triumph
Designed, Compiled and Written by Jordan Clare-Rothe Published by Jordan Clare-Rothe Text set in Tungsten, Archer, and Sentinel For the film festival I Think Therefore You Is paying tribute to the work of Terry Gilliam. Printed in Spring 2010 Š Jordan Clare-Rothe isbn 02644586-AAu All Rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy or any storage retrieval systam, withoutpermission in writting from the publisher. Respect copywrite, encourage creativity. Limited Edition only.
triumph
scuba
“But seriously, without me there would be nothing, not even you. Cogito ergo es. I think, therefore you is.” —Floating Head of the King of the Moon, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
triumph
Contents
druid
1
2
Reality and Madness
Gilliam’s Story
Gilliam’s work is
How did this guy escape
about asking questions.
from the States and into a
Is the world really as it seems?
world of his own creation?
page gubernatorial
page numerator
3
4
5
The Films
Rushdie Interview
England Guide
A collection of the director’s
The notable author holds
The historic Old Vic Theatre,
work surrounding the theme
a conversation with
and merry old London. What
of reality and madness.
the intrepid director
to do while you’re there.
page beagle
page water park
page pantry
guilt
Reality and There is a common sentiment upon leaving a Gilliam film: What the hell just happened. His films can certainly ruin a perfectly pleasant afternoon.
gubernatorial
1
Madness Over the decades, Gilliam is intent to look at the
It is not our problem to have all the answers, and
world in a way it is not usually considered. He
it is not Gilliam’s job to give them to us. Gilliam
asks the question with his films: What is reality?
uses various vehicles (time travel, drug use,
How do we understand reality? The heroes in his
childhood) to show the way we look at ourselves.
films oftentimes have a reality that is strikingly
He challenges us, the viewer, and his world is not
different than our own. His characters may be
always our own. Gilliam wants to disorient us. To
insane, some of them certainly are. And yet
hold us by our feet and let our hair hang upwards
the world is presented to us through their eyes.
and see our world from a new angle.
Does our concept of reality invalidate theirs? Does the way a crazy person see the world make our understanding of reality any less concrete? Gilliam pushes us to ask these question with the themes of imagination and madness which push how we can understand reality. Reality is not a solid ground from which to stand in his films, but rather a shifting shape beneath our feet.
illusive
numerator
2
Gilliam’s Story
Who is this guy? A perfectly normal childhood led an adequate child to a dirty world of cartoon making, leading to an even more tawdry dip into movie direction. You might say that it could have happened to any of us. Feel lucky that it didn’t happen to you.
pizzeria
g
Gilliam was born in Medicine Lake,
Minnesota, and moved with his family to
Panorama city, California as a child in 1952.
He attended Birmingham High School where
was class president and Senior Prom King, and
was voted “Most Likely to Succeed.” During
High School he discovered Mad Magazine, in
and defined the group’s visual language in other media. He also appeared in several sketches, and played side parts in the films but was definitely always the least visible python. Gilliam’s animations for Monty Python have
the days it was being edited by Harvey Kurzman.
a distinctive style. He mixed his own art, char-
This would later go on to influence his work.
acterized by soft gradients and odd bulbous
After High School Gilliam went on to Occidental
shapes, with backgrounds and moving cutouts
College. He began as a physics major, then
from antique photographs, mostly from the
switched to fine arts, before finally settling on
Victorian era. The style has been mimicked
Political Science. He contributed to his college
repeatedly throughout the years: in the children’s
magazine, Fang, and became its editor in his Junior
television cartoon Angela Anaconda, a series
Year. After graduating college, Gilliam worked
of television commercials for Guinness stout,
briefly in advertising before being hired by
the “Children’s Television Sausage Factory”
Kurzman at Help! Magazine. The comic sensibili-
openings that inspired opening animator Barry
ties of Kurzman had a profound effect on the
Blair of Nickelodeon series You Can’t Do
young Gilliam. It was also at Help! that Gilliam
That On Television!, John Muto’s animation
became acquainted with John Cleese.
in Forbidden Zone, the political cartoons
Terry Gilliam started his career as an animator and strip cartoonist; one of his early
that feature on the web site JibJab, the Rathergood.com animations by Joel Veitch,
photographic strips for Harvey Kurtzman’s Help!
a bizarre set of Internet cartoons called
featured future Python cast-member John Cleese.
Animutations made by Neil Cicierega, the
Moving to England, he animated features for Do
television history series Terry Jones’
Not Adjust Your Set, which also featured future
Medieval Lives, recent episodes of the Alton
Pythons Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin.
Brown’s Food Network television show Good
Gilliam then participated in Monty
Eats, and, to a degree, South Park.
Python’s Flying Circus from its formation, at first being credited as an animator (his name was listed separately after the other five in the closing credits), later as a full member. He was the only non-British member. He was the principal
stipulation
artist-animator of the surreal cartoons which frequently linked the show’s sketches together,
Gilliam went on to become a motion picture writer and director. His films are usually highly imaginative fantasies. Most of Gilliam’s movies include plot
lines that seem to occur partly or completely in
He also is given to incongruous juxtapositions,
the characters’ imaginations, raising questions
say of beauty and ugliness, or antique and
about the definition of identity and sanity. He
modern. Most of his movies are shot almost
often shows his opposition to bureaucracy
entirely with extremely wide lenses of 28 mm
and authoritarian regimes. He also distinguishes
or less, and extremely deep focus.
‘higher’ and ‘lower’ layers of society, with a disturbing and ironic style. His movies usually
Gilliam has acquired the unfortunate reputation of making extremely expensive movies beset
Terry Gilliam started his career as an animator and strip cartoonist; one of his early photographic strips for Harvey Kurtzman’s Help! featured future Python cast-member John Cleese. feature a fight or struggle against a great power
with production problems. After the lengthy
which may be an emotional situation, a human-
quarrelling with Universal Studios over Brazil,
made idol, or even the person himself, and the
Gilliam’s next picture, The Adventures of Baron
situations do not always end happily. There is
Munchausen, cost around US$46 million, and
often a dark, paranoid atmosphere and unusual
then earned only about US$8 million in US ticket
characters who formerly were normal members
sales. A decade later, Gilliam attempted to film
of society. His scripts feature a dark sense of
The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, budgeted at
humor and often end with a dark twist.
US$32.1 million, among the highest-budgeted
His films have a distinctive look, often
films to use only European financing; but in the
recognizable from just a short clip; Roger Ebert
first week of shooting, the actor playing Don
has said ‘his world is always hallucinatory in its
Quixote (Jean Rochefort) suffered a herniated
richness of detail.’ There is often a baroqueness
disc, and a flood severely damaged the set.
about the movies, with, for instance, high-tech computer monitors equipped with low-tech magnifying lenses in one film, and in another a red knight covered with flapping bits of cloth.
diffident
Peter Vaughan
Derrick O'Connor
Time Bandits
Brazil Jim Broadbent
Jack Purvis
Ian Holm
The Aventures of Baron Munchausen
Recurring Actors Guide Gilliam has a few favorite actors who can be seen recurring in several of his films. This is especially true in his earlier work.
beagle
Jonathan Price
Twelve Monkeys Katherine Helmound
Simon Jones Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Christopher Meloni
Tideland
Charles McKeown
hindsight
Time bandits
Brazil
12 Monkeys
Fear and LoathingIn Las Vegas
octogon
3 The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
Tideland
Films
filter
Friday 7/16
Steadman’s ink Party
Events
scynthetic
Saturday 7/17
Panel Discussion with the cast of Monty Python
Sunday 7/18
Terry Gilliam speaks
combat
films Time Bandits
Brazil
7 PM
7 PM
Main Theatre
Main Theatre
The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
Twelve Monkeys
7 PM
Main Theatre
Tues. 7/13
Thur. 7/15
Wed. 7/14
Fri. 7/16 10 PM
Main Theatre
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Tideland
7 PM
Main Theatre
Sat 7/17
Main Theatre
altruist
Sun 7/18 7 PM
Schedule events
Panel Discussion with the cast of Monty Python’s Flying Circus Fri. 7/16 7 PM
Eric Idle, Jon Cleese, and the rest of the gang get together to talk about what made their sketch comedy group of seventies so influential, and why comedy geeks on both sides of the pond continue to say “Nee!”.
Steadman’s Ink Party Sat. 7/17 7 PM
Ralph Steadman, the legendary artist best known for his manic, splotchy ink pieces and his time spent with Hunter S. Thompson hosts a drawing party and will talk about his decades long friendship with Gilliam. Don’t expect to see any “happy trees” here.
Gilliam Speaks Sun. 7/18 7 PM
The Master film maker himself comes to anwer questions from the audience. Tomatoes will be available.
patriarch
scuba
triumph
Time Bandits Time Bandits exhibits Gilliam’s characteristic interest in history. Visible in the film’s periphery are Homeric Greece, the French Revolution, the sinking Titanic and basic ethical manifestations of good and evil (the former—the Supreme Being—wears a pleated gray suit). Time Bandits is at once revisionist history and children’s fantasy. Terry Gilliam’s entire career has been spent as an endearing fight against convention. Furthering this plight in Time Bandits is a principle cast comprised almost entirely of midgets.
The short ones are the film’s namesake, and possess traits that may be associated with children: they are immature, rude and greedy. The dwarves are former hedge
trimmers for the Supreme Being. The group plotted mutiny, stole a map of the universe (which cites the location of crucial “time holes”) and proceeded to gather the most valuable loot in history. One such time hole lies in the closet of Kevin, a young boy in a relatively contemporary England. He is awakened by the abrupt appearance of the group of bandits and is shortly enlisted in their scheme. The camera inherits the perspective of the film’s miniature protagonists. It is placed entirely at low angles to respect its main characters’ stilted height. This technique crops the faces of many of the taller characters; we see only their feet and their actions. In this manner Gilliam establishes his film’s subjective approach, and it is clear this troupe of midgets and their younger sidekick, each vulnerably short, stands heroic. The very scope of this film is incessant in its sporadic setting — locations are nearly incidental, a series of comedic opportunities. The famous climax of the Titanic disaster is seen in over thirty films (and is arguably the subject of many of them) and it is at its least dramatic in this film.
chine
Writers Michael Palin Terry Gilliam Released November 6, 1981 Starring John Cleese Sean Connery Ian Holm Michael Palin Ralph Richardson Peter Vaughan
Despite the fact that the film’s comedy inevitably hinders its philosophy, its thought is nonetheless apparent. The world Gilliam constructs is one in which age or, more particularly, maturation prohibits one’s ability to imagine. Much like blood, one’s imagination procures creative and mental longevity. The midgets resemble children not only in their stature but in their ability to idealise history — to make it fun. For Monty Python, The Meaning of Life is a characteristic effort, as it bears the balance of the sacred and profane, at once excessive and subtle qualities that distinguishes the body of their work. Similarly characterising is Gilliam’s prologue: it runs ten minutes and in it’s brief duration exhibits a bold, varied visual scale and resolute climactic action. This scene possesses unavoidable limits in its length and relation to the film (from which it is distinctly separate), yet it is an exemplar of Gilliam’s filmmaking tactics. Article by Rumsey Taylor, sensesofcinema.com
pantile
pantile
If i were creating the world, I wouldn’t mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers. Eight o’clock. Day one. — Evil, Time Bandits
spool
scuba
Brazil triumph
Brazil There is a crucial element of fantasy in Brazil (1985), although it occurs in ascetic, corporate environments: busy, dark offices without an outside view, alleys paved in advertisements and flyers. Legal paperwork (receipts, warrants, order forms) must accompany every transaction and interaction; it is this overwhelming formality for documentation, in addition to the lack of reliability in technology that fosters the most caustic disruption in the most mundane error. (Brazil’s principle conflict ensues in result of a squashed bug that lands in a
typewriter.) As a gesture of calamity exclusive to this environment, explosions in Brazil cause showers of paperwork in their aftermath. They are show-
ers of celebratory confetti, announcing a scar in a system bound in red tape. It is not necessary that Brazil’s setting resembles a natural one, though such resemblance forwards the film’s allegorical relevance. A rendition of Orwellian dystopia with the comic cynicism of Jacques Tati’s masterpiece Playtime (1967), Brazil is a parable of corporate dominance; it depicts an environment strewn in propagandistic slogans and is scored with the unending rhythm of typewriter keys. There is no natural horizon in this location; for the matter, there is no hint (until a brief shot at the film’s end) of an uninhibited, natural freedom The film’s protagonist is a blue-collared everyman, Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce). He lives in an automated apartment with the activity and inefficiency of a Rube Goldberg machine. His corporate setting, dressed in impersonal fluorescent lighting and shades of grey, is similarly ascetic. As a counterbalance to his “natural” environment, Sam has dreams in which he is an armoured, winged hero. He glides and flips through the sky, and protects a beautiful, angelic goddess. Sam’s dreams are in fantastic, freed environments and become indistinguishable from his reality (a final conflict
sentiment
Writers Terry Gilliam Tom Stoppard Charles McKeon Released December 18, 1985 Starring Jonathan Pryce Robert DeNiro Kim Greist
seems to occur in both settings). It is a suggestion that the government is fascistically contaminative, that even the freedom of dreams has been prohibited. Peripheral characters are dressed identically in attire that clearly relays their social rank, forwarding a notion of the individual’s lack of identity — in Sam’s second job, his name is even replaced with a serial number. His mother is seen distinctly throughout, and in each sequence is in a subsequent stage of a comprehensive plastic surgery (literally; in once scene her face is held in saran wrap). By the film’s end she becomes a physical and soulless replication, an attractive body (or, at least, she matches Sam’s perception of beauty in resembling his fantasy girlfriend) and no soul. She is present at the funeral of her own, withered flesh. Superficial material replaces the soul. Although ironically comedic, Brazil is dense and ambiguous in its comedic intent. Thusly, biographical references to Gilliam’s affiliation with Monty Python are falsely suggestive in critiques of the film. Consider a late scene in which Sam is promoted to Information Retrieval and enters his new office. It is as small as a closet, economically paired with another so that a desk may be shared between the two. Sam arranges his papers and office trinkets and lowers his eyebrows in question as his desk slides slightly into the wall. He enters the adjacent office and distracts its tenant, leaving after he nudges the desk back towards his space. The scene is a clever and comedic sight gag, yet it is more useful (and less comedic) as a metaphor, either for Sam’s discomfort or hierarchal competition.
proof reader
scuba
There you are, your own number on your very own door. And behind that door, your very own office! Welcome to the team, DZ-015. —Mr. Warrenn, Brazil
didactic
The film is without debate Terry Gilliam’s most ambitious work, referenced keenly in his prior efforts: Time Bandits includes a exploitative game show that tempts contestants with elaborate and unnecessary home maintenance equipment; Gilliam’s prologue for The Meaning of Life involves a mutiny against a consumerist corporation. It is a fascist and oppressively stark vision (its criticism and recommendation are regularly discrete), as known for its visual strength as it is for its Hollywood spawning. Article by Rumsey Taylor, sensesofcinema.com
friend
triumph yogi
The Adventures of
Baron Munchausen In the 19th century, a fortress is under siege from the Turkish Army. While the attack is going on, the town’s people are in the theatre, watching a play based on the life of notorious tall tale teller Baron Munchausen. The real Baron Munchausen arrives at the theatre and claims not only to have started the war, but also to be able to save the town from the siege. He encounters only mockery from an incredulous townsfolk who dismiss the Baron and his stories.
The Baron finds an ally, a young girl called Sally, who encourages the Baron to imagine a method to save the city—this involves the Baron locating his four powerful
friends by flying to the moon and visiting war god Vulcan under a mountain (where he encounters the pictured Cyclops). He is also swallowed by a large sea monster. The Baron’s friends are Bertholdt, who can run faster than a bullet; Albrecht, who is very strong; Adolphus, who can see for miles; and Gustavus who can blow faster than a thousand winds. However, his friends have aged somewhat, and appear reluctant to go into battle. Reunited with his friends, the Baron aims to save the city from the Sultan and his army. But can this really be true? Baron Karl Friedrich Hieronymous von Munchausen did actually exist in the eighteenth century. Rudolph Raspe compiled a collection of his apochryphal stories in 1785, which have enchanted children for generations. The stories were later illustrated by Gustave Dore. Who lured Terry Gilliam into making Munchausen the movie? In 1979, George Harrison showed Gilliam his collection of Munchausen stories, and later, Ray Cooper gave Gilliam a book on the Baron and challenged the director to make a film of them. On the completion of Brazil in the mid-eighties, Munchausen seemed like an ideal project. It would be visually rich, and would have an appeal similar to the hugely
delicatessen
Writers Terry Gilliam Charles McKeown Released March 10, 1989 Starring John Neville Eric Idle Uma Thurman
profitable Time Bandits. The more the idea was developed, the more it became apparent that such a movie would in fact be the third part of a trilogy, starting with Time Bandits (fantasist as child), Brazil (young man), and now Munchausen (old man). Following a collaboration on Brazil, Gilliam developed Munchausen with Charles McKeown. At the time, Arnon Milchan was interested in producing the movie. However, the movie was produced by Thomas Schuhly, a German producer based at Rome studio Cinecitta. According to Schuhly, Milchan was impressed that he had produced The Name of the Rose under budget, and asked Schuhly if he would like to produce Munchausen, with Milchan as executive producer. Gilliam loved the idea of making Munchausen in Rome, and got on well with Schuhly when they met. At this time, Milchan became less and less interested in Munchausen, and as a result, bowed out. Schuhly took on the full role of producer. The script was developed and according to Schuhly’s insistence, was budgeted at $25m. It was assumed that production costs at Cinecitta would be far below that of London. A deal was struck with Columbia, then with David Puttnam in charge, giving the company distribution rights for most of the world. Columbia was to pay $25m, which included video distribution rights too. Since Columbia would pay no more than this amount, a completion guarantor was employed, to insure against the movie going over budget. At this stage, Gilliam’s previous two films were Time Bandits and Brazil, and Gilliam had a reputation, thanks in part to his modelling skills, for being able to deliver
sanctum
scuba
Your reality sir, is lies and balderdash, and i’m delighted to say that i have no grasp on it. —The Baron, The Adentures of Baron Munchausen
triumph
expensive looking films cheaply. It turned out that the agreed budget would prove to be woefully inadequate. Gilliam was delighted to work in Italy, and Schuhly helped to get an excellent crew for Terry. The Production Designer was Dante Ferretti, and the Director of Photography was Giuseppe Rotunno, both of whom had worked with Fellini. Ferretti compares Gilliam to Fellini, “Terry is very similar to Fellini in spirit. Fellini is a wilder liar, but that’s the only difference! Terry isn’t a director so much as a film author. He is open to every single idea and opportunity to make the end result work. Often the best ideas have come out of something not working properly and coming up with a new concept as a result. He is very elastic and that’s one quality in a director that I admire the most.” Richard Conway, who had worked for Brazil, was responsible for special effects. As in his previous movies, Gilliam used excellent character actors in Munchausen. The role of the Baron was filled by John Neville—not very well known, but Gilliam felt he would fit the role of the Baron far better than other established stars. Michael Hordern was also considered in the early stages of development, but said to Gilliam, “Look Terry, I’m 73—and I’d very much like to see 74!”. Bertholdt was played by Eric Idle, a fellow ex-Python, who has worked with Gilliam over the years on many projects. Gilliam was particularly pleased with Vulcan, played by Oliver Reed as a steel baron from Nineteenth Century Lancashire. Reed recalled, “Munchausen was about the only time I’ve been allowed
sashay
to do what I wanted with a part. You can be over-directed by people, but Terry let me have my own way. [When rehearsing], Terry said, ‘You seemed to be having much more fun with the character yesterday. Could you take it a bit further?’ I didn’t need to be told twice! Once I realized I could get away with it, off I went!” Article courtesy Phil Stubbshttp://www.smart.co.uk/dreams
prolix
Twelve
Monkey
ys
triumph
Twelve Monkeys
Twelve Monkeys is a film that constantly plays with, distorts, and manipulates time. The year is 2035. A deadly virus has wiped out almost all of humanity, leaving the survivors to take refuge deep underground. Only the occasional foray up to the surface in protective gear by a select group of “volunteers” offers any clues as to what went wrong.
James Cole (Bruce Willis) is one such volunteer who is particularly good at retrieving information. As a result, he soon finds himself being sent back in time to find out how the
virus originated and who was responsible. Unfortunately, he goes back too far, arriving in 1990 and is promptly thrown into a rather nightmarish mental hospital. In there, he meets Jeffrey Goines (Brad Pitt), a fellow inmate with a loopy sense of reality that feeds all sorts of paranoid delusions of grandeur. Cole also encounters Kathryn Railly (Madeleine Stowe), a beautiful doctor who sympathizes with him and his plight. As Cole travels back and forth in time he begins to realize that one of the most important clues to the source of the deadly virus may lie in the rather enigmatic underground organization known only as The Army of the 12 Monkeys. Soon, Railly and Goines begin to play integral roles in Cole’s search as he consistently crosses paths with them. But is this all taking place in Cole’s mind? Is he really humanity’s only hope at averting a catastrophic disaster or is he just insane? From the first shot to the film’s conclusion we are never quite sure of Cole’s sanity or lack thereof. It is just one of many questions that the audience must think about not only during the film but long after it ends.
caracul
Writers Chris Marker David Peoples Janet Peoples Released January 5, 2006 Starring Bruce Willis Brad Pitt Kathryn Railly
The seeds of Twelve Monkeys lie in an obscure French New Wave film called La Jetee (1962) made by Chris Marker. The film was composed entirely of black and white photographs and set in Paris after World War III. It was an apocalyptic vision in reaction to the threat of nuclear annihilation that became prominent in the 1950s and 1960s. Writers David and Janet Peoples were approached by producer Robert Kosberg to do an adaptation of La Jetee. The screenwriting couple wasn’t that keen on the idea, however. “We couldn’t see the point. It’s a masterpiece and we didn’t see that there was anyway to translate that masterpiece,” David remarked in an interview. And he was no slouch to the art of screenwriting, having rewritten the screenplay for Blade Runner (1982) and penned the brilliant Clint Eastwood film, Unforgiven (1992). Kosberg got the Peoples to watch La Jetee again and the couple began to see possibilities for a different, more detailed take on the material. “How would we react to people who showed up and said ‘Oh I’ve just popped up from the future’ and in turn how would that person deal with our reaction.” With this in mind, David and Janet set out to write a challenging piece of fiction that not only manipulated our conventional views of time but that also dealt with the notion of madness. Janet explained in an interview, “We were very interested in asking questions like ‘Is this man mad? And how about the prophets of the past, were they mad? Were they true prophets? Were they coming from another time? What are all the different possibilities?’” The film’s script argues that certain people who are classified insane by society at large may not really be crazy at all but are in actuality
non-fattening
presenting ideas that are way ahead of our time. And perhaps the blame for this misunderstanding should be leveled at the psychiatric profession which, as one character in the film observes, has become the new religion of a society that has deserted traditional faith for modern technology. After showing the finished screenplay to Marker and getting his blessing, the Peoples were faced with the daunting task of finding someone who would not only click with the material but also have the visual flair that the story needed. The couple figured that the only director to handle such tricky subject matter was somebody like Ridley Scott or Terry Gilliam. The theme of madness that plays such a prominent role in the script fit right in with Gilliam’s preoccupations and so he seemed the natural choice to direct. As luck would have it the filmmaker was between films and looking for work after several years of seeing potential projects fall through for various reasons. Gilliam was also eager to take a lot of Hollywood money (a $30 million budget) and create a strange art film that would fly in the face of the traditional mainstream movie. “The idea that someone’s writing a script like this in Hollywood and getting the studio to pay for it was pretty extraordinary. So I thought let’s continue to see how much money we can get the studio to spend.” Gilliam’s battles with Hollywood studios is the stuff of legend — most notably his struggle with Universal over the release of Brazil (1984). They wanted to revoke the director’s final cut privileges and insert a happier ending instead of Gilliam’s decidedly downbeat ending. The director’s vision prevailed in the
antacid
“It’s one thing to get lost in your own madness, but to become lost in somebody else’s madness is weirder…”
—Terry Gilliam
end, but the ordeal left him understandably wary of further studio involvement. He has since reconciled somewhat with Hollywood by making The Fisher King (1991) which turned out to be a surprise commercial and critical success. The film is structured somewhat like an onion. On the surface, the audience knows very little at the beginning, but gradually as it progresses and the layers are removed, more and more of the mystery is revealed. However, this is not readily apparent after an initial viewing. Only after subsequent screenings does the full impact and brilliance of what Gilliam and his cast and crew have created sinks in. It is this great amount of care and detail that has clearly gone into this film that makes Twelve Monkeys a truly challenging, brilliant piece of filmmaking. Article Courtesy J.D. LaFrance, http://www.smart.co.uk/dreams
noblewoman
I am escaping certain unnamed realities that plague my life here‌ Are you also divergent, friend? —J.L. Washington, Twelve Monkeys
crupper
melanoma
scuba
triumph
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Journalist Raoul Duke (Johnny Depp) and his attorney, Dr. Gonzo (Benicio Del Toro), drive to Las Vegas to cover the 1971 Mint 400 motorcycle race for Sports Illustrated magazine. However, the race is merely an excuse for the duo to abuse their expense account and indulge in a galaxy of drugs. What was initially a simple journey to cover a motorcycle race mutates into a bizarre search for the American Dream.
Actor Johnny Depp first met Hunter S. Thompson in Aspen, Colorado just before New Year’s Eve, 1995. Depp left that initial meeting wondering why Fear and
Loathing had not been made into a film. The actor subsequently invited Thompson to do a one-night gig at Depp’s nightclub, The Viper Room on September 29, 1996 with the intention of asking the writer about doing a film version of his book. The opportunity never materialized but the two began corresponding via faxes. Early one day, Thompson called Depp on the phone and asked him if he would consider playing Raoul Duke if a film was ever made of Fear and Loathing. “Without hesitation, I said, ‘You bet!’” Depp recalls. By the Spring of 1997, Depp had moved into the basement of Owl Farm, Thompson’s home in Aspen in order to do proper research for the role. Depp was given complete access to every memento the writer saved from his 1971 trip to Las Vegas. The actor read through the writer’s notebooks (which included an unpublished chapter entitled, “The Coconut Scene,” which Gilliam placed in the film) only to realize that “the freakiest thing was that it was all real, that the reality was as insane as the book.” He rummaged through Thompson’s wardrobe at the time: Hawaiian shirts, a patchwork jacket, a safari hat, and a silver medallion given to him by Acosta.
sourpuss
Writers Hunter S. Thompson Terry Gilliam Tony Grisoni Tad Davies Alex Cox Released May 22, 1998 Starring Johnny Depp Benicio Del Toro Christina Ricci
Thompson graciously allowed Depp to wear it all in the film. Thompson even let Depp borrow the red shark: the giant fire engine red convertible that the author took to Vegas, which was also used in the film. All of these items only enhance Depp’s performance. In the film, he has literally transformed into Duke/Thompson, complete with the man’s unusual bow-legged walk, sweeping arm movements, mumbling speech pattern, and the trademark Dunhill cigarettes in a holder between clenched teeth. It’s an incredible performance that transcends simple mimicry. Depp’s research culminated after a week when Thompson shaved almost all of the actor’s hair for the film and entrusted him with the very car he used in the trip. The actor soon became Thompson’s roadie and in charge of security for The Proud Highway (a collection of Thompson’s letters) book tour. Filmmaker Alex Cox was hired to direct the film on January 1997. Judging by his past efforts, films like Repo Man (1983) and Straight to Hell (1987), Cox was no stranger to the same kind of Gonzo sensibilities evident in Thompson’s books. However, Cox’s idea of the film seemed to differ from everyone else involved. Johnny Depp remembers that “Alex had some dream that he could make Thompson’s work better. He was wrong. He had this idea about animation in the film.” Cox and his writing partner, Tod Davies, met Thompson at his home and it was at this point that Cox expressed his desire to incorporate animation in
limber
the film. Thompson took offense to his book being reduced to a cartoon and promptly kicked Cox and Davies out of his home. After Cox was fired, the film’s producers approached Terry Gilliam’s agent. There was an air of desperation because, as Patrick Cassavetti, one of the film’s producers, put it, “the option on the book was about to expire. Johnny Depp had been waiting around overlong and we had another project going that we had to launch in 1998.” Terry Gilliam seemed like the perfect choice to direct this film. The theme of insanity had always figured into his films but has since taken a more prominent role with his last couple of projects. As a result, Fear and Loathing completes an informal trilogy based on madness that includes The Fisher King (1991) and Twelve Monkeys (1995). When Gilliam had first read Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas back in 1971, he “immediately identified with what Hunter was saying. I’d left the States to move here for the very same reasons that Fear and Loathing was written -- that feeling the ideals of the ‘60s had died and that it was all fucked. I was so angry I was going to start throwing bombs. So when I read the book it was like, ‘Jesus! He’s got it! That’s exactly how the fuck I feel!’” Gilliam enjoyed the book but didn’t think about it for years afterwards. Ralph Steadman, who illustrated the book, was a good friend of Gilliam and began to bug him over the years to do a film version of Fear and Loathing. In 1989, Gilliam remembers a “script turned up which briefly got me excited about the book again, but
gullet
I was busy with another project and I ultimately decided that the script didn’t capture the story properly.” However, in 1997, when Gilliam got the call from Laila Nabulsi, one of the film’s producers, to direct, the time seemed to be right. Gilliam said in an interview, “she sent me a script, and it reminded me of how funny and good the book was. I didn’t really care for the script, but it inspired me to go back and read the book again.” And so, Gilliam scrapped Cox and Tod Davies’ screenplay and had only ten days to write another. Gilliam enlisted the help of Tony Grisoni (Queen of Hearts) and together they hammered out a screenplay at Gilliam’s home in London, England in May of 1997. As Grisoni remembers, “I’d sit at the keyboard, and we’d talk and talk and I’d keep typing.” Gilliam felt that the structure of the film should be organized much in the same way as the book: “We start out at full speed and it’s woooo! The drug kicks in and you’re on speed! Whoah! You get the buzz—it’s crazy, it’s outrageous, the carpet’s moving and everybody’s laughing and having a great time. But then, ever so slowly, the walls start closing in and it’s like you’re never going to get out of this fucking place. It’s an ugly nightmare and there’s no escape. And then they get out into the desert and it’s light again. But it’s a really rough ride for a lot of people to climb inside that head.” Gilliam also felt that the more surreal parts of the book could be transferred onto film if done right. For example, the imaginary bats that Duke sees on the highway at
pan-pipe
“One toke? you poor fool! Wait till You see those goddamn bats!”
—Duke, Fear and Loating in Las Vegas
tempest
lightbulb
the beginning of the book was one such passage the director felt could be translated into visual terms. “Right at the start I thought, ‘Well, we can’t show them in the sky, we can only show them inside Duke’s eyeball. So in the film we push in really tight on one of his eyes, where you can see these reflections of bats flapping around. We then cut to a wide shot that shows Duke waving his arms at nothing. I wanted to some how convey that this was an internal problem.” From there, the pace never slackened as Gilliam and company shot Fear and Loathing on location in a fast 56 days on a lean budget (by Hollywood standards) of $18.5 million. “One of the reasons I made this film,” Gilliam remembers, “was to push myself and see if I could still work the way I used to: fast, furiously and cheaply.” Visually, Fear and Loathing is a masterpiece with a whacked out kaleidoscope of colours and insanely inventive camera angles and perspectives that make you feel like you’re actually on drugs. Each drug consumed by Duke and Dr. Gonzo had its corresponding cinematic look to simulate its effects on the characters’ perception. As the film’s cinematographer, Nicola Pecorini points out, the effect of ether was done with “loose depth of field; everything becomes non-defined,” while the effects of amyl nitrate were done so that the “perception of light gets very uneven, light levels increase and decrease during the shots.”
expression
Robert Yarber, an artist who paints pictures of people inside hotel rooms using fluorescent colours, influenced the look of Fear and Loathing. As Gilliam remembers, “we used him as a guide while mixing our palette of deeply disturbing fluorescent colors.” This is evident in the scenes set in hotel rooms that each have their own garish Las Vegas decor that Duke and Dr. Gonzo subsequently transform into a twisted disaster area. Around the 3/4-way mark, Fear and Loathing veers off into some really dark territory as the horror that accompanies chemical dependency rears its ugly head. I was worried that this element would be lost in the transfer from book to film and that it was going to be simply a “straight” comedy. Thankfully, the darker edge of the book has been retained and reinforced in spades. To say that Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas received a mixed reaction from audiences and critics alike is a gross understatement. Perhaps Terry Gilliam and Co. did too faithful an adaptation and it’s a film that only really appeals to devotees of the book. Or, as Gilliam suggests, people were scared off because they had to think about what they were watching, “you’ve got to work out what it’s told you, and that’s not what America’s about. They want their morality clear.” Gilliam found that the American press refused to “even talk about Fear and Loathing. They won’t say, ‘Ban the film’—they’re too liberal for that—so instead they seem to have adopted this attitude of, Oh, maybe if we don’t talk about it, it’ll go away. That’s modern America all over.” And judging by Fear and Loathing’s quick demise at the box office
truant
A 128 minute acid trip from beginning to end with no respite, no rest stops, and no objective distance from which to view the whole insane picture safely. You are plunged headlong into this weird, wild world along with the characters.
and subsequent disappearance from theatres, this strategy worked. While most critics praised Depp and Del Toro’s performance, most found Gilliam’s film to be a muddled mess with no coherent structure: just one long debauched road trip. Regardless of what the critics thought, Gilliam hoped that one person would at least appreciate his efforts: Hunter S. Thompson. “Yeah, I liked it. It’s not my show, but I appreciated it. Depp did a hell of a job. His narration is what really held the film together, I think. If you hadn’t had that, it would have just been a series of wild scenes,” Thompson remarked in an interview. Gilliam remembers Hunter’s reaction to the film when he saw at the premiere: “He was making all this fucking noise! Apparently it all came flooding back to him, he was reliving the whole trip! He was yelling out and jumping on his seat like it was a rollercoaster, ducking and diving, shouting “SHIT! LOOK OUT! GODDAM BATS!” I think that this is indeed some kind of genius film, but in a really demented way that I would have a hard time verbalizing to someone who didn’t tap into what Gilliam is trying to do. I can see why Fear and Loathing received a critical shellacking from all the usual pundits (Ebert et al.). It’s a very odd film—a 128-minute acid trip from beginning to end with no respite, no rest stops, and no objective distance from which to view the whole insane picture safely. You are plunged headlong into this weird, wild world along with the characters. This is the kind of film that people will either really love or hate—there is no middle ground. Gilliam’s film is going to be one of those movies that’s destined to become an
misanthrope
instant cult item. As Hunter S. Thompson puts it in the book, “there he goes, one of God’s own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind, never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, too rare to die.” Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is pure Gonzo filmmaking for people who like weird, challenging films. Article Courtesy J.D. LaFrance, http://www.smart.co.uk/dreams
waiver
scuba
Tide
land
triumph
Tideland For most of you, this will be your first opportunity to see Tideland. It popped in and out of the major cities faster than you could pull your socks on, cinch up your belt, find the keys to the car and, once near the cinema, fail to find a parking space. It seems that without the blessings of sufficient numbers of mainstream critics, there wasn’t much the American distributor, THINKFILM,
seemed capable of doing to reach the public. Too many films to handle. No time to devote sufficient energy, or the passion and imagination required to inspire the public
to take a chance on something different and demanding. They had other films that were easier to sell. They had to deal with corporate changes. They probably had lives to lead. So with only a week to go before the film opened in New York, and without a poster or ad to be seen, I was encouraged by my daughter to take to the streets with a cardboard sign reading “STUDIO-LESS FILM MAKER—FAMILY TO SUPPORT—WILL DIRECT FOR MONEY” and a begging cup to draw people’s attention to the impending release of Tideland. Not only did it work - we managed to get a large enough opening to generate a second and third week in the cinema - but also I made $25. Welcome to the joys and pain of independent film-making. Tideland has turned out to be a very divisive film. People love or loathe it. Perhaps “love” is the wrong word, but the film does touch nerve endings that are not too often reached in the dark of today’s cinema. We didn’t set out to reach everybody, but we wanted to give encouragement to people with open minds and imaginations in need of support that they are not alone… or weird.
wattle
Writers Tony Grisoni Terry Gilliam Released March 30, 2006 Starring Jodelle Ferland Jeff Bridges
For me it was a kind of litmus paper test of our current society. Are people able to think for themselves or are they so overwhelmed by buzz words, manufactured fears, sensationalized reality that they have lost touch with life? Can they see beyond the surface? Is a child preparing heroin for her father a child abused… or a loving daughter? Does a child have to wail and weep at the loss of a parent to feel her loss? Is the perceived vulnerability of a child merely a projection of our own fears? Those that look beyond the surface find the film very tender and truthful…and strangely wonderful. Even those uncertain about the film find it stays with them for days after seeing it. I encourage people to watch it twice. I can guarantee it will be a different experience each time. Despite the fact that the film received six nomination for the Canadian “Genies”, won the Fipresci Prize at the San Sebastian Film Festival, ended up on a surprising number of Best of 2006 lists, was acclaimed a “masterpiece” by Harry Knowles of aintitcool.com (and Jodelle Ferland has just received another nomination… this time for a Saturn Award), it was nowhere to be found amongst the films up for nominations for this year’s Oscars. You might ask why? Well, it’s back to our good friends at THINKFILM where it seems there was a teensy-weensy “oversight” on their part. As I wrote them, “when I opened the envelope containing the Academy Award ballot papers and sat down
sidestep
disolve
Squirrel Butts Don’t Glow. —Jaleeza Rose, Tideland
writhe
silkworm
to nominate the Best Picture and Best Director I discovered that Tideland was nowhere to be seen in the list of qualifying films. It saved me from the always painfully embarrassing decision of whether or not to vote for myself. Many thanks and keep up the good work.�All said and told, it's a good place to be in. Perhaps it’s time to give up independent film making and become dependent again. Article by Terry Gilliam, http://www.smart.co.uk/dreams
suffuse
water park
4
Salman
Rushdie Interviews
Gilliam
In the following pages, the notable author interviews the intrepid director.
partition
At the 2002 Telluride Film Festival I was asked if I’d take part in a public conversation with Terry Gilliam. I have known Terry a little bit for a long time and admired his work much more than a little bit for an even longer time; so I agreed delightedly to the festival organizers’ request. This was in the aftermath of the catastrophic collapse of Gilliam’s long-cherished The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, scuppered by bad weather and the ill health of the leading actor, Jean Rochefort. Lost in La Mancha, a remarkable fly-on-the-wall documentary detailing the calamity, was screened at the Telluride Festival. What struck me when I saw the documentary was the extraordinary openness and honesty with which Gilliam had allowed the filmmakers free access, enabling them to chronicle what must have been a dreadful time for him. I loved movies as a kid. I grew up in a movie town: Bombay, which makes more movies each year than Hollywood. It makes cheap
truant
Terry Gilliam movies. Very cheap. You grow up with a kind of fantasy of cinema all around you if you grow up in a town like Bombay. The movies are on every street corner. And people in my family were in the movies, and so on. Also, our generation was a movie generation. When I was growing up in India, there was no television. There simply was not a TV service. So we read books and went to the pictures. And then I came to England and boarding school and went to university, and it was totally impossible to watch television. Movies educated me, and so I feel I’m a creature of the cinema and grateful to the great filmmakers of our time who taught me as much as any novelist did. And so we get to Terry who certainly is, I think, one of the few really spectacular, original talents in the cinema nowadays.
—Salman Rushdie
oregano
SALMAN RUSHDIE: Years ago I wrote an essay about
bother a lot of people—if we could place them in a
Brazil. It was called “The Location of Brazil”—and
slightly different world. It would be funny if we put
what it suggested was that clearly Brazil was not
on funny costumes and said the lines rather than
in South America. The Brazil in the movie is more
just looking like this. [Gestures toward himself and
obviously located in a song, you know, than in a
audience.]
place. It’s in song-Brazil rather than anywhere else. And so this got me thinking. What is the relationship of the imagined world to the real world? How do you get there from here? What is the road to Wonderland? Where is the Yellow Brick Road? How do you get to Brazil—and back again? So I thought I might just start, Terry, by asking you that. When you were making a film like Brazil, which is clearly another version of the world, where did you feel the connection with the world that we actually are stuck in?
plaster
I never wanted to make naturalistic films. I’ve always liked the idea that film is an artifice, and that this is admitted right from the start. So we create a world that isn’t true to a realistic naturalistic world, but is truthful…that is the main thing. I think it also comes from being a cartoonist. I’ve always abstracted. Cartoons always push toward the grotesque. You twist, you bend, you shape. Brazil is that way. Brazil came specifically from the time, from the approaching of 1984. It was looming. In fact, the original title of Brazil was
TERRY GILLIAM: I actually preceded Brazil doing
1984 1/2. Fellini was one of my great gods and it
the Python things, Life of Brian, etc. Comedy
was 1984, so let’s put them together. Unfortunately,
seemed to play better—especially political comedy,
that bastard Michael Radford did a version of 1984
or things that we were trying to say that would
and he called it 1984, so I was blown. And so Brazil
became the title—because of the song. Brazil started
Meinhof were in action. The academics had to sign
when I was sitting out on a beach in Wales—Port
loyalty oaths and it was a very repressive time there.
Talbot, which is a steel town. They bring the coal
It was happening everywhere. In South America I
in from the ships on these great conveyor belts. So
was reading of cases where people would have to
the beach is pitch black. It’s covered with coal dust.
pay for their incarceration in jail. They paid. You
It was a miserable, awful day, and I just had this
know, why should the state pay for putting these
image of some lonely guy sitting on that beach and
people up in these nice places?
tuning in a radio and suddenly [Hums the tune to “Brazil”] this music he’s never heard before—there was no music like that in his world—was there. And that would trigger him to believe there is another world out there, a better world. And that was America in the Forties. We were always going south to Rio, and I grew up in that dream time. And it seems like the dream world was somewhere in South America, where everything would be perfect.
I saw an article that Terry Jones had in a book about witchcraft. Private practices with loved ones. And there was a seventeenth century sheet—a cost sheet. If you were arrested and thought to be a witch, and if you were indeed convicted, you had to pay for everything along the way. You had to pay for your food, for the incarceration. You had to pay for the piles of fagots that were used to burn you. Everything. You had to pay for a party for the court
At the time Brazil was gestating, governments were
that found you guilty. This is extraordinary. The
getting really interesting, especially in Germany
economics of a repressive regime.
where the left-wing urban terrorists like the Baader
nondescript
One of the great things about the witch hunts in
That’s good advice. There were also some issues
England, particularly Oliver Cromwell’s witch hunt
with the final version of that film. There was quite a
in the seventeenth century, was the test they had for
battle about the cut. Do you want to say something
a witch. The test was to weigh suspected witches
about how that went?
down with stones and throw them into a river. And if they drowned, they were innocent. Good for everybody else. They can sleep. One of the early examples of the double bind.
spellbound
Well the advantage of being in Monty Python was that we got away with murder and there was nobody telling us what we could or couldn’t do. We just did it. And time after time it was successful So you build a certain amount of confidence, and
Yeah. [Pause] At the heart of Brazil is a man who
a little bit of arrogance. So when it comes along to
has a privileged background, who is educated,
making a film and you’ve spent a couple or several
who isn’t taking responsibility for the world he is a
years on it, it seems to me I have the right to make
part of. He is a cog in it, thinks he can do nothing
my mistakes, and not somebody else’s mistakes. At
better. To me, the heart of Brazil is responsibility,
the end of the day, the film was released in Europe
is involvement—you can’t just let the world go on
with no problem with Twentieth Century Fox, but
doing what it’s doing without getting involved. And
with Universal in America it was different. The
of course what he does is he falls in love so he falls
great wonderful thing about Universal is it’s housed
vulnerable, and his whole world starts falling apart.
in a black tower that looks like the monoliths in
Never fall in love.
Brazil; it’s not intentional, it just happens to be
“I became terrified that I was going to be a full-time, bomb-throwing terrorist if I stayed [in the U.S.] because it was the beginning of really bad times in America.
one of the little coincidences that keep occurring
and in the middle in neat typing, “Dear Mr. Sid
around Brazil.
Steinberg [the head of Universal], When are
But anyway, [the people at Universal] were appalled by the film. They thought it didn’t work.
you going to release my film, Brazil? Signed Terry Gilliam.”
They wanted me to change the ending, give it a
It seemed pretty straightforward, but you don’t
happy ending, because more people would see the
do that in Hollywood, and the whole place went
film and like the film and it would be better for
bloing! It was extraordinary. And there was a man
everybody. I said no, and then they embargoed the
named Jack Matthews who was a journalist for the
film and they started cutting it. I decided to wage
LA Times, and he ran with this thing. He basically
a campaign and I said to the producer, “Lawyers
kept a dialogue between me and Sid Steinberg
are no good—[Universal’s] got all the lawyers in the
going, even though Sid and I weren’t speaking. He
world, they’ve got all the time in the world, and they
would come to me and ask me to say something
don’t have to release the film, so let’s go public and
and then he’d go to Sid and say, “Terry said this,”
personal.” And that’s what I did. I took out an ad in
and then Sid would react in a stupid way. Because
Variety, a full-page ad, with little black strips around
Sid really believed that if this were allowed to sneak
the edges like Italian death notices. The very
through—this kind of expression, artistic expres-
middle of this big blank page—you know Variety’s
sion and directors getting away with murder—that
covered with just zeroes, really is all it seems to be:
the whole thing would be over. Hollywood would
“Ten million dollars in the first two seconds” And
collapse. I think he actually believed it. And this
then there’s the second page with the neat border
dialogue went on and on. We offered any legitimate
noodle
traction
journalist interested to be flown to London, or
released it in New York and Los Angeles, and
wherever it was showing in Europe, or we could
they had no posters. They had nothing—they had
bus them down to Tijuana, where we would show it.
a Xeroxed copy of the artwork they were going to
And what finally happened was we started a series
eventually make a poster of. That’s all they had.
of clandestine screenings hosted by L.A. critics
And it did proceed to do the most business per
and their friends because there was this embargo
theater of any film at that time.
saying we could not show that film anywhere in America—ever. And at the same time Universal is beavering away doing their version of the film. And the L.A. critics—eventually I think about seventy five percent of them saw it—when it came time to vote for films of the year they discovered
Well it’s a great story about the power of advertising. Well the great thing, the irony, was before I left America, in ’67, the last job I had was in an advertising agency doing ads for Universal Pictures.
in their bylaws that the film didn’t actually have
There is an untold story, both about writers and
to be released—it could still qualify. And so on
filmmakers, which is that so many of us started in
the night of Universal’s biggest film of the year,
advertising. I started in advertising. So did Don
Out of Africa, premiering in New York—Redford,
DeLillo. Joseph Heller. When I was working in
everybody’s there in their tuxes—the L.A. critics
advertising in the 1970s, the commercials’ filmmak-
announced their winners. Best film: Brazil. Best
ers were Nicolas Roeg, Alan Parker, Hugh Hudson,
screenplay: Brazil. Best director: Brazil. They
Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, Adrian Lyne. I mean, I
[Universal] were in such a flap—they immediately
made a haircare commercial with Nic Roeg.
tripe
Did you ever buy the product? It was Clairol’s Loving Care. It was for keeping the gray out. I didn’t have any gray hair back then. Anyway, whenever anyone asks me what the influence of advertising was on my work I say, “Nothing.” Wouldn’t you say that?
was going to be a full-time, bomb-throwing terrorist if I stayed [in the U.S.] because it was the beginning of really bad times in America. It was ’66-’67, it was the first police riot in Los Angeles. I happened to be with my girlfriend who was a reporter for the London Evening Standard. We went by on the way
Oh God, I wish I could. I wish I was that pure.
to a party to check out the police riot, and it was
Apart from being good for the bank balance. When
ugly beyond belief. In college my major was politi-
I was writing Midnight’s Children, I used to work
cal science, so my brain worked that way. And also
two days a week at an ad agency and five days a
in L.A. at that time I had long hair.
week writing my book, and I thought of it, kind of,
Oh yes.
as industrial sponsorship.
Ugh, a foolish, foolish thing. And I drove around
It was that. That’s what actually happens. Every few
this little English Hillman Minx—top down—and
years when it’s been another five years that have
every night I’d be hauled over by the cops. Up
passed and I haven’t made a film and the depres-
against the wall, and all this stuff. They had this
sion starts taking over totally, I allow myself to do
monologue with me; it was never a dialogue. It was
a commercial. And then I feel really dirty and get
that I was a long-haired drug addict living off some
to work promptly.
rich guy’s foolish daughter. And I said, “No, I work
I used to work Thursdays to Fridays, and then
in advertising. I make twice as much as you do.”
I’d come home Friday night and have a really
Which is a stupid thing to say to a cop.
long bath. Kind of wash it off. And then wake up
[Laughs.]
Saturday morning and be a writer.
And it was like an epiphany. I suddenly felt what
But it leads me to another question, which is,
it was like to be a black or Mexican kid living in
you said you came to England in the mid-Sixties.
L.A. Before that, I thought I knew what the world
What did you do in England? Someone said to
was like, I thought I knew what poor people were,
me yesterday, after they met you, that it was the
and then suddenly it all changed because of that
first time they realized that you weren’t English,
simple thing of being brutalized by cops. And I
that you were in fact American. I guess because of
got more and more angry and I just felt, I’ve got to
Python and all that. What do you think took you to
get out of here—I’m a better cartoonist than I am a
England and why do you think you got stuck there?
rye
Well I know why. I mean, I became terrified that I
“But with storytelling, we do suspend our disbelief, and we go with it. As long as it’s truthful, as long as it’s based on truthful things, we can go anywhere.”
bomb maker. That’s why so much of the U.S. is still standing. Were you of draftable age? I served my country, Salman, in the armed forces. I was honorably discharged. Oh. By doing one of the most dishonorable things imaginable. I was in the National Guard, and when I went to England I was working on a magazine called Help with Harvey Kurtzman, who was the great icon of all cartoonists in the late Fifties and Sixties; he created MAD comics. Bob Crumb, Gilbert Shelton, all these guys were working on the magazine. And the magazine folded and I was fed up with New York and I wanted to go to Europe to hitchhike around—which I did. But to help me ease my way out of the National Guard, on the last bits of note-headed paper of Help, I wrote that I was
monologue
being transferred to the European branch of Help Magazine. The magazine had now finished, but we had paper, so I went off to the non-existent branch. The National Guard then posted me to a control group in Germany, where I’d have to report every so often. I ended up in Greece on the Isle of Rhodes, where a former roommate was living. And we then wrote saying they’d transferred me to the Rhodes office of Help Magazine. A long way away from Germany and everything else. And then I came back to the States. And we had this long correspondence where the army would send—from St. Louis, Missouri—they would send to Germany whatever they wanted to tell me, which would then be sent to Rhodes, which would then be sent to the States, where I was. And I would reply, and put it in an envelope, and send it to my friend who would then post it with a Greek stamp.
tuba scuba
triumph
I live in London full time. I can’t say I love England, but I’m less unhappy there than other places. It’s partly being a reasonably well-educated, reasonably intelligent American. I think there’s such a responsibility in being part of the richest, most powerful country on earth. I wanted to have a different perspective, the perspective you’re allowed to see from where you are. Yeah. It’s very important. And so all my films are really about America in many ways. I used to say my films were messages in bottles for America, And this went around for several years. And then
because I just think I need that different perspec-
the war was heating up and they closed down all
tive. [To audience] I think all of you do, frankly.
the control groups in Europe, and everyone had to come back to the States. And I was not going to do it. I was seriously going to give up my U.S. citizenship. But I luckily got a lawyer. We then went around to all the magazines and television stations I was working for in London, and they all wrote letters saying that were I to leave their employ, their organization would collapse. And I think out of all the guys who were coming back to the states out of the control groups, I was one of six who got an honorable discharge. By lying, cheating, and behaving in the best American traditions—certainly of corporate leadership. I could have been the man at Enron.
the time you came to Europe, I made my first visit to America. Actually, on an advertising gig. I was being asked to write travel advertising, encouraging people to take their vacations in the United States. But I had never been in the United States. So the American government, I guess under Nixon, kindly sent me on a free trip around America to have a vacation so I could go home and write about having one. I arrived in San Francisco with long hair, no beard, but a Zapata mustache—remember those? I mean, that’s how long ago it was. And there was a sign in the immigration office saying [mimics flat American accent] “A few extra min-
So that’s two things America escaped: the bombs
utes in customs is a small price to pay to save your
and Enron. And now, are you more comfortable
children from the menace of drugs.”
based in England? Or do you spend more time here now?
myopic
There was a time when I had hair, too. And about
We’re standing in line, and in front of me there’s
people. And it fixed it, you know. Then it was all
this kind of classic, American redneck guy with a
right. Then I could go and enjoy America.
very red neck about this wide. [Holds out hands almost a foot apart.] He turned around to me, and with a complete change of heart, he said, “Buddy, I
Well you’re right. That’s the great thing about America: American people.
sure feel sorry for you.” And he was right. I mean,
Yeah, they’ll do that. First they’ll search your
I got taken to pieces. I got strip searched, I got
rectum, and then they’ll apologize for it.
everything. And I arrived in America, you know,
[Both laugh for almost a full minute.]
for the first time, trembling. There was this tiny lady standing at the bus stop waiting for the bus, and she saw that I was trembling. She said, “What’s the matter, dear?” and it kind of all poured out. And—this was the other side of America—she did
Back to the cinema. All right, another question. I wanted to ask you something about science fiction. Until Star Wars, science fiction/fantasy films, there were always two views about them. One was that
this amazing thing, she apologized on behalf of
they were always very, very cheap.
the United States. She put her hands in the elocu-
Yeah.
tion position. [Holds out hands in front of chest, fingers interlocking, pinkie to thumb.] She looked like Grandma Clampett, this tiny old lady. And she made a formal apology on behalf of the American
And you could see the furniture move. When the rocket door slammed, the rocket shook. And secondly, the truism was that they were never commercially successful. They were these little shoddy
gumption
“It’s about expanding how you see the world. I think we live in an age where we’re just hammered, hammered to think this is what the world is. Television’s saying, everything’s saying ‘That’s the world.’ And it’s not the world. The world is a million possible things.”
hip
C or D movies. Then along comes George Lucas
fantasy, and that intrigued me. And then George
and Terminator and Spielberg and all that, and now
came along and took all the stuff before 2001 and
really probably the biggest commercial sector of
put it together in one film and made it really glossy,
the cinema is fantasy/science fiction movies. Now,
and off we went. The world changed. We reverted.
first of all I wonder if you have any view on that
But, unlike Star Wars, a lot of the earlier films raised
huge shift of weight, and then if you could lead
questions.
into 12 Monkeys, which is your take on that sort of science fiction film. I always grew up liking science fiction films. I never liked the wobbly ones. But I loved the ones like War of the Worlds that were technically well done. And I liked all the bug films as well … the ant and spider ones. So there were quality ones and then there were crap ones like Ed Wood’s films. You know, he was inspired but incredibly untalented. That was a problem. When 2001 came around, that was the
Well, science fiction is always a vehicle for ideas. It’s the form which allows either movies or books to be an exploration of how we should live. Exactly. Again, it’s like going back to the question of Where is Brazil? In sci-fi movies, you move beyond the real world so you can abstract it and then comment upon it. Philip K. Dick was always my favorite sci-fi writer because it wasn’t so much about sci-fi as about the human condition.
moment I felt sci-fi was at its finest, because it was
Yes, do you remember the original title of Blade
intelligent, and it seemed to be grounded. It wasn’t
Runner—which asks an intellectual question?
fantasy, but it was so wild and extreme, it was like
glow worm
But that’s the problem with films we’re seeing now: they give you all the answers, they plug in all the holes, they don’t make you… —Terry Gilliam scuba
triumph
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I mean, it’s
But that’s the problem with films we’re seeing now:
the difference between 2001 and Close Encounters.
they give you all the answers, they plug in all the
2001 ends with a question. You’re not sure what is
holes, they don’t make you…
going on. There’s been this strange room experience, and then the baby. You kind of feel there’s a rebirth, a new beginning, but you don’t know
Well, I thought that when…did you see the KubrickSpielberg Artificial Intelligence, AI?
what it is.
Oh God. [Whispers.] What was that?
Close Encounters ends with an answer. And it’s…
[Laughs.]
little kids in latex suits that come out and go like
Mr. Articulate speaks.
that. [Flaps hands.] There’s a moment in Close Encounters before the kids in latex suits come out with the wrinkles on their wrists. When the door first opens, this blinding light comes out and this strange preying mantis figure rises. I would just cut to black at that point and [Gasps.] leave the audience with a gasp. [Gasps again.] And then your brain has to start working and fill in the gaps.
