View source for Talk:Terry Gilliam

{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Entertainers|class=B}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=B|filmbio-work-group=yes|filmbio-priority=high|listas=Gilliam, Terry}}
{{WikiProject Television|class=B|importance=high|monty-python=yes|monty-python-importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Comedy|class=B|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Animation|class=B
| b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = yes
| b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy    --> = yes
| b3 <!--Structure              --> = yes
| b4 <!--Grammar & style        --> = yes
| b5 <!--Supporting materials   --> = yes
| b6 <!--Accessibility          --> = yes
|importance=Mid|American-animation=yes|American-animation-importance=Mid|people=yes|people-importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Marketing & Advertising|class=B|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Minnesota|class=B|importance=Low}}
<!-- worked in advertising, filmed commercials -->
}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Terry Gilliam/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}}

== box office success? ==

"Gilliam's $30 million-budgeted film The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus had also become an international '''box office success''', grossing over $60 million in worldwide theatrical release." If you gross 60 million on a 30 million budget you break even. Half the gross revenue is kept by the theaters. I would not call that a success. --[[User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )]] ([[User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )|talk]]) 03:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

:''Parnassus'' had broken even before the film was even released anywhere, thanks to clever distribution deals, see [https://web.archive.org/web/20141209200657/http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=cd3e6572-f609-42b1-bafa-9acf52b220da]. Those $65 million are *ON TOP* of the production breaking even. --[[Special:Contributions/2003:71:4E07:BB23:9163:E32E:3FE1:A5D3|2003:71:4E07:BB23:9163:E32E:3FE1:A5D3]] ([[User talk:2003:71:4E07:BB23:9163:E32E:3FE1:A5D3|talk]]) 00:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

The Vancouver Sun citation talks about how the financing was put together, no mention of anything that made this a break-even film budget. Further rights (such as DVD distribution) can be presold, etc., but no discussion in the article of these standard practices. The $30 million production cost is only for getting the film made. It does not include marketing, advertising and distribution costs--which can easily wind up equaling the production costs. That's why as a rough estimate a film is considered "break even" when it makes double the production costs. On top of that, according to Box Office Mojo[http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=imaginariumofdoctorparnassus.htm], the film only made $7,689,607 domestic revenue, $54,119,168 in foreign markets. Domestic gross is weighted more heavily, because the producers get more of that money back than from the international market. The entire Box Office section comes off as a puff piece, which is really unnecessary even if that's the aim. Members of the film industry understand the numbers. Not sharing that with Wikipedia users is a disservice to them and to Gilliam.  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Vogelspiegel|Vogelspiegel]] ([[User talk:Vogelspiegel#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vogelspiegel|contribs]]) 17:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Speaking of standard practices, it's a standard Wikipedia practice according to official guidelines on film articles not to count "marketing, advertising and distribution costs" when it comes to when a film breaks even. The rest is only some creative "Hollywood book-keeping" to dump on people that some bigwigs don't like, by only counting those latter costs against misfits but never when it comes to the darlings of studio heads. Speaking of which, the domestic market for ''Parnassus'' was the UK, and $7 million drawn in at the UK box office is certainly a lot. Anyways, this supposed rule that films are supposed to make a lot especially in the "domestic market" is a biased US-centric POV when it comes to non-US and maybe non-Canadian films. The rule is non-existent outside of North America.

:Anyways, even if the above wouldn't disprove your poor points from the start, there's more in the Vancouver Sun article than just that, namely the fact that the film's *PRODUCERS* have officially stated that the film had broken even before it had even been released, thanks to clever distribution and licensing deals. --[[Special:Contributions/2003:EF:1700:B470:40A4:31ED:152D:BBF6|2003:EF:1700:B470:40A4:31ED:152D:BBF6]] ([[User talk:2003:EF:1700:B470:40A4:31ED:152D:BBF6|talk]]) 15:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on [[Terry Gilliam]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/813200682|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151016043313/http://www.labiennale.org/en/cinema/70th-festival/screenings/sept2.html to http://www.labiennale.org/en/cinema/70th-festival/screenings/sept2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101011122710/http://www.eno.org/see-whats-on/productions/production-page.php?&itemid=1087 to http://www.eno.org/see-whats-on/productions/production-page.php?&itemid=1087
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131013215342/http://twitchfilm.com/2013/10/stanley-kubrick-wanted-terry-gilliam-to-direct-son-of-strangelove.html to http://twitchfilm.com/2013/10/stanley-kubrick-wanted-terry-gilliam-to-direct-son-of-strangelove.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080527070757/http://www.showbuzz.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/06/movies/main2071659.shtml to http://www.showbuzz.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/06/movies/main2071659.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 11:04, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

== Future projects ==

Everything listed under future projects are actually items from 3-6 years old.  Did any of these pan out?  Are any still in development?  At what point do we remove all of it? ---<b style="font-family: Georgia;">[[User:TheOldJacobite|<span style="color:#009900">The Old Jacobite</span>]]</b><i style="font-family: Courier New;"><sub>[[User talk:TheOldJacobite|<span style="color:#006600">The '45</span>]]</sub></i> 12:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

:{{u|TheOldJacobite}} We could merge certain sections, specifically [[Terry Gilliam#Production problems]], [[Terry Gilliam#Projects in development or shelved]] and [[Terry Gilliam#Future projects]], into one section and title it "Unrealized projects".  This is common in other Wikipedia BLP articles about filmmakers such as [[William Friedkin#Unrealized projects]] and [[Nicolas Winding Refn#Unrealized projects]].  I even created such a section at [[Frank Oz#Unrealized projects]].  We could do the same for the Gilliam article, and if that section becomes sizable enough, we could even create an article titled [[Terry Gilliam's unrealized projects]].  That's what I did when I created [[Michael Cimino's unrealized projects]].   I'm just making a couple of suggestions, that's all. [[User:Hitcher vs. Candyman|Hitcher vs. Candyman]] ([[User talk:Hitcher vs. Candyman|talk]]) 19:22, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

== Notable Works ==

Can I please start a "Known Works" list for [[Terry Gilliam]]? He has accomplished many creative endeavors in his life, and I feel it would be cool to pay homage by creating one. Much like the list for [[Rob Reiner]], it can be broken up by his work as an actor, and as a director. ''[[Monty Python]]'' can go under the acting section, while his films like ''[[Time Bandits]]'', ''[[The Fisher King]]'', and ''[[12 Monkeys]]'' can go under the director section. Please let me know what to include, and I will contact you soon.
Thank you. [[User:Jgwilliams873|Jgwilliams873]] ([[User talk:Jgwilliams873|talk]]) 17:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
:These are [[WP:POV]] and [[WP:SYNTH]]. They are also deprecated by the filmproject. This has been explained to you many times. [[User:MarnetteD|MarnetteD]]&#124;[[User talk:MarnetteD|Talk]] 01:28, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

== Recurring collaborators ==

In my opinion the problem with the table of recurring collaborators is not that it is unsourced. We could easily source that Gilliam worked with for instance Myrtle Devenish on no less than two movies. The problem is the question whether this piece of information is relevant enough. It would be relevant to note if Gilliam in interviews had stated that he had deliberately chosen to repeatedly collaborate with Myrtle Devenish. But in the absence of such a statement by Gilliam, I think the informational value of the table is almost zero. Most of the people mentioned have only worked on two films. The table suggests, by its mere presence, that a two-time collaboration is something special. With thirteen full-length films directed by Gilliam a two-time collaboration is not enough for me to consider being something special. I am in favour of removing the table entirely. We might want to write a short, sourced paragraph about people that Gilliam himself explicitly considers his recurring collaborators. By the way, the existence of this table has previously been discussed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terry_Gilliam/Archives/2016 in 2016] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terry_Gilliam/Archives/2013 in 2013] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terry_Gilliam/Archives/2012 in 2010]. I have not yet read any convincing argument to include the table. [[User:Mark in wiki|Mark in wiki]] ([[User talk:Mark in wiki|talk]]) 14:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
:I've seen it done on other pages where the minimum collaborations to be included on a table is three rather than two. That's my personal preference. [[User:YouCanDoBetter|YouCanDoBetter]] ([[User talk:YouCanDoBetter|talk]]) 22:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

== EARLY ANIMATION ==

I expected to see a decent history of Mr. Gilliam's early cutout animation works, I supposed produced during his college days, none of which are mentioned. I have been unable to locate a particular long film that was broadcast far past midnight on a weekend in the late 1960's by one of our local rural television stations, at a time when broadcasting was almost always shut down for the night. That specific film last more than a half-hour, as I recall. One such early film, available on YouTube, was called "Storytime" (1968), allegedly his first. I think this is an important topic and totally relevant to the subject due to his unique style, especially since it was later routinely employed in "Monty Python". [[User:Mentummike|Mentummike]] ([[User talk:Mentummike|talk]]) 04:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)