Terry Gilliam on His Epic New Dystopian Film the Zero Theorem(wired.com)
wired.com
Terry Gilliam on His Epic New Dystopian Film the Zero Theorem
http://www.wired.com/2014/09/zero-theorem/
8 comments
As someone who used to really enjoy dystopian themes, and who still does when done properly, the trope has become overused. "Epic new dystopian" film instead sounds like your standard "start out interesting for the first thirty minutes," and which then devolves into an hour or so of mindless fighting. Then again, Gilliam did do Brazil so maybe I'm wrong.
Yep. It's all been way overdone. Brazil and 12 Monkeys were different because it was all more or less new then. Both also had great arc and reveals, but It's Been Done Now.
I say "new then"; dystopian SciFi was a staple of drive-ins in the '70s - from Silent Running to Planet of the Apes to Logan's Run...
It's not like there isn't a huge backlog of great sci-fi to draw on that isn't dystopian. I'd like to see The Foundation Trilogy as a multi-year "Breaking Bad" style series.
It's basically a massive essay, but Scorcese's "Personal Journey" manages to explain why movies are in terrible shape without being hopeless about it. The reasons are profound.
I say "new then"; dystopian SciFi was a staple of drive-ins in the '70s - from Silent Running to Planet of the Apes to Logan's Run...
It's not like there isn't a huge backlog of great sci-fi to draw on that isn't dystopian. I'd like to see The Foundation Trilogy as a multi-year "Breaking Bad" style series.
It's basically a massive essay, but Scorcese's "Personal Journey" manages to explain why movies are in terrible shape without being hopeless about it. The reasons are profound.
Disagree - it's not what you do, but how you do it. Execution matters.
The Matrix was even old hat at the time - future dystopian, man vs. machine - Terminator 1 and 2 really hit those themes.
But the Matrix took the idea and dug down, found ore, and refined it, crafted it, polished it.
Gilliam has some good notches on his belt so I'm hopeful there will be substance.
The Matrix was even old hat at the time - future dystopian, man vs. machine - Terminator 1 and 2 really hit those themes.
But the Matrix took the idea and dug down, found ore, and refined it, crafted it, polished it.
Gilliam has some good notches on his belt so I'm hopeful there will be substance.
Not a big Matrix fan. I agree it was extremely well-executed.
I also hope Gilliam hits this one out of the park on general principles.
I also hope Gilliam hits this one out of the park on general principles.
If you haven't seen "Black Mirror" from Channel 4 yet, watch it. I just found out about this recently from the Hello Internet podcast. Very dystopic/dark satire. There are 2 series of 3 episodes each.
Don't spoil it by reading about it!
Don't spoil it by reading about it!
A feature-length special is coming this Christmas:
http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2014/aug/21/charlie-...
I recommend Black Mirror as well, but I would suggest skipping the first episode. Like the twilight zone, each episode is independent so it doesn't matter what order you watch them and the first one is... unpleasant (and in my opinion not as well done as the others).
I went to a Neal Stephenson talk where he argued that the main reason we see so many dystopian themed TV shows and movies is because they're cheap. He argued that it's cheaper to depict a dytopian future than a utopian one.
So that's a self-referentially constructed explanation for dystopianism in film :) Nice.
The budget for Blade Runner was US $28,000,000.00 in 1982, which was A Lot. It's so much that the IMDB page says "(estimated)" .
The budget for Blade Runner was US $28,000,000.00 in 1982, which was A Lot. It's so much that the IMDB page says "(estimated)" .
I don't understand it. Why is it cheaper to design a colourful background animation then one of a cyberpunk city? Or cloth or items?
It's not about CGI. It's about practical effects; set and setting -- to convey the emotional feel of hope, safety, plenty and beauty.
Utopia requires verdant green lawns, large old trees, calm ponds or slowly flowing water. Big Open spaces. Lots of good light, clean surfaces, rich materials and blue skies.
This adds up to larger sets, more expensive sets (more care needed in their construction and use), lots of expensive lights or desirable locations -- everyone loves a picturesque park, so imagine how much it costs to shut one down for filming. And now imagine what happens if that day is cloudy, or rainy, or a scene just didn't get captured on schedule. (This is also why so very few movies are shot on or around water. And why, when they are, massive water tanks are so often used. Even though they are massively expensive to create, they're far cheaper than trying to film out on open water.)
If you need to build and furnish a "utopian" apartment or a building, it needs to be aesthetically pleasing, with graceful curves and clean surfaces. Drop the fancy chair? You might have to get a new one or at least spend time and effort reconditioning it or setting it so damage isn't visible on camera.
Dystopia, on the other hand, is conveyed with dark, cramped, dirty, broken and grimy sets and setting. These things are easy to find, are not in particularly high demand, can be done trivially on a sound-stage, etc. If you need a building you can literally just screw together shipping pallets and scrap metal. If you need to furnish a room, you take a stroll through a dump or buy some cheap dorm-class furniture and then beat it up a bit. And, importantly, less light. Fewer lights to rent and move and set up and operate (and move and set up and operate and move and set up and operate...). You can shoot into the night, you can shoot facing a decrepit building, you can shoot in the back of a rusted out buick in a garbage dump.
Utopia requires verdant green lawns, large old trees, calm ponds or slowly flowing water. Big Open spaces. Lots of good light, clean surfaces, rich materials and blue skies.
This adds up to larger sets, more expensive sets (more care needed in their construction and use), lots of expensive lights or desirable locations -- everyone loves a picturesque park, so imagine how much it costs to shut one down for filming. And now imagine what happens if that day is cloudy, or rainy, or a scene just didn't get captured on schedule. (This is also why so very few movies are shot on or around water. And why, when they are, massive water tanks are so often used. Even though they are massively expensive to create, they're far cheaper than trying to film out on open water.)
If you need to build and furnish a "utopian" apartment or a building, it needs to be aesthetically pleasing, with graceful curves and clean surfaces. Drop the fancy chair? You might have to get a new one or at least spend time and effort reconditioning it or setting it so damage isn't visible on camera.
Dystopia, on the other hand, is conveyed with dark, cramped, dirty, broken and grimy sets and setting. These things are easy to find, are not in particularly high demand, can be done trivially on a sound-stage, etc. If you need a building you can literally just screw together shipping pallets and scrap metal. If you need to furnish a room, you take a stroll through a dump or buy some cheap dorm-class furniture and then beat it up a bit. And, importantly, less light. Fewer lights to rent and move and set up and operate (and move and set up and operate and move and set up and operate...). You can shoot into the night, you can shoot facing a decrepit building, you can shoot in the back of a rusted out buick in a garbage dump.
I find that the somewhat more utopian futures are fairly well presented in games and anime, precisely because scale color are cheap there.
Yes I get the picture. Thank you.
Regardless whether this is true I also find it very funny.
Counterpoint: the far future of Mr. Nobody, which feels well-fleshed out for a considerably smaller budget than most blockbuster sci-fi: http://www.netflix.com/WiMovie/70117580
Star Trek TNG also managed to pull off utopia on a budget, although who knows if that would be feasible in today's fractured TV landscape; at the time, TNG was nearly the only sci-fi game in town.
While cost is a benefit for dystopian media (ie, Snowpiercer), it's also just easier to tell a story in those universes, as the conflict comes baked in.
Star Trek TNG also managed to pull off utopia on a budget, although who knows if that would be feasible in today's fractured TV landscape; at the time, TNG was nearly the only sci-fi game in town.
While cost is a benefit for dystopian media (ie, Snowpiercer), it's also just easier to tell a story in those universes, as the conflict comes baked in.
I rather have the feeling there wasn't much there. All that new dystopian action movies are just the basic and shallow action movies we had with a distopian theme on it. I watched Elysium recently. You could have this without the SciFi part also.
I haven't seen a good dystopian movie in a long time. I was however also not very happy with Zero Theorem but they tried to do something different at least.
My relationship with Hollywood is this: I'm always happy they do something with SciFi. No matter how bad it is. People like SciFi atm and this brings money to ideas which also rises the chances of one really good movie. Then it all was worth it.
Same goes for TV shows. Black Mirror has been mentioned here. What a great show! But it was a great time for SciFi also. Look how many episodes Star Gate got. I couldn't watch it because it was so shallow but many people liked it and it was great for the genre.
I haven't seen a good dystopian movie in a long time. I was however also not very happy with Zero Theorem but they tried to do something different at least.
My relationship with Hollywood is this: I'm always happy they do something with SciFi. No matter how bad it is. People like SciFi atm and this brings money to ideas which also rises the chances of one really good movie. Then it all was worth it.
Same goes for TV shows. Black Mirror has been mentioned here. What a great show! But it was a great time for SciFi also. Look how many episodes Star Gate got. I couldn't watch it because it was so shallow but many people liked it and it was great for the genre.
12 Monkeys too. His last films have been okayish, but this one looks pretty good.
As much as I love Terry Gilliam I find his films like Zero Theorem and even Brazil very challenging to watch the whole way through. I always think they are absolutely genius for the first 30 minutes or so then my interest always starts to slowly fade.
Similar to most of the Monty Python films.
It's like a desert you can only eat in small batches but delivered in full cake size.
Similar to most of the Monty Python films.
It's like a desert you can only eat in small batches but delivered in full cake size.
The first time I watched Brazil I felt physically uncomfortable. I thought that was the point. I loved it.
... I disagree on the Monty Python films, I find they're generally well-paced and can be enjoyed all the way through.
Gilliam's serious films, on the other hand - yeah. The main needs to listen to his editors. Every time I watch a Gilliam movie, especially a director's cut, I'm always frustrated how much his movies drag through the 2nd act. The man needs to learn some brevity, but at his age he's obviously made up his mind that the audiences need to absolutely wallow in his beautiful imagery.
Gilliam's serious films, on the other hand - yeah. The main needs to listen to his editors. Every time I watch a Gilliam movie, especially a director's cut, I'm always frustrated how much his movies drag through the 2nd act. The man needs to learn some brevity, but at his age he's obviously made up his mind that the audiences need to absolutely wallow in his beautiful imagery.
Those bits are for people in altered states. I posit that this has helped many of his films having incredible long tails thanks to their cult status.
Official trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rae7_O_6EtU
HD version http://youtu.be/RyMSRRNHRos
I totally recommend the movie to anyone who is interested in cultural films. The film scrutinizes our religious beliefs and is a huge eye opener. The only downside is the excessive use of semi-pornographic materials.
The movie is a must for all the Lisp and Emacs hackers out there who embrace the hacker philosophy.
The movie is a must for all the Lisp and Emacs hackers out there who embrace the hacker philosophy.
So you're saying there is a self referential satire of the religion of lisp + emacs. That is good ;)
I love Gilliam but imo this is one of his weakest films. My main beef with it is that not much happens in it, it seems repetitive.
Also it is often illogical (ie. does not follow the fantastic logic already established in the film)
Agreed. Waltz's character is just too aloof and annoying to give a shit about him, or why he's waiting for his call. Not too relateable from a protagonist perspective. The film is basically him being bothered the entire time by other people when he just wants to work at home.
Personally I thought this was a great movie about remote working...
The rest was totally lost on me
The rest was totally lost on me
I'm surprised this story got to front page on a SV-based forum where everybody feeds on techno-utopianism.
Unsurprised about the negativity in the comments.
You might not like the movie, but it is quite original and dares touch a lot of subjects most of the film industry can't articulate more than 1 at a time.
I wonder how HN takes Black Mirror.
Unsurprised about the negativity in the comments.
You might not like the movie, but it is quite original and dares touch a lot of subjects most of the film industry can't articulate more than 1 at a time.
I wonder how HN takes Black Mirror.
>I wonder how HN takes Black Mirror.
Black Mirror is more of modern Twilight Zone. Really tight stories exploring a narrow ideas quite well. The only exception is probably "White Bear".
Zero Theorem is kind of the opposite: it felt completely unfocused until the end. I usually hate characters that only exist to deliver exposition but I was thankful for Management's monologues and the dialog with Leth's supervisor. The story felt frozen in place whenever they weren't on-screen.
Black Mirror is more of modern Twilight Zone. Really tight stories exploring a narrow ideas quite well. The only exception is probably "White Bear".
Zero Theorem is kind of the opposite: it felt completely unfocused until the end. I usually hate characters that only exist to deliver exposition but I was thankful for Management's monologues and the dialog with Leth's supervisor. The story felt frozen in place whenever they weren't on-screen.
Honestly, it's hard for me to get past the cinematography with Gilliam's films. Way too many Dutch Angles and other funky things.