Jump to content

Talk:Terry Gilliam: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
Bots
1,333,191 edits
m Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Terry Gilliam/Archives/2019. (BOT)
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
Bots
1,333,191 edits
m Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Terry Gilliam/Archives/2021. (BOT)
 
(15 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=B|vital=yes|living=yes|listas=Gilliam, Terry|1=
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Entertainers|class=B}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|filmbio-work-group=yes|filmbio-priority=high}}
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=B|filmbio-work-group=yes|filmbio-priority=high|listas=Gilliam, Terry}}
{{WikiProject Television|importance=high|monty-python=yes|monty-python-importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Television|class=B|importance=high|monty-python=yes|monty-python-importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Comedy|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Comedy|class=B|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Animation|importance=Mid|American-animation=yes|American-animation-importance=Mid|people=yes|people-importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Animation|class=B
{{WikiProject Marketing & Advertising|importance=Low}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Minnesota|importance=Low}}
| 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 -->
<!-- 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}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Terry Gilliam/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}}


== box office success? ==
== Early Animation ==

"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)

== No mention of his support of a convicted rapist? ==

There is no mention of his support of convicted felon Roman Polanski. Should this be added?

For those who apparently can't handle the truth about this individual, here is a link to the petition he chose to attach his name to.

[http://www.indiewire.com/2009/09/over-100-in-film-community-sign-polanski-petition-55821/] <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:2601:802:8003:2040:88e6:9c8c:14b1:cad9|2601:802:8003:2040:88e6:9c8c:14b1:cad9]] ([[User talk:2601:802:8003:2040:88e6:9c8c:14b1:cad9#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/2601:802:8003:2040:88e6:9c8c:14b1:cad9|contribs]]) </small>
:Given that over 100 other people also supported Polanski, can you provide any sources to establish that Gilliam's support was considered particularly controversial in some manner? [[User:Doniago|DonIago]] ([[User talk:Doniago|talk]]) 20:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

All of them are controversial, but apparently no one cares about entertainers supporting entertainers who rape children. It would seem no one on wikipedia is willing to tolerate this information posted on their favorite entertainers' pages. Strange that the names of his parents is considered pertinent information but his support of criminals isn't.<!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:2601:802:8002:500:c5dc:f559:d51a:b1a1|2601:802:8002:500:c5dc:f559:d51a:b1a1]] ([[User talk:2601:802:8002:500:c5dc:f559:d51a:b1a1#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/2601:802:8002:500:c5dc:f559:d51a:b1a1|contribs]]) </small>
:If it's controversial then providing a source should be easy enough. [[User:Doniago|DonIago]] ([[User talk:Doniago|talk]]) 19:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

:A source has been provided, however I accept that supporting child rape isn't a big deal as long as people like your creative efforts. After all, it wasn't "rape rape", right? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2601:802:8002:500:F54A:9583:6FD8:3808|2601:802:8002:500:F54A:9583:6FD8:3808]] ([[User talk:2601:802:8002:500:F54A:9583:6FD8:3808#top|talk]]) 22:28, 2 October 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

"After all, it wasn't "rape rape", right?"

In [[Roman Polanski]]'s case, we have a detailed article on the [[Roman Polanski sexual abuse case]]. He offered 13-year-old model Samantha Gailey some champagne, which had been spiked with [[methaqualone]] ("Quaalude"). He then performed oral, vaginal, and anal sex on her, while ignoring her protests.

Not only was the sex not consensual to begin with, but it involves the use of a [[date rape drug]].

However, support for Polanski is commonplace. France, Poland, and Switzerland have all opposed extraditing Polanski to the United States. According to a public manifesto in support of Polanski: "Roman Polanski is a French citizen, an artist of international reputation, now threatened to be extradited. This extradition, if brought into effect, would carry a heavy load of consequences as well as deprive the film-maker of his freedom."

[[Frédéric Mitterrand]] defended Polanski, because Polanski "always said how much he loves France, and he is a wonderful man". [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 12:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

:{{reply to|Doniago}} Over 100 other people signing it does not make Gilliam's own support less controversial. I'm not sure what the problem is with [https://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/sep/29/roman-polanski-petition the source] I originally provided. Celebrities opinions in relation to politics or whatever are often included on their articles so I do not see why this shouldn't be. But how about these: [https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jan/30/hollywood-reverence-child-rapist-roman-polanski-convicted-40-years-on-run source 1], [https://jezebel.com/letters-from-hollywood-roman-polanskis-rape-of-child-n-5370356 source 2], [https://www.eonline.com/uk/news/146550/woody-allen-and-martin-scorsese-free-roman-polanski source 3]? Source 1 does not mention Gilliam by name but is about the support of Polanski in general – sources 2 and 3 do include his name. [[User:Abbyjjjj96|Abbyjjjj96]] ([[User talk:Abbyjjjj96|talk]]) 02:34, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
::You have missed the point. Is there some source that indicates why Gilliam's support of Polanski is particularly critical to Gilliam's career and biography in a way it ''isn't'' to all those other signatories? Why is this detail WP-worthy? [[User:Grandpallama|Grandpallama]] ([[User talk:Grandpallama|talk]]) 10:05, 13 June 2019 (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)