Well, you answered the question. There’s a moment in that film about thirty-five minutes before the end when the little robot kid decides the world is not worth living in and dives off the building. Now, if the film had ended there, it would have been a lot better—a lot better. And you can’t help feeling that if Kubrick rather than Spielberg had directed the film, that would have been the Kubrick ending. But then there’s half an hour of Spielberg feel-good crap. Blue fairies.
hitch
There’s a moment in Close Encounters before the kids in latex suits come out with the wrinkles on their wrists. When the door first opens, this blinding light comes out and this strange preying mantis figure rises. I would just cut to black at that point and [Gasps.] leave the audience with a gasp.
The truth is the successful films aren’t asking questions, they’re not making you think, they’re not asking you to consider. I think what the people in Hollywood think when they look out at the great American public, they think a sign should say, “Do not disturb.” Entertain them. Fill them up with pablum. Hollywood realizes that baby food is easier to chew than big filet mignons and they make a lot more money. It seems to be working. That’s what depresses me. So much of this fantasy film material now is about war. It’s about unleashing large machinery against other pieces of large machinery. It’s not about people, it’s not about peace. And one of the things I thought about E.T. for example—which is interesting, and which relates to a wonderful science fiction film, The Man Who Fell to Earth—is that the alien is vulnerable. Instead of the alien being something
Ache
When they came into contact with the steam/ dry ice clouds, they would move the clouds in swirls that were just magic, which you could never animate. You would never have that many odd things happen.
to be scared of, the alien’s scared of us, and is easily damaged. I think that makes E.T. kind of different.
Yes. And seventy-five percent of it is animated. All that
No, you’re right.
ocean. All of that, that’s a cartoon.
And made The Man Who Fell to Earth very different.
It’s very impressive, but it doesn’t resonate. I
My problem with E.T., and I think it would be a better film, are those big Walter Keane moonstone eyes, because you immediately love that little creature. There’s a moment in the film when they’re dissecting the frogs and they do a close-up of the frogs with those alien slit eyes. Now if E.T. had those eyes, then he’s a really grotesque ugly thing and the kid has to learn to love a grotesque ugly thing. It’s easy to love E.T. It should have been difficult to love E.T. As a cartoonist, and animator, what does it feel like to watch animation secretly taking over the cinema, but not being admitted as being animated? You go and see a film like The Perfect Storm, for instance.
think somehow, subconsciously we can see it even if we can’t see it. I remember with Jurassic Park when the first tyrannosaurus rampaged around. It was incredible. How quickly we got to realize it was fake when we saw II and III. By III, I think it’s even more fabulous the things that are going on, but you kind of don’t believe them anymore. It’s totally subconscious. I think Lord of the Rings was interesting because they use a lot more models. So you have physical things that react to the physical world. And it’s always surprising what happens when you do that. The behavior of real physical interactions is much more unpredictable than computer-generated
culprit
action , and we seem to empathize with it subcon-
And it was like, Did you get it? Did you get it? Let’s
ciously. When we were doing Brazil—for the flying
do another one.
sequences in Brazil we used a model of Sam in this flying gear. That tall wing span, about like that. [With hands he shows a figure about one foot by one foot large.] He had a little motor in his chest and he was on wires that went up to a battery pack, which was then on a track that ran across. We built these layers of first painted background, and then we had kapok—this stuff you use in furniture, this kind of cottony stuff—with which we covered
And it wasn’t till the next day that we’d know if we’d gotten a shot. What was wonderful the next day was the wings did now slow down [demonstrates wings flapping slowly]. When they came into contact with the steam/dry ice clouds, they would move the clouds in swirls that were just magic, which you could never animate. You would never have that many odd things happen.
chicken wire frames, making big cumulus clouds.
You know, hearing you talk, it’s exactly how when
In front of that, we had tanks with steam pumping
I started out wanting to write, it seemed to me that
up through dry ice. So you have real elements there.
one of the things that everybody knows about sto-
And then we would run the model through this. We
ries is that they’re not true. That’s why it’s called a
had to shoot this at four or five times normal speed.
novel. It’s in the fiction part of the shop. So it seems
So we’d get the lights going, get everything going,
to me that, Okay, let’s not behave as if it necessarily
and we’d wind up the model and it’d go [Mimics
is true. I mean, horses don’t fly.
model going berserk and crashing]. Boom. Shit.
Your Haroun and the Sea of Stories. Fantastic.
pronunciation
Well, you know, there was a time when I wanted you
says certain things. It’s about expanding how you
to direct it.
see the world. I think we live in an age where we’re
I know. I was in my own little world.
world is. Television’s saying, everything’s saying
I thought, you know, I don’t blame him.
“That’s the world.” And it’s not the world. The world
But with storytelling, we do suspend our disbelief,
is a million possible things.
and we go with it. As long as it’s truthful, as long as
And the world is about the way in which our dreams
it’s based on truthful things, we can go anywhere.
intersect with our real life. Endlessly, the world of
Well, it’s exactly that. It’s the difference between
the imagination changes the world.
what is naturalistic and what is truth. And in a way
But the dreams that are being offered are just
fiction—movies, books, whatever—allows you to get
whiter teeth, or thicker toilet paper. Things like
to certain truths which you can’t get to so easily by
that. [Mimics TV voice] Dream of three-ply toilet
naturalistic fiction. I mean, the world is not a natu-
paper. After a real bout of diarrhea… But these are
ralistic place. Buildings may fall down. The world is
the dreams that are being offered up to us. It’s
not like kitchen-sink drama; the world is this weird,
appalling. I just feel it’s compressing and compress-
operatic place.
ing. And then when you see sci-fi films they’re not
Well, I really want to encourage a kind of fantasy,
really doing it. They’re not taking you to a place
a kind of magic. I love the term magic realism, whoever invented it—I do actually like it because it
taste
just hammered, hammered to think this is what the
where you can really stretch your world. And I think that’s one of the big problems with Hollywood
triumph
dominating the world as far as cinema—it’s slowly
which I thought very disappointing because the
squishing it down everywhere. Except living out-
visuals weren’t as good as you could imagine
side the States, it’s easier to rebel against.
from the radio.
It used to be easier. It’s not easy anymore. I think
Yeah, a man with two heads is not as impressive if
the reason for that incredible flowering of the
one of the heads is just made with papier-mâché
movies between the late Fifties and the mid-Sev-
sitting on the shoulder. Well, I want to come back
enties was because or that brief period Hollywood
to 12 Monkeys. Do you want to say anything about
lost control of world cinema and as a result you
its relationship to the Chris Marker movie?
get the French New Wave, you get Fellini, Visconti, Antonioni, Bergman, Wajda, Kurosawa, etc., etc. and then Hollywood put the lid back on it.
asked—the producer and director company had actually bought the rights to Chris Marker’s La
I think what we should do is just close down all
Jetée. They showed it to Dave and Jan, and they
the television stations and just have radio again.
were like, Well, it’s fantastic, we don’t want to make
Because I grew up with radio…
a copy of this. We want to maybe be inspired by
I grew up with radio.
it. We want to take it and go off and leap off this thing. They talked to Chris, and he felt the same
I think radio gave me all my visual skills. Which is
way. It was a blown-up version of the same thing.
an extraordinary thing—because you have to invent
And so it was really inspired by it. In fact, it took
it, it’s not there. The sound effects are there, the
us months to get the Writers’ Guild of America to
voices are there, and you’ve got to invent the cos-
agree on a new word in the credits—“inspired by”
tumes, the faces, the sets. It’s the most incredible
as opposed to “based upon.” “Inspired by” was the
exercise for visual imagination.
accurate description of what went on. I purposely
When Douglas Adams invented The Hitchhiker’s
didn’t see La Jetée until the Paris premiere of 12
Guide to the Galaxy, it was invented as a radio
Monkeys. It was on as the opening short.
program, and you know, planet Earth is destroyed
Had you never seen it?
to make room for a an inter-stellar bypass in the first minute. You just go, whoom. No more earth.
metronome
It was purely that Dave and Jan Peoples were
No, and I didn’t want to.
This would cost $70 million.
No, I mean in the past you’d never seen it?
What’s interesting about Hitchhiker’s Guide
No, because I knew I’d be accused of ripping it off.
is Doug spent his dying day trying to make it
It was the same with 1984 and Brazil. I didn’t read
into a film. They made it into a television series,
the book until after. So the film—David and Jan,
who are great writers, took it and went with it. La Jetée is kind of this perfect thing, this tight—like an acorn—and 12 Monkeys is kind of the oak that grew out of it after a lot of shit was dumped on it.
Are you serious? Oh yeah. This list came out—[To audience] I don’t know if you saw this—for which writers around the world were asked to… In fact, what happened
I wanted to ask you about Lost in La Mancha,
was slightly fake. We were asked to choose our
which a few people have seen here. I wanted to
ten favorite books, without ranking. Just our ten
ask you two things. One is, instead of, you know,
favorite books. And then that was all fed into a
talking about not making a movie, one was, What
computer. Anyway, Don Quixote came up most,
was the appeal of Don Quixote? And the other was,
so it was declared the greatest work of art of all
Why did you not want to make Don Quixote itself,
time, you know. And Hamlet the second. And a
but this variant story of Don Quixote?
lot of people got very angry. Because you talk to
Wow. Well, partly because all of the great novelists of the world just decided recently that the greatest book ever written was Don Quixote.
people in Spain about how you love Don Quixote, and they say, “That?” Because they’ve all been given it to read at school and they detest it, as you would if you were given King Lear to read when
That’s right.
you were fourteen.
I guessed that before you guys voted.
I, like most people, had a vague idea of what
We got terribly trashed for voting it.
