Mr Sausage wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 6:09 pm
This doesn't seem as beloved as Gilliam's other big films, but I love it. It's the purest expression of Gilliam's Romantic belief in the regenerative power of the imagination. While Brazil was in part about how the imagination is vulnerable to being crushed by the mundane brutalities of the world, rendered merely an escape from realities too awful to handle, Baron Munchausen is the obverse, where the power of the imagination can prevail not only over the violence and despair of the world, but even over death itself. It's rare to see a modern artist commit to so Romantic a conception of the imagination. It's wonderful.
Love it as well, and I'll even say it's my favorite of Gilliam's films. I think a number of Gilliam's fans may have singled it out as their favorite as well (Jonathan Rosenbaum and possibly Jim Jarmusch) so I want to say it is beloved in that sense, but I rarely hear it discussed among casual fans or skeptics of his work.
I'm very happy this is getting a release, but even if there are few new extras, it wouldn't matter, the new transfer upgrade is the main selling point for me. Previous home releases already had extensive extras, so I imagine it would be somewhat difficult to surpass them. The difficulties of the production were thoroughly and openly discussed on the feature-length 'making of' documentary.
It would be interesting to get fresh comments from Andrew Yule, author of the wonderful Losing the Light: Terry Gilliam and the Munchausen Saga. I’m curious to know what Gilliam thinks of it as well; it’s a rare filmmaker who has invited multiple authors to cover their productions with such unfiltered access, as he did on Brazil and The Brothers Grimm, too. Perhaps he sees it as a kind of insurance policy against his detractors. It’s not overly critical of him, and it places a lot of the production problems on producer Thomas Schühly, who also produced Oliver Stone’s bomb Alexander and a rudderless Columbia/Tri-Star. Yule was on the set for most of the shoot, and Polley used it for fact checking details in her memoir.
Finch wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 7:16 pm
What was going on between Sarah Polley and Terry Gilliam? I am not aware at all of their history.
therewillbeblus wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 7:19 pm
Finch, just google "Sarah Polley Gilliam" and you'll find it - in short, he made her feel unsafe on set when she was a child actor by setting off explosives without safety protocols, etc.
Polley has become an outspoken critic of how child actors are mistreated on set, largely as a response to her experiences making this film. More along the lines of physical endangerment etc not MeToo stuff
Forrest Taft wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 6:03 pm
She appears in The doc on the existing blu-ray and touches in the issue, albeit briefly.
Right. I think her own feelings have evolved a lot since that appearance, though. There was a point where she indicated that she felt that Gilliam understood what she was going through, and from her most recent comments, I don't think she believes that any longer.
Forrest Taft wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 6:03 pm
She appears in The doc on the existing blu-ray and touches in the issue, albeit briefly.
Right. I think her own feelings have evolved a lot since that appearance, though. There was a point where she indicated that she felt that Gilliam understood what she was going through, and from her most recent comments, I don't think she believes that any longer.
Gilliam basically doubled down and appeared to mock the trauma she experienced. I love him as a filmmaker, but I think he has what psychologists call an external locus of control. He has significant difficulty taking ownership of his actions, including contributing to an unsafe working environment on this set
Polley wrote a lengthy essay about the experience with Gilliam in her book Run Towards the Danger. I recommend reading the whole essay, and the whole book.
criterionsnob wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 8:03 pm
Polley wrote a lengthy essay about the experience with Gilliam in her book Run Towards the Danger. I recommend reading the whole essay, and the whole book.
Gilliam himself has always been critical of the film, as I recall -- the nightmare production coloring it for him, I'm sure, but he also claimed that the film we got wasn't what he had in mind, he wanted something bigger and grander. He always seemed mystified that people like it as much as they do. He said in an interview that his response to those who tell him they love it is, "I'm glad." But even Gilliam had to admit in one of his commentary tracks that the film has turned out to have legs, apparently people approach him about the film a good deal.
It's always been a mad favorite of mine, I saw it at least six times in its initial release and any number of times on home video and at repertory screenings, but I just can't stand that goddamn Robin Williams. I always FF through his scenes when I watch the film at home, and there's no surer bathroom break in all of cinema when I see it in cinemas (as I did earlier this year at the beloved Museum Of The Moving Image, when the final battle with the Grand Turk had me in actual tears of joy and pleasure -- this is one of the very very very few movies that can actually make me believe that the good guys can actually win). The news of the Criterion upgrade, with full 4k from a new transfer supervised by Gilliam, made me as happy I've been in a while.
I think Gilliam's main disappointment is that, to keep the running time down, he ended up pacing the film too quickly. Every time I watch it, I get the sense that the material would play better with a little more breathing room. Watching Brazil (the final director's cut) or The Fisher King, the two films made on either side of Munchausen, one can see that the moments where those films slow down are among the best. Munchausen has many extraordinary scenes, but the pell mell rush grows wearying.
Roger Ryan wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 1:32 pm
I think Gilliam's main disappointment is that, to keep the running time down, he ended up pacing the film too quickly. Every time I watch it, I get the sense that the material would play better with a little more breathing room. Watching Brazil (the final director's cut) or The Fisher King, the two films made on either side of Munchausen, one can see that the moments where those films slow down are among the best. Munchausen has many extraordinary scenes, but the pell mell rush grows wearying.
