There.. someone mentioned him in it up the thread. I loved that movie but I felt he was so wrong for that part. Just because he is getting all of this acclaim now...you know every movie he made was not totally genius. But we all have a right to our opinions. Even Marlon Brando made bad movies. So has Sean Penn.... great actors can make and often do choose roles that are wrong for them. He took me totally out of the Dylan movie and just made it seem wrong to me.

comment #21

EOTW says ...

Different strokes, romeo, but I was the one who said he was great in INT above. I said that back last year before his passing, when I first saw the film. Looking ack, you can see that maybe in some ways, he knew he was playing himself in the film: A young movie star, on the brink of leaving his woman and children behind (which Heath did for real not soo nafter). It's a brief, great performance and he's gold in it. Yes, I too agree he was in a lot of mediocre stuff. I agree with that completely, but INT there is a classic and he is in it, too.

comment #22

breadlymoore says ...

Gilliam lost his touch years ago.

Now he's just a sad guy trying to cash in on his past sucesses. TIDELAND pretty much summed up his current abilities.

comment #23

corey3rd says ...

what percentage of Gilliam's bitterness is his fear that his on-set conditions (having the rain machine going for days) contributed to Heath getting sick and mixing his medicine?

He's Not Here is a mess. How real can a Dylan film be if Allen Ginsberg doesn't ask for a BJ?

comment #24

hollyman says ...

Here is an interesting take on where Gilliam maybe coming from.

http://www.hollywoodoutbreak.com/?p=841

comment #25

K. Bowen says ...

Is there any chance that all known prints of this film could "accidentally" burn?

comment #26

D.Z. says ...

corey: "You'd figure enough secretaries would flock to the theater to see him in the Libertine. But they didn't."

To be fair, I think Harvey blew the marketing on that one, since Sweeney Todd did significantly better than it.

"Gilliam lost his mind years ago. Begging for cash to help promote Tideland from the people in line for the Dailyshow?"

It's no worse than studios expecting us to pay for crap like Meet Dave.

"what percentage of Gilliam's bitterness is his fear that his on-set conditions (having the rain machine going for days) contributed to Heath getting sick and mixing his medicine?"

Bull. Ledger was a junky, and would have offed himself sooner or later, regardless of Gilliam.

romeo: "...you know every movie he made was not totally genius."

Actually, I thought he was a liability in most of his movies; but he could have been more memorable, if he emoted most of the time.

comment #27

janee says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability software