Introducing Terry Gilliam and The Fisher King

 Film of the Month Club: Fisher King and Terry Gilliam Tickets, Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 9:00 PM | Eventbrite

Here is my intro for the film:

If watching a movie critically is a richer experience than watching a movie passively, than Terry Gilliam is a good place to start because every choice he makes is strong. His artistic process is among the most transparent of any film maker. It’s very easy to spot his bold choices and it might not be too much of a stretch to reach into his head.

The former animator for the Monty Python troop sees the world as a children's storyteller of sorts influenced by mythology, science-fiction, and absurdist humor.

Pretty much nothing about the way his films are made are ordinary from the internal logic of his films, to the way his actors act exaggerated and can even be seen as live-action cartoons, to the close-ups and Dutch angles by which he will film his actors, to the artifice of the art direction, to the overwrought scores. But does it all add up to the sum of its parts? Is it enchanting?

The Fisher King might be Terry Gilliam's most adult film. It deals with loss, trauma, and metamorphis, and the nature of charity. 
His cartoonish style when Jack Lucas is interacting with Parry is juxtaposed against a straighter visual and aural tone when Lucas is interacting with people in the regular world. Whereas his characters often act cartoonish, Jeff Bridges and Robin Williams deliver two of their greatest performances here, Mercedes Ruehl won an Oscar in the supporting actress category, and Amanda Plummer should have won the Supporting Actress Oscar for my money. It would be rather far-fetched for anyone to earn a nomination in any of the earlier stages of Gilliam's career.

WHAT ELSE WILL THE FILM OF THE MONTH CLUB BE COVERING:
Future installments include: Sunshine State and the poverty exposes by John Sayles; Zorba the Greek and the jet set era of 60s films; Sex Lies and Videotape and the birth of indie films; Treasure of the Sierra Madre and the capacity for the adventure film; Who Framed Roger Rabbit and the re-interpretation of noir.

If I Curated a Film-of-the-Month Club

 This isn't that much of a hypothetical as I am currently starting one on a shared FB chat. 

I have a list chock-full of favorites My Top 100 of the 20th Century (imdb.com) (and have these 50 favorites on top of the original: 20th Century 50 Runners-Up (imdb.com). However, this isn't what I'm looking for when deciding what I want to do when curating a list of films for discussion.

For instance, I think Terry Gilliam is a good film director to examine because he's a very odd anomaly with a lot of variances in his popularity. A good discussion can be had about why his films might resonate and what holds him back from achieving more popular success. Someone in the group suggested Brazil but I think that might not create optimal discussion considering it is one of the most beloved films of all-time. I would imagine that 9 out of 10 viewers would find Brazil brilliant which wouldn't lead to as much discussion over a polarizing film director. Films like Fisher King (an attempt at merging mythology with a sappy drama about high stakes and trauma) or Time Bandits (a time travel sci-fi film that's underdeveloped in terms of world building by today's standards), or 12 Monkeys (a more universally enjoyable film, but has some odd attempts to integrate the source material to the final product) will challenge the audience more to see the director's vision. That would be more ideal for discussion.

Here are my picks for a batch of films that have a certain quality, will enrich the viewer, encompass variety, and provoke discussion.

So here is what I would pick if I could say curate for a year (I stretched it out to a year and a third)

1.     Sunshine State (2002) by John Sayles. It’s a film about poverty, class (a little bit about race), and people coping with changing economic conditions. Plus, it's a great Florida film (my favorite invented genre). I’m assuming that people in my group will have less familiarity with him as other auteurs, and that should be changed.

Alternate: Matewan

2.     Theoretically, Liz (the horror buff) would pick the second film and she would probably like to do horror and I don’t know how much stomach we have for that group.. But  David Cronenberg’s 1980s film Videodrome is a thoughtful film (I have seen about half of) and I might be able to appreciate it in a way and it might be a good way to bend. it’s firmly within the realm and I don’t think it’s too horrific for people who don’t love that type of horror.

