From the shoutbox:
Sarisa: "Speaking of Netflix Instant gold...Terry Gilliams Time Bandits is up too"
Light Dragon: "At some point I will watch that; however that director has no idea how to end a movie- Monty Python, the Imaginarium- had no endings (even if it was part of the point with Python's unexpectedness, it was STILL weak storytelling); and Brazil would have been better off without the escape part of the ending- I was thoroughly angered at the escape's idiocy, figuring it may just be a dream, so that when my belief was confirmed- I couldn't have any catharsis and left that movie annoyed. Oh yes, and I also considered Muchausen a frighteningly bad film... And the Fisher King, if I recall properly, also had huge ending problems. I recall being disturbed and annoyed throughout that entire movie. He has good initial ideas, he does some interesting filmography, but ultimately his works are soulless and fail to achieve the goal of catharsis that theatre is supposed to achieve. Even if he is trying to aim at one of the schools of theatre- the school of theatre of the absurd (?? forget the name) like Brecht or one of Ionesco who intend to shock the viewer and create social consciousness- he does not achieve what he sets out to do nearly as well. His endings essentially ruin his plays- much as the third act of Our Town is a bitter juxtaposition to the first two, which leaves the viewer feeling insulted."
Steerpike: "I think you're thinking of Brecht's "epic theatre." I think Gilliam is about as far from Brecht as it's possible to get, though. What possible consciousness-raising message could be found in Brother's Grimm? Sounds like you're a pretty staunch Aristotelian there... what do you think about comedies? Or horror movies, where the ending generally undermines a sense of closure? "
Seraphine Harmonium: "Yes, Brecht was Epic Theater. And while Theater of the Absurd often comes with the trappings of weirdness that you brought up, it comes with the existential underpinnings of "pointlessness" "
The Meanest Guest: "Maybe if you didn't over-analyze film so much you would enjoy it more, LD. "
Light Dragon: "Although portions of his work demonstrate extreme creativity and wit; his work in toto was not enjoyable whether it is analyzed or not. (I will see about starting a thread; any suggestions on a title?) "
(thanks to Steerpike for the topic title)
Steerpike- Re: Gilliam being far from Epic Theatre; it depends on what movie you are analyzing. I am not familiar with Brothers Grimm. Gilliam did seem to be making a political statement in Brazil (the hopelessness of person against government) and he seemed to be making a statement in Fisher King (the hopelessness of person against self) and in Dr. Parnassus (the failure of love to overcome anything). His statements are also fairly bold and include lectures to the audience, if I recall properly there were a number of soliloquies in the movies. You are right though that he would be more Theatre of the Absurd (like Eugene Ionesco, who I mentioned above) than Epic Theatre.
Furthermore re: epic theatre- epic theatre is about making political statements and knowing that one is watching a play. Monty Python certainly breaks the third wall and could be seen to be a mockery of epic theatre, especially with the dirt farmers who discuss their sociopolitical status. And Threepenny Opera by Brecht is, like Monty Python or Brazil, very aware of the power of a 'happy ending' and the power of a writer to take away the ending and jerk around the watchers... Except Threepenny Opera does its ending so much better than Brazil. Threepenny Opera is sarcastic with its happy ending because a 'happy ending is expected'--when Threepenny winks at watchers that in the real world an ending would not be happy...and threepenny also winks in that the 'happy' ending isn't exactly happy in that 'just desserts' are not necessarily served; Brazil's ending, however, falls flat with a bait and switch 'dream' sequence.
To elaborate on my response to TMG: I sadly don't find much enjoyable about Gilliam's movies- I feel like he is trying insult viewers. He is, in many ways, like Vonnegut- someone with interesting ideas, but who is ultimately poison for the soul. Vonnegut is an amazing example of an author who can find the horror and the horribleness and the grotesque about everything, every intention, every action, everything that anyone does to an extent that anything he writes becomes melodrama. Vonnegut creates art and he accomplishes something amazing. However, Gilliam, like Vonnegut, appears to be an artist who paints with excrement. He splashes it on everything and while the product is intriguing and interesting, the end result inspires disappointment rather than wonder and inspiration.
While I can enjoy Theatre of the Absurd's pointlessness sometimes- I do like Monty Python's sketches- sketches do not a movie make. The joke is old after it is done once and Gilliam is no Becket (Waiting for Godot) or Ionesco.
Where Gilliam fails to entertain is that he presents problems but no solutions. He presents inner horror without inner beauty. I think he raises good points that people should consider, but what he creates is not entertainment, nor does it entertain me.
Steerpike- Re: Aristotelian Tragedy. Yes, I would consider myself an Aristotelian. I don't like being lectured in a movie or obviously manipulated and I enjoy a resolution. I like to see things presented as they are for the universe of the characters. Third wall breaking tends to infuriate me. A play is a play is a play and it is in the context of its own world. Similarly with books; I enjoy some philosophical books in spite of their lectures (C.S. Lewis in That Hideous Strength), but as with depictions of sexuality or obscenity- it's more amusing when statements are cleverly included in the very structure of the story rather than blatantly 'told'. (e.g. it's more interesting to insult someone with faint praise as often happens in the Thin Man movies than to blatantly fart and twit off like in Ace Ventura or Dumb and Dumber [though both movies certainly demonstrate cleverness at times-the movies are well-thought, which rescues them a bit, but I have to swallow my bile at times while viewing them]).