Quixote was, and it was the idea that Peter O’Toole singing “Dream the Impossible Dream”
proportion
inspires a man to move forward. I called one
the money didn’t come through. And so in the last
day—this was twelve years ago—I called Jake
moments before it all collapsed the first time—
Eberts, who was the executive producer on [The
because what the film [Lost in La Mancha] doesn’t
Adventures of Baron] Munchausen, and I said,
quite show is they say it’s the second time. What
“Jake, I’ve got two names for you and they’re each
you see on screen is the third time—but anyway, I
worth a million dollars. One’s Gilliam, the other’s
was working on A Kid in King Arthur’s Court, so I
Quixote. And he said, “Done.” And so we set off.
came up with this thought that why not steal this
And then I sat down and read the book, because I
idea of the modern man and push him back into the
hadn’t read the book like most people haven’t read
seventeenth century. Because all along I thought
the book. And it’s a big thick…
most most modern audiences don’t know who
It’s nine hundred pages.
parallel
Quixote is, and how do you distinguish between a man who wears funny armor in the seventeenth
And I had the nineteenth century Gustave Doré
century and the guy wearing good armor because
illustrated edition. [Mimes heaving each page as
he’s dreaming about an age a hundred years before?
he turns them over.] And it took me weeks to get
And so [I decided] a modern man would become
through this fucking thing. We sat down, Charles
our guide. He would be us, and he would go into
McKeown and I, and tried to write a script of it. And
this world and it would be filthy and foul and pesti-
you can’t. It’s too vast. It’s so extraordinary, and
lential, and also at the same time he would discover
it’s so wondrous. And we tried. We beat the thing
all these things that are not in his life. So that was
to death and, ultimately, I wasn’t satisfied. Also
the form of it, and I thought in the end we were able
to pick the bits of Quixote that I really liked and put
in English that feels as rambunctious as the original
them together in a formula, and I was arrogant to
feels in Spanish. It opens up the book completely.
think Cervantes would even approve of it.
There’s a wonderful sentence at the end of Don
Cervantes was a wild guy. Cervantes was not
Quixote the novel, where Quixote, old and dying,
a polite writer. I mean, he’d had one hell of a
has come to his senses and understood that he’s
life. You know he’d been a slave, he’d been in
been nuts all his life. And the phrase he uses to
a debtors’ prison.
describe his madness is: “I’ve been looking for this
Yup. I mean the exact contemporary of Shakespeare, day for day. And they were both pretty much roaring boys. There’s a great translation of Quixote. Most translations of Quixote into English suck. They make the book seem about as deadly dull as it’s possible to
year’s birds in last year’s nests.” Which seems to me a wonderful description of both insanity and the movie industry. Does it ever feel like that? It always feels like that. The trick is to be more pigheaded than they are. Obstinacy, that’s the thing.
be. And then at one point, a couple hundred years ago, the novelist Tobias Smollett translated Quixote and his Spanish is not perfect. If you’re looking for a literal translation, it’s not. It’s the only translation
square bashing
England Guide
bushfire
5
For some, this festival is just a few stops on the Underground. Others will no doubt come from further afield. We invite all of you to take in a bit of Gilliam’s London. Let us start out at the Historic Old Vic Theatre, at which our fine festival will take place. We also suggest that you stay at the Mad Hatter Inn. After the festival, we have a few destinations that will take you out of London to see some of the reality bending locations around England.
pantry
The
Old Vic
Theatre This festival will take place at the Old Vic Theatre, just south-east of Waterloo Station in London, England. Giliam moved to England as a young man and has since renounced his US citizenship. This is a theater with a great history and a wonderful look. It was opened in 1818. When it was opened, it was a “minor� theater and was thus forbidden to show serious drama. It was badly damaged in The German Blitz of World War Two. All events will take place in the main lobby of the theatre.
dingy
raceme
About The Old Vic
This festival will take place at the Old Vic Theatre, on the South bank of the Thames River in London. This iconic and historic theatre opened its doors in 1818. Its first show included a melodrama, an Asiatic ballet, and a harleqinade. It has been home Olivier’s Hamlet and Ian McKellan’s Widow Twankey. As a venue for plays, it is a stage suitable for Baron Munchausen, himself. Kevin Spacey currently acts as Artistic Director, and is proud to see the work of Gilliam being shown here at this time. The Old Vic survived Hitler’s Blitzkrieg. Surely it can survive a week of Gilliam.
half-holiday
Getting Here
103 The Cut, London SE1 8NB, UK
From Heathrow Airport
From the Central London
By Subway
• Take Tunnel Rd. West
• Head west on A302/Parliament
• Take the Gray line to Southwark
• Merge onto M4
• Turn Right at Parliament Square
station
• Continue on A4
• Turn Right at Great George St.
• Walk Southwest on The Cut to
• Exit onto Duke of Wellington Pl.
• Turn Slight Left at Bridge St.
Waterloo Rd.
• Continue onto Grossover Pl
• Exit Waterloo Rd.
• Turn Right at Great George St.
• Turn Left at The Cut
• Turn Slight Left at Bridge St. • Exit Waterloo Rd. • Turn Left at The Cut
South Bank ank
t.
dS for tam
d. Blckfriars R
North B
S
Sou thwa rk
St.
Union St.
Yo rk
Rd .
ut eC Th
dge Rd Southwark B ri
Bay lis R d.
d. oR rlo
ate W
h Rd. Boroug
loin
hoary
窶認loat The
“I can’t say that I love England, but I’m less unhappy there than other places”
ting Head of the King of the Moon, e Adventures of Baron Munchausen
—Terry Gilliam
untaxed
gully
Where to
Stay
The Mad Hatter Behind the nineteenth century facade of this former millinery factory is a modern, 30 bedroom hotel. The Mad Hatter is located close to one of the oldest parts of London, the ‘Borough’, well known to Shakespeare and Dickens. A really popular location for both business and leisure visitors, the hotel is within walking distance of many of London’s attractions—Shakespeare’s Globe, Tate Modern, South Bank and the London Eye, National Film Theatre and the Dali Exhibition to name but a few. The Mad Hatter is on London’s South Bank, just a walk away from the events at the Old Vic Theatre.
pirouette
Unreal England Tour England has a long history of the odd and the insane. After six days of experiencing madness through the eyes of Gilliam we invite you to go out and visit some of the strang parts of the odd and the insane outside of the Theater and outside of London. At each of these locales, take a moment to consider the reality that caused such a place to exist.
robin
Land Shark! Local cinema-owner Bil Heine decided to make a very different statement from the one eeryone else was making at the time(that is, joining the CND, wearing ataomkraft? Nein Danke! badges, and sitting in fields outside American air bases). On the forty-first anniversary of the bombing of Nagasaki, Heine hired a crane to lift a twenty-five-foot, four hundredweight fibreglass sculpture through a hole in his roof. When the press clamoured for an explanation, Heine declared, “The shark was to express someone feeling totally impotent and ripping a hole in their roof out f a sense of impotence and anger and desperation… It is saying something about the CND, nuclear power, Chernobyl and Nagasaki.” Predictably, the shark caused a huge uproar, Almost immediately, Oxford City Council inspected the premises to ensure the item posed no no threat to public safety. Excerpted from Weird England, Matt Lake
inclined plane
The Rude Man of Cerne Abbas Of all the hillside figures, the giant just north of Cerne Abbas in Dorset is the most likely to raise eyebrows. His outline, carved in lines a foot wide and a foot deep, lies betwee a pagan earthwork called the Trendle ad a Spring once held sacred to Helith, a goddess of Health; and te giant certainly appears to benefit from his location, as he s the very picture of health in one obvious way. This Character is far more than just a simple chalk outline on a hill; he has a well defined ribcage, two seven foot wide circles representing his nipples, and raised eyebrows giving him a rather comical expression of surprise. He’s also gesturing to a point on the top of the hill where the sun rises on May Day. However, he’s not pointing with his finger. The giant has spawned many legends, and nobody’s really certain who he’s supposed to be. Some believe this 180-foot tall figure marks the spot where locals killed a giant for poaching their sheep.Others think this is a cock-and-bull story, and prefer the ideas that he was a heroic fiure who carried sacred stones to Avebury and Stonehenge, and then Keeled over, exhausted, on the Dorset hillside to die. He wields a huge knobbly club over his head, which some take to mean that he is ether a warrior or a god. Excerpted from Weird England, by Matt Lake
firedog
silt
On Ward and Up Ward Behind the pub in a little vilage near Grantham (Lincolnshire), there stands a workshop. Inside this stone building is a man earnestly plugging away on his latest invention—a twelve foot electromechanical carrot that looks lke a rocket from 19030s science fiction. The structure is supposed to provide luxury accomodation for a pet rabbit, complete with a lift. And as you look at this imposing edifice clad in orance fake fur, one question comes to mind: ‘What kind of person would invest his time and energy in building that?’ The man in question in is John Ward, an eccentric inventor who has been cranking out obscure but well-designed machines and art pieces for more than thirty years. Excerpted from Weird England, by Matt Lake
stinker
Stop or Go? Of course, some public artworks are just plain silly. The concrete and glass merchants who transformed the run down Isle of Dogs in London’s Docklands into the gentrified Canary Wharf decided it would be fun to put dozens of traffic lights onto one pole in the middle of a roundabout. Driving through London is stressful enough, even for seasoned drivers, without adding contradictory traffic signals into the mix. And there’s an even stranger side to the Traffic Light Tree: Roundabouts utterly flummox forein visitors, aho can just about handle driving on the left, but are all too often inclined to steer right at roundabouts and travel round them anti-clockwise, yet the tree was designed b a French artist, Pierre Vivant. Which raises the obvious question: Quoi? Excerpted from Weird England, by Matt Lake
epoxy
regalia
See you next year!
triumph
scuba