3.     The Elia Kazan film Pinky (1949). This will be a very interesting film to discuss because this is a 1940s film about race that would get canceled immediately today because the character’s mixed race and she’s played by a white actress. Kazan made a lot of social message films but some like this and Gentlemen’s Agreement (in which a clearly non-Jewish person tries to expose anti-semitism) seem dated, but we can look at such things from a modern lens and evaluate. Mind you, the film might be dated but it is not boring. I really do remember this to be a very moving and good movie.

4.     The disaster film Airport  (1970) upon which Airplane! devised some of its popularity. We should look at the disaster film as a whole and evaluate whether this is just frivolous Blockbuster or like a really good film. 

Alternatives: Airport, Earthquake, Towering Inferno

5.     Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) It’s one of those films that regularly appear on the top 100 films of all time lists, and is part Western, part adventure, and a little formless. It’s a beloved film, so the discussion can be about whether it’s worth the hype. I’ve only seen half of it on TCM (not the start and not the beginning).

6.     The Conversation (1976). A 1976 Francis Ford Coppola film made at the height of the film director’s power that was sandwiched in between the Godfathers and Apocalypse Now. It’s about surveillance, and equally as acclaimed but not as famous. I haven’t watched any Coppola films outside some of his unacclaimed 90s stuff and Finnian’s Rainbow, and honestly, I don’t feel like starting the Godfather or Apocalypse Now this late in life, so I want to work my way into this wayward stop in his filmography as he returns to form in Metropolis.

7.     School Daze (1988). A 1988 film of Spike Lee that’s right before his defining turn in Do the Right Thing. It might be interesting to look at the elements of Spike Lee before his big, big film.

8.     Sweet Charity (1969). For Mary (a member of our group who liked musicals), we’ll throw in a musical. There's a tremendous number of musicals I'm fond of but for the group, late-period musicals like that of Bob Fosee would be richer for discussion in terms of modern relatabality. Cabaret, because it foreshadows Naziism and the songs serve a purpose that you can argue a lot is an interesting film. But Sweet charity was also an influence in Schmigadoon, and also a Bob Fosse film. I have a feeling it will be very 60s and 70s vibe. As films are a window into history, this could be a big one

Alternative: Cabaret

9.     American Graffiti My favorite coming-of-age film. I’d be curious to see how others see this 1973 George Lucas film as comparing to the ones they grew up on (I’m guessing John Hughes).

Alternative: Rebel Without a Cause

10. The Fisher King (1991) I think Terry Gilliam is an odd bird, to put it mildly. What is it about his visually exxagerative style that works?

Alternatives: Time Bandits, 12 Monkeys 

11. The Day the Earth Stood Still (1956) I want through a lot of sci fi films before deciding on this one. It's not as iconic and influential as Flash Gordon or 2001: A Space Odyssey, but it's a landmark film and symbolizes 1950s films which, like the Twilight Zone, were often rich in allegories and morals. It can be seen as a good code film.

12. What Did You Do in the War Daddy (1966) by Blake Edwards, best known for the Pink Panther. Is a comic war film you might enjoy (I’ve seen it) and can serve as a companion piece to the more famous Rob Altman film MASH (1980) in that it shows the silliness of war

13. Three Days of the Condor (1975) Adam Spector (the local film discussion guru) spoke of this as having some bearing on the Marvel movies, so it could be a good segue to the early action films of the 1970s and 1980s.

14. Cat Ballou (1965) A fun Jane Fonda film and woman-oriented Western which is kind of a curious thing to study from a feminist perspective. It's also a less famous Western, and a very fun film.

15. Dr Zhivago (1965) An epic. The kind of epic that becomes endangered. This is a film I’ve seen half of and own but the second part of the DVD is broken.

16. Looper (2012) Certainly not my favorite film of this era, but it's a curious film and there are a lot of influences in this that might be interesting to examine

17.  Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) We can watch noir or we can watch something that references

18 The Matrix (1999) In this case, I'm picking a film I've never seen and should have. It comes from what some in the group consider to be the best year in recent American history. It's also taken on meanings upon meanings as the film has matured, so that evolution can be discussed.