== Troy ==


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 lasted well 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 his animation was later routinely employed (and became famous) in "Monty Python". [[User:Mentummike|Mentummike]] ([[User talk:Mentummike|talk]]) 04:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
I have added entries in the section of the article titled [[Terry Gilliam#Projects in development or shelved|Projects in development or shelved]] in which Gilliam turned down offers to direct such films as ''Who Framed Roger Rabbit'' (1988), ''Forrest Gump'' (1994), ''Braveheart'' (1995) and one of the sequels to ''Alien'' (1979). I learned about this information via my discovery of this link from [https://books.google.com/books?id=vqR6DQAAQBAJ&pg=PA107&dq=terry+gilliam+troy+five+pages&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwieqojJjY3kAhUMWqwKHYvjCYcQ6AEwAHoECAAQAg#v=onepage&q=terry%20gilliam%20troy%20five%20pages&f=false Google Books], which also mentions that Gilliam turned down the offer to direct ''Troy'' (2004) after reading five pages of the script. Since the publisher of the Google Books link is [[Lulu.com]], a self-publisher, would I be violating [[WP:SELFPUB]] if I were to add the ''Troy'' entry to the section using Lulu.com as its reference? [[User:Hitcher vs. Candyman|Hitcher vs. Candyman]] ([[User talk:Hitcher vs. Candyman|talk]]) 19:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
:We have an article on a Gilliam short film called [[Story Time (film)|Story Time]] (1979), but not on a 1968 film. [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 05:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)


== Notable Works ==
== Perforated medullary artery ==


The article claims that he did not suffer a stroke, but rather a "perforated medullary artery," and presents an article quoting Mr. Gilliam as the source of this claim.
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)


More information is needed to justify this claim. As a neurosurgeon who specializes in the treatment of cerebrovascular disease, I have no idea what a "perforated medullary artery" is. I suspect he is referring to a medullary perforator infarct, which is, in fact, a stroke. [[Special:Contributions/72.235.131.131|72.235.131.131]] ([[User talk:72.235.131.131|talk]]) 01:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
== Recurring collaborators ==


:I don't have to be a neurosurgeon to know that A. The medulla oblongata is part of the brain (stem) and B. A perforation in an artery causes bleeding. Bleeding in the brain is BY DEFINITION a stroke! I am changing the article to reflect this FACT. Oh, by the way it turns out that a square is a rectangle and many people who have suffered a stroke deny it.[[Special:Contributions/71.30.91.96|71.30.91.96]] ([[User talk:71.30.91.96|talk]]) 19:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
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)
::After I edited the article to remove the claim that calling it a stroke was an error, I noted that the "error" is based on Mr. Gilliam's claims. This was after I mentioned (directly above) that people often deny having strokes. It's not a coincidence, there's emotional baggage attached to the term "stroke" which can be obfuscated with medical jargon. IMHO, Wikipedia has to balance respect for the subject of a biography with accurate, if unpleasant, truth-telling, especially when the jargon-laden obfuscation doesn't inform the readership. I don't care to get into the better argument as to whether the media's "mis-[sic]characterization" is notable enough to be included. The best argument I have is that calling his injury a perforated medullary artery is not informative for most readers, and that "stroke" best informs a lay-audience.[[Special:Contributions/71.30.91.96|71.30.91.96]] ([[User talk:71.30.91.96|talk]]) 20:01, 13 May 2023 (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)

Latest revision as of 05:47, 16 June 2024


Archives (Index)

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Early Animation

[edit]

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 lasted well 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 his animation was later routinely employed (and became famous) in "Monty Python". Mentummike (talk) 04:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on a Gilliam short film called Story Time (1979), but not on a 1968 film. Dimadick (talk) 05:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perforated medullary artery

[edit]

The article claims that he did not suffer a stroke, but rather a "perforated medullary artery," and presents an article quoting Mr. Gilliam as the source of this claim.

More information is needed to justify this claim. As a neurosurgeon who specializes in the treatment of cerebrovascular disease, I have no idea what a "perforated medullary artery" is. I suspect he is referring to a medullary perforator infarct, which is, in fact, a stroke. 72.235.131.131 (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have to be a neurosurgeon to know that A. The medulla oblongata is part of the brain (stem) and B. A perforation in an artery causes bleeding. Bleeding in the brain is BY DEFINITION a stroke! I am changing the article to reflect this FACT. Oh, by the way it turns out that a square is a rectangle and many people who have suffered a stroke deny it.71.30.91.96 (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After I edited the article to remove the claim that calling it a stroke was an error, I noted that the "error" is based on Mr. Gilliam's claims. This was after I mentioned (directly above) that people often deny having strokes. It's not a coincidence, there's emotional baggage attached to the term "stroke" which can be obfuscated with medical jargon. IMHO, Wikipedia has to balance respect for the subject of a biography with accurate, if unpleasant, truth-telling, especially when the jargon-laden obfuscation doesn't inform the readership. I don't care to get into the better argument as to whether the media's "mis-[sic]characterization" is notable enough to be included. The best argument I have is that calling his injury a perforated medullary artery is not informative for most readers, and that "stroke" best informs a lay-audience.71.30.91.96 (talk) 20:01, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Terry_Gilliam&oldid=1229326958"