The Brothers Grimm
© James C. Hess
Several years ago, while doing relevant fact checking and related research for a screenplay tailored to the creative talents of a specific Hollywood director, I happened upon a rather substantial criticism regarding all the films and movies director Terry Gilliam had directed to that point in time. The criticism, which weighed in at more than ten thousand words in length, was undeniably vitriolic, furious, angry, and outraged with Gilliam.
Initially and superficially, I couldn't understand this attitude and unprofessional behavior by a critic, but as I read the criticism in its entirety I came to gain, by way of appropriate context, an understanding, an appreciation regarding it, best summarized in a remark by the author apparently meant as a throw-away comment: Terry Gilliam, as a director of films and movies, would never find success in Hollywood. He would never realize success in Hollywood not for a lack of talent, ability, and skill but because his films and movies were far too sophisticated, intelligent, and clever for the average movie-goer.
At first the remarks, within the context of anger and fury, made no sense beyond unapologetic prejudice and bigotry, but as I gave the matter more thought and consideration I came to realize and understand, appreciate and relate, to the anger and fury put forth: Everything he said was true: Terry Gilliam, as a director of films and movies, will never find success in Hollywood because his films and movies, overall, are far too sophisticated, intelligent, and clever for the average movie-goer. Because they are they will not be able to find a sufficient theatrical audience and, consequently, will not realize commercial success at the box office, defining them, then, as undeniable failures.
Which is why the critic, I concluded, was angry and furious with Gilliam: He is too smart and talented for his own good. If only he could strive to restrain and restrict his obvious talent, his ability for the visual inventiveness. If only he could supress his imagination and produce a flick of mediocre proportions, then, and only then, would he be faced with the possibility of finding an audience through Hollywood and achieving success by Hollywood standards.
In other words: If Terry Gilliam were just another flavor-of-the-month in the popular culture, lacking any measure of talent, he would be a brilliant genius.
Think about how twisted and perverse the logic of this is and you come to understand, as I did, why this particular critic was so angry and furious with Gilliam. He was angry with Gilliam in spite of the obvious truth and fact. And he had to be furious, because deep down he was actually angry and furious with himself because to be otherwise would go to betray everything he believed he stood for.
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to James C. Hess's Film & TV Reviews topic, please visit the Discussions page.