Dirk Gentley's Holistic Detective Agency: Start of Season 2

This show might have gotten unfavorable "the book was better"comparisons, it might have gotten lost in the shuffle, or critics pain didn't like it, but this was one of my favorite shows last year. It was wonderfully bizarre, the characters were outlandish and well-cast (they strike me as inhabiting a universe where everyone’s just a little out of tune, like the types who pop up in Terry Gilliam films) and the serialized plot built towards something. But this series is more anthology-like, so it’s really a more a question of whether lightning can strike twice than a continued interest.

So far, I have no idea what to expect and the exposition is more like homework. You need to absorb the information of seeing and characters before you can them intermingle, but then again that's standard (at least for me). We're not at the proverbial drop point in the roller coaster, but it’s getting close.

Dirk Gentley desperately needs some forward progress. Like Dwight of The Office successfully demonstrated and Dina on Superstore is failing to do, there’s nothing particularly pleasant about watching an annoying character continue their irritating ways without gradually becoming aware of how annoying they are. We see Todd bending towards Dirk, but that doesn’t fully break the illusion that Dirk is getting any less useless. At the same time, Douglas Adams’ work is rooted in exposing the ridiculousness in our world (or, rather, a slightly off-center fantasical version of it) and Dirk solving crimes while doing godawful detective work is one of those oxymorons this kind of material thrives on.
Elijah Wood’s screen persona is that of a blank slate a la Tobey MaGuire: His go-to acting move is reacting with wide-eyed wonder with
a little more frustration laced in.

So far, it’s hard to tell what’s going on and this is a series that relishes in taking a while to connect the dots. I can barely remember anything plot-wise except the character work. The two stand-out characters that keep things interesting so far are an oddball police officer who somehow see things on the same bizarre spectrum of causality as Dirk; and Suzy, who is a submissive housewife and secretary to a white trash husband and corrupt boss that is suddenly on the grips of getting some superpowers.

My Response to 6 AV Club Q & A Prompts

The pop-culture website AV Club has a fun Friday feature where they ask their writers a broad question and have them riff on pop culture with differing answers and writing styles. I noticed that I have some pretty detailed answers from the comments section, so I thought I'd elaborate a little and paste some of them over here. 

What Pop Culture Screams 1997 to You?

The summer of 1997 reflects a time when the Summer blockbuster was trying to transition into the tent pole (so called because they hold up the profit line from all the riskier projects) industry we know today. Natural disaster films like “Volcano” and “Anaconda” and the annual film starring Harrison Ford as a gruff hero of sorts (i.e. "Clear and Present Danger", "The Fugitive", "Patriot Games"), “Air Force One” took up their spaces on the calendar. Efforts to sequalize big hits were burning into the ground with epic failures like “Lost World” and “Batman and Robin.”

It was at this time when the formula was more of a prototype than a sure thing that Barry Sonnenfeld released "Men in Black" from a comic book that was not a well-known existing property. Carrying the biggest budget of the year on a movie this (for lack of a better word) weird might not make sense in retrospect, but it was on the heels of a time when visually idiosyncratic film makers Terry Gilliam and Tim Burton had their biggest commercial successes ("12 Monkeys" for the former;  Batman series and "Edward Scissorhands" for the latter). It was as good a time an effort in the vacuum of a working formula to try a blockbuster that was visually weird and stylistically unique. It also had Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones who always seem to epitomize the 90s for me. 

Which Pop Culture Party Would you Like to Attend?

I like to think of myself as a reluctant extrovert, although I am likely not the only person with a duality between getting energy from personal interactions and being exhausted by all the complications therein. As a human-interest journalist, I love the opportunity to dive into unique subcultures what's the luxury of not having to declare myself a part of any of them. That's why being a caterer on the "Party Down" crew seems like a perfect fit. Every gig I take will, at the very least, be eventful for starters. I will be at liberty to partake in the event (the show's in-universe rules will find a way to stretch my fifteen-minute break into full-on party mode) should I desire, but if I'm feeling reticent, my uniform will allow me to stay in wallflower/observer mode without fully committing to being part of the scene. I would also get a lot of enjoyment out of watching my slightly depressed coworkers alternate between flirting with each other and destroying one another's egos.

What Romantic Comedy Couple Shouldn’t Have Ended up Together?

Credit: Rogerebert.com

Romantic comedies are a viable genre when handled with care, but there is no narrative trope that is more sorely in need of reexamination than the penchant to romantically pair off any two characters who make googly eyes at each other as the standard happy ending. Aside from how it bears little  resemblance to real life and encourages unhealthy expectations, it really dilutes the magic of a romantic ever after if it’s already a foregone conclusion. Nowhere does this seem more of an egregious mistake than the 2012 indie film “Safety Not Guaranteed.” Aubrey Plaza plays emotionally detached young adult Darius (in other words, Aubrey Plaza in full snark mode), on a quest with two other journalists to uncover the truth behind a strange man (Mark Duplass as Kenneth) who thinks he can time travel. Darius’s casual cynicism gets put through the blender, as she makes her way into Kenneth's circle of trust only through empathizing with him. In and of itself, this should be enough to make a great story. Furthermore, because it’s an indie film, it would have been a great opportunity to buck the oldest trend in the book and not pair the characters up. After all, they have no chemistry, the age difference between the two characters borders on gross, and it’s quite possible that Kenneth is mentally ill. Instead, the predictable end result takes down the movie a couple pegs to forgettable.

Which Film do You Wish You’d Seen When it First Came Out?

The easiest way to answer this question is to scroll down my all-time list of favorite films, cross-reference with the proper time period, and voila! But watching a brilliant movie I know will be brilliant and that I also know (with a few exceptions) my fellow movie watchers will also appreciate, will be a foregone conclusion.

Therefore, my criteria has to be brilliant yet baffling: Trying to predict audiences’ conflicting reactions to something as full of raw anger and as adeptly staged as “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolff” would be a hoot. Films like “Five Easy Pieces” or “The Graduate” are great films I have trouble fully grasping the thematic context of because of my distance from the counter-culture movement and experiencing these films during their times could be enlightening.

The one that keeps sticking in my head is “Brazil." Terry Gilliam’s dedication to visual purity often overshadows his extremely inventive storylines and this is one where the balance between the two really shine. Opinions will vary, but this is his first film which could be considered a classic and I would enjoy seeing people discover the idiosyncratic storyteller ascending to a new level of coherence, appeal and complexity in his work. It’s also a film that takes a while to get so the post-film discussion would consist of a lot of “huh”s but it would be a lot of fun piecing the puzzles and symbolism of the film together.

What TV Series do You Love but will Never Revisit?

I get confronted with this question every time I desire some comfort TV and tune in to find “Seinfeld” and “The Simpsons” (who the Gods of syndication have been eternally kind to) are pretty much always on. While this wouldn’t be an unpleasant use of a half-hour,  I have some strange resistance to revisiting either of the series that came to culturally define the decade in which I came of age. Maybe, it’s an act of rebellion against the perceived quality of these shows: While I tend to rail against hipsterish attitudes of consciously defining your tastes against the mainstream, I can’t help admitting that the high placement of both these shows on best-of-all-time lists drives me to want to define my tastes from this decade differently.

Beyond that, there’s plenty of pedestrian reasons to resent these shows. How can I not resent The Simpsons like a privileged child for being cancellation-free when every other show (including superior sister show “Futurama”) has to contend with the axe? How can I not blame the show’s success for Jerry Seinfeld’s leverage to get away with passive-aggressive behavior or Julia Louis-Dreyfus’s frustrating lockhold on lead actress awards in the present day? There’s a myriad web of reasons not to like these shows and while I find it difficult to put my finger on exactly what keeps me from turning to channel five, I know that I’ve been able to resist the urge for a decade.

What Pop Culture Becomes More Meaningful as You Get Older?

 Credit: Readthespirit.com

I've gradually gone from liking "Dead Poets Society” but not understanding the ending, to thinking it is a perfectly realized film. As a child, Robin Williams’ character of John Keating was so right and the stuffy administration so wrong that I found the film’s “Oh Captain, My Captain” scene to not make up for all the tragedy that had been happening in the third act. As I’ve grown into adulthood and learned firsthand the myriad of ways in which an employer can screw you over (including some not particularly well-received stints in the education sector), I’ve come to appreciate the “Oh Captain My Captain” scene as a pretty solid outcome for an anti-establishment type in an employment landscape that discourages such free thinking and isn’t necessarily fair. Besides, what is the job of a teacher other than to impart a lesson onto his students? He might not have stayed until the end of the school year, but he can rightfully say "Mission Accomplished".

Spring Round-Up Part III: Garfunkel and Oates, Comedians, 12 Monkeys, Bates Motel

Twelve Monkeys (SyFy)-Based on the Terry Gilliam film of the same name, this loopy time travel series got my attention out of the gate. It had a premise that kept me eagerly awaiting the next plot turn despite the fact that it's based on a story I'm already familiar with.

Aaron Stratford (Pyro from the X-Men) plays Bruce Willis' role of Cole and gets the dazed and confused stature of the action hero down (which isn't particularly far off from the war-weary and jaded thing he's going for). The chemistry between him and Dr. Railly (Amanda Schull) and Stratford has a certain electricity to it despite the fact that they aren't romantically intertwined (as of Episode 10, at least). They do a lot with wayward glances which makes a scene like Cole's attempts to dance at a cocktail party a lot less cringeworthy than originally written.

Credit: Cnet.com

Slowing down this romance is Railly's off-and-on-again boyfriend/fiancée who goes from disbeliever to uneasy ally. Part of this might have to do with the sort of trippy quasi-love triangle they're in wherein one side might have some extra special motivation to ensure that the other side gets erased from time although this isn't acknowledged (which is kind of weird).  Emily Hampshire (the MVP of Schitt's Creek, pictured right) plays the Brad Pitt character with a wild manic energy that's worthy of more of my adoration.


Unfortunately, the series gets bogged down in the middle episodes with plot lines set in the future outside of Cole that don't resonate. Dr. "Not Indiana" Jones gets into a power struggle with a faction that wants to cure the virus rather than do the whole time travel assassination thing. This virus cure strategy aligns more with the plot of the original movie but it's nowhere near as exciting as assassination via time travel, so what's the point? Even more questionable is the choice to add a subplot about Ramse's ex-lover and newly discovered child. This is way too much screen time to give to a character who exists primarily as a side character and confidante to Cole. This would be like if "It's a Wonderful Life" interrupted the main plot to bother us with story lines about Clarence and his domestic squabbles in Heaven.


The primary purpose of setting scenes in the future in the film was to provide the backstory and showcase Terry Gilliam's aesthetic which this show can't compete with. The scenes set in the present from Dr. Railly's point of view where she has highly imperfect information over what/where/when will happen next is when the series is at its best so let's hope we see more of the show set there. The show is still very enjoyable despite its complex plot and unpleasant deviations and I'm only at Episode 10, so let's hope things right themselves by the end of the season.


Garfunkel and Oates (IFC)-The brainchild of two actors that met each other performing at the UCB theater, Garfunkel and Oates originated from a song and dance act of two girls singing plain and dirty truths set to sweet harmonies and ukuleles. The musical numbers are undeniably catchy but there's nothing beyond that that isn't already being done by better acts that came along first. The first comparison that will come to mind is "Flight of the Concords" which is pretty unflattering considering that G & O does such a poor job of shoehorning their songs into plots.

Other than that, we have unflattering comparisons to "Broad City" in that the leads are two dense ladies with questionable abilities to navigate adulthood in a codependent relationship with each other. If not for "Broad City," there's also the "Live Prude Girls" web series (starring the AT&T girl) and Grace Helbig doing the dense girl shtick solo.

I'm not suggesting that these two actresses are falling short of the admirable goal of finding their voice and translating it into sitcom form. It's just that they have the awful luck of having a voice that's eerily similar to a number is shows already out there and what little there is that differentiates Garfunkel and Oates from Broad City or Live Prude Girls is a very small slice of demographic pie.

[Update: I watched a couple more episodes. The one with Ari Graynor is pretty solidly written]

The Comedians (FX)-Even if we admire the execution of shows like Louie, Episodes, Comeback,  Curb Your Enthusiasm, Life is Short  or The Michael J Fox Show we need to stop celebrating the same tired concept of a comedian or actor playing a thinly veiled version of his or herself. It comes off as vain and is becoming ad overused a genre as vampires are for teens.  At least Michael Judge or Jon Favreau had the creative decency to channel their creative frustrations into metaphors like tech start ups or cooking. To make matters worse: Billy Crystal already mined this territory in Mr. Saturday Night. For someone who's primarily known as a last minute resort for Oscar hosting with the same shtick he's been doing since the 90s, you would think he would use an opportunity like this to do something more inventive. On the plus side,  underrated character actress Stephanie Weir is now employed for a while. 

[Update: I only watched the first episode]

Bates Motel (A and E)-I was incredibly pleased with this show over the first two seasons. Who would've thought that Hitchcock's most action-oriented film could be adapted into one of the best mood pieces on TV. This is like Dawson's Creek or another small town teenage drama except with a lot more rape,  arson,  manslaughter, corruption,  schizophrenia, and outright murder. But it's still a mood piece with a strong sense of place,  deep characters and great performances.

The problem if that the show might have run out of mileage by now. The reveal that Norman has a habit of losing his marbles has already happened, we already know Mama Bates is creepy, the town's dirty,  and we've already seen Norman fall in love and murder someone twice (On the subject of his murdering: Shouldn't he be put in a mental institution by now?) What's there left for the show to do?  

From what I've seen of this season,  they're now pairing him off with a new love interest in Emma and more shady people are rolling into town. Neither of these things are new. I'm not suggesting the show needs to shift it's identity but rather reconsider whether the show will have diminishing returns from here on out. I'm not saying "Let's cancel the show!" but there are some obstacles in place that need to be worked out if the show is going to tread in the same direction.

For other editions of my Spring 2015 review:
Part I: Glee, Togetherness, Last Man on Earth, Archer
Part II: Schitt's Creek, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, The Librarians 
Still to come: Daredevil, Better Call Saul, Fresh off the Boat, Empire, and possibly Modern Family, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Empire, and Silicon Valley

My top 100 films of all-time 87-80

I just interviewed the Washington D.C. Filmmaker of the Month and we discussed films shot in D.C., opportunities for local actors and The West Wing. Click here

My top 100 continued. I don't entirely have it mapped it out (I might be guilty of forgetting a film or misplacing a film), but let's see how this goes:

87. Three Kings (1999) directed by David O Russell, Starring George “Please stop writing magazine articles about this guy” Clooney, Mark Wahlberg, Ice-T, Nora Dunn

I was heavily debating between this and "Oh Brother Where Art Thou" and felt an urge not to over-Clooney my list*. The film certainly isn’t a conventional war film or even a particularly patriotic one. Like MASH, this is a film of people who are apathetic to the war around them. More significantly, they’re bored which explains why they initially go on their adventure. The film also deepens in unexpected ways. The film is very gritty visually and doesn’t shy away from gore (it even gets creative with shots of internal organs) but it’s not overly crude just for the sake of being edgy.

86. Cat Ballou (1965) directed by Henry Hathaway, Starring Jane Fonda, Lee Marvin, Dwayne Hickman, Nat King Cole

I’m not sure if I’m becoming guilty of overloading my list with goofy pictures of no technical value other than they just make me smile, because like “In Like Flint” this might fall into that category as well. It’s got some pretty heavy comedic leanings, but it’s a solid adventure that’s just as kinetic as the most fun Western you can imagine. The film really is a perfect fit for Jane Fonda too.


I did once review this film years ago on my blog, so that should cover it.

85. Fisher King (1991) directed by Terry Gilliam, Starring Robin Williams, Jeff Bridges, Amanda Plummer, Mercedes Ruehl

Sometimes Gilliam gets lost in his own imagination and the effect can be that the story gets diluted through cartoonish characters and deviations from the plot. This is a shame because some of his stories are really great. This is one such great plot idea and it helps here that these are probably the four best acting performances I’ve seen in a Gilliam film. It’s a great fusion of solid drama with the abstract stylings of Gilliam’s bizarreness.

84. Seabiscuit (2003) directed by Gary Ross, Starring Jeff Bridges, Tobey Maguire, Chris Cooper, William H Macy, Elizabeth Banks

This is my one clichéd Disney story of an underdog entity winning against all the odds. I would rethink this corny period piece until I remember that the film was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar so other people must have thought it was pretty good too. The production values are great, the source material is converted to cinematic effect, and the acting is tremendous (I remember thinking: man, that actress who plays the wife should get nominated for an Oscar. She didn’t but she was Elizabeth Banks and became famous later). Also, it does have some very bittersweet undertones despite being a film made for no other reason than to stir up inspirational feelings.

83. Rain Man (1998) directed and written by Barry Levinson, Starring Tom Cruise and Dustin Hoffman

I generally don’t think a film can be considered great solely on the basis of one performance. “Rain Man” comes close. Hoffman is a fascinating character but Tom Cruise doesn’t get enough credit for his role even though he acts like Tom Cruise for the first half of the movie. While it’s a story about two people with very rigid temperaments changing (one because he’s biologically incapable, and one because he’s “a prick” in his own words) for the better.

82. Goldfinger (1964) directed by Guy Hamilton, based on the book by Ian Flemming, starring Sean Connery, Gert Forbe, Harry Sakada, Honor Blackman, Los Maxwell, Shirley Eaton, Cec Linder, Bernard Lee

Embodies the best of everything that you associate with James Bond: Beautiful scenery, ornate lairs, diabolical villains, creative technology, sexy women, and a convoluted plan for world domination. There’s not much more to say. Last time a James Bond film came out pre-Daniel Craig era, I found it amusing to see the reviews because there really isn’t much to say about a Bond film. You basically just check off a list of elements because as complex as the stories are, it’s mostly an excuse for the elements.

81. McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971), dir. Rob Altman, starring Warren Beatty, Julie Christie, Rene Auberjoinis, Keith Carradine, William DeVane

This film is basically a response to the other Westerns of its time. It’s not really a great film on its own, because you have to see at least a couple other classic Westerns to really appreciate the way that this film turns those conventions on their head. It’s definitely a film worth watching a second time, if only for the fact that you’re not going to get everything anyone’s saying. It’s also a piece with a lot of symbolism that sort of pieces together in a thinky kind of way.

80. Goodfellas (1990), Martin Scorsese, written by Nicholas Pileggi, starring Ray Liotta, Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, Lorraine Bracco

I'd probably characterize my reaction to this film as a classic that I agree is worthy of being a classic. Other people call this the most influential film of the 1990’s or whatever. I won´t say that´s untrue but I have no idea why, so if anyone wants to correct me about that in the comments. Didn´t Scorsese make other mob films? I just see it as a very good film within an already existin genre.

On a recent poll of best supporting actor winners of all time, I ranked Pesci #1 (& Waltz #2). To me the film is most notable for Pesci's performance and the very organic character change from Henry Hill, the relatively morally straight teenager who admired the local hoodlums, to a ruthless man and almost entirely unsympathetic character.