Very likely, yes. I seem to recall Gilliam describing a big scene on the Moon with the Queen at a feast, in a parody of the dinner scene in TOM JONES, where the Baron does feats with the utensils and glasses for the Queen's pleasure -- it might even be one of the storyboarded scenes from the old laserdisc that are on the upcoming UHD. And what can I say, mileage is gonna vary on the pace. I've never found anything in FISHER KING to be better than MUNCHAUSEN, but that's me, and the big scene in BRAZIL where the film really slows down is the film's weakest moment for me, that agonizing long long scene in the truck between Pryce and Greist which I recall even Gilliam felt was too long. I've never found MUNCHAUSEN pell mell, the pacing has always felt just right to me, except during William's interminable turn as the King when the film just screeches to a halt.
Roger Ryan wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 1:32 pm
I think Gilliam's main disappointment is that, to keep the running time down, he ended up pacing the film too quickly. Every time I watch it, I get the sense that the material would play better with a little more breathing room. Watching Brazil (the final director's cut) or The Fisher King, the two films made on either side of Munchausen, one can see that the moments where those films slow down are among the best. Munchausen has many extraordinary scenes, but the pell mell rush grows wearying.
Ironically, I’ve always found Gilliam’s last cut of Brazil to be too hurried and frantic, despite being longer. I just don’t like the rhythm of the editing in the last 30 minutes. I’m sure part of it comes from seeing the 1985 American theatrical release first, but I’ve always thought that version of it is as good as the film can be
As I mentioned earlier, the cut of Munchausen that screened for preview audiences was possibly about 3 hours in length. I’d love to see that, but I do think this film is just about perfect as is.
The film we got looks pretty grand to my eyes, so it's pretty amazing that he'd want more. It makes me a bit weary too because 1) I can see it looking overstuffed if it went much further and 2) what makes it his best film has more to do with other things besides the physical production. The argument for a slower pace does sound intriguing - the film does move at a breakneck pace and that feeling is probably accentuated by the fact that the film is so dense (i.e. it's like watching a whole marathon speed by instead of one sprinter, if that makes sense). Personally, I don't mind that. Sometimes I find a fast two-hour show preferable to a more deliberately paced 150 minute show, so who knows.
Re: Robin Williams, his film career is a massive disappointment (particularly in the '90s) given his talent and potential, but I think his work with Gilliam is an exception. If you can clear your head of his filmography and just focus on his live comedic work of the '70s and '80s (and there are a few great cable specials floating out there), he really is amazing. I have no problems with him here, but in memory, it's not much more than a cameo.
Zeman's The Fabulous Baron Munchausen, which undoubtedly served as a major inspiration here, is an all-time favorite of mine in part because it's a relentlessly imaginative piece of forward momentum through setpieces that no one could predict in advance and regularly slows down enough to bask in the magic of the action, and the feelings and thoughts of the protagonist in Munchausen's sidecar. The sobriety to the sublime doesn't wedge itself into passages between stops on the journey, but is woven indiscriminately into the fabric of all scenes. I don't think Zeman ever really accomplished this balance of pacing before or after, but I can see why it'd be the coveted standard for Gilliam
hearthesilence wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 2:52 pm
Re: Robin Williams, his film career is a massive disappointment (particularly in the '90s) given his talent and potential, but I think his work with Gilliam is an exception. If you can clear your head of his filmography and just focus on his live comedic work of the '70s and '80s (and there are a few great cable specials floating out there), he really is amazing. I have no problems with him here, but in memory, it's not much more than a cameo.
I’ve actually been reading David Itzkoff’s incredible biography of Williams, which does the rare trick of breaking down the myths surrounding him while simultaneously enhancing your understanding of the work that he put into developing his skills as a comic and actor. I think there are a lot of duds for sure, as he had a large filmography, but some of the smaller films that he did in the last 10 years of his life like World’s Greatest Dad are real gems
You are correct in that his role in Munchausen is a cameo. I think it’s less than 5 minutes in total. What I also love about this film is how Gilliam really maximized the studio space that he had at Cinecitta. It looks absolutely massive, and Federico Fellini was in awe of it when he visited
beamish14 wrote: Tue Oct 18, 2022 3:21 pm
I’ve actually been reading David Itzkoff’s incredible biography of Williams, which does the rare trick of breaking down the myths surrounding him while simultaneously enhancing your understanding of the work that he put into developing his skills as a comic and actor. I think there are a lot of duds for sure, as he had a large filmography, but some of the smaller films that he did in the last 10 years of his life like World’s Greatest Dad are real gems
You are correct in that his role in Munchausen is a cameo. I think it’s less than 5 minutes in total. What I also love about this film is how Gilliam really maximized the studio space that he had at Cinecitta. It looks absolutely massive, and Federico Fellini was in awe of it when he visited
I actually know someone who acted in World's Greatest Dad! It's possible they filmed it at her real-life school - IIRC she plays a student. (She now lives in Chicago doing theater.) I'll have to check it out.
I just remembered that one of the many sneaky things producer Thomas Schühly admitted to in the Baron Munchausen doc is that he unsuccessfully tried to put Williams's name on all the advertising and posters even though Williams agreed to do the film for virtually nothing, provided that his name was left out of marketing. Gilliam felt that would have betrayed their friendship, but Schühly had absolutely no scruples and believed profit justified breaking any promise made.
I have seen some discussion about whether or not people can still like this movie after hearing about my horrible experiences working on it as a child. You may not be asking for it or care - but you have my unconditional permission to still love this movie. Yes, it was traumatic for me. Yes, it should have been handled very differently. Yes, it is still a great movie. The joy that comes from it is the joy I am able to carry with me as well as the terrible memories. So go nuts. Enjoy it. You have my blessing.
I’m really not a fan of Terry Gilliam, he’s very hit and miss for me.This is another miss.
But… I’m howling at the one screening review that he read out in the bonus feature.
What did you think of the movie?
It sucked shit & I’m sober!
It’s the “& I’m sober” that really puts it over the top for me.