Fisher King review

The Fisher King (1991):
Dir. by Terry Gilliam, Starring Robin Williams, Amanda Plummer, Jeff Bridges, Mercedes Ruehl

The Fisher King is one of Terry Gilliam’s least bizarre adventures but it certainly is a wonderfully bizarre movie by the standards of the average movie. Jeff Bridges, in a role that seems fairly similar to his persona in The Big Lebowski, plays an emotionally devoid radio DJ who hits rock bottom when one of his callers goes on a killing spree. Three years later, he’s an unemployed bum who feeds off a live-in girlfriend (Ruehl in an a role that won her the supporting actress oscar) who runs a video store in Brooklyn. His life turns around when in a drunken stupor he falls into an alleyway where on the verge of getting beaten to death, a crazy homeless man named (Robin Williams) saves his life. The lives of the two become interconnected as Bridges’ character learns that Perry (Williams) was once a respected professor of medieval history whose downfall into the bottom rungs of society he is indirectly responsible for.
Gilliams’ films are usually bizarre visually, but this is one of the few Gilliam films that possesses that wonderful sense of imagination in its storyline (the other one would probably be Brazil). It’s thoroughly engaging and has a good amount of depth below the surface. It was also probably the most challenging role of Williams’ career to date and holds up as one of his best. It does not fit the typical Robin Williams’ mold of inspiring leader (i.e. Patch Adams, Dead Poets’ Society, What Dreams May Come), the funnyman (i.e. Flubber, Good Morning Vietnam) or his desperate attempts to go against type performances in 2002 (Insomnia and One-Hour Photo). His role in Fisher King combines perverted elements of Robin Williams the funnyman, Robin Williams the romantic, and unique elements of Robin Williams’ range that have never been seen before or since.

Top 10 Sci-Fi films and more

This is in response to an Entertainment Weekly article which identified the top 25 sci-fi TV and movie phenomenoms over the last 25 years.

I have a very detailed version of this I intend to expand upon as I improve on this, but here's what I would say are the ten most definitive sci-fi films of all time and when I get the time, I will expand upon this more. So consider this incomplete without explanations:
1. Star Wars, George Lucas, 1977
2. Metropolis, Fritz Lang, 1927
3. 2001: A Space Odyssey, Stanley Kubrick, 1968
4. A Clockwork Orange, Stanley Kubrick, 1971
5. Close Encounters of a Third Kind, Stephen Spielberg, 1977
6. Blade Runner, Ridley Scott, 1982
7. Brazil, Terry Gilliam, 1986
8. Matrix, Wolchowski Bros., 1999
9. Alien, Ridley Scott, 1979
10. Back to the Future, Rob Zemeckis, 1985

10 other films of note: The Day the Earth Stood Still, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, War of the Worlds (original), 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Day After Tomorrow, Independence Day, Aliens, Minority Report, X-Men, E.T.

10 great Sci-Fi TV Shows I recommend: Lost in Space, Star Trek, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Seaquest DSV, Futurama, Sliders, Quantum Leap, Firefly, Andromeda, Heroes

10 sci-fi books: Dune; I, Robot, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Ender's Game, The Time Machine, Journey to the Center of the Earth, 20000 Leagues Under the Sea, Farenheight 411, and hmmm, can't think of any other ones.

Review of The Brothers Grimm

The Brother's Grimm might not succeed as the definitive postmodern compendium of fairy tales that Director Terry Gilliam made it out to be. The plot's finer points and its references to fairy tales get easily lost on the viewer. At the same time, the movie works as a playful ride fueled by the odd couple chemistry between its two stars. Heath Ledger and Matt Damon play brothers Will and two witch doctors who travel the 18th Century German countryside offering their services as witch doctors. In reality, they're con artists who elaborately plot hoaxes. The main plot is that the two brothers are forced to play witch doctors for real when they are hired to clean out a forest that they discover is truly haunted. Terry Gilliam, who is somewhat of an acquired taste for being more of an art director than a storyteller, achieves more impressive and less distracting visuals than usual and imbues the film with touches of humor. Overall, the film works.