

I was recently asked to take part in HELL FOR HYPHENATES - a monthly film-discussion podcast based in Melbourne. Each month, film-related folk are recruited to talk about both the month's releases and the work of a chosen director. After much prevaricating, I decided to talk about Terry Gilliam, whose work probably helped me get interested in film in the first place. It surprised me then how much easier I found it to pick apart his shortcomings than sing his praises. At the end of the hour, I wondered if I'd said anything nice at all.
The problem, of course, is I love Gilliam's work. I love his idiosyncratic design, his cinematic flair, his blurring of lines between the real world and the imagined. I love the fact that he always sides with imagination over reality, from Time Bandits' Kevin despairing of his suburbanite parents to Parnassus fretting that nobody wants to hear his stories anymore. Watching Time Bandits again recently I was astonished how deeply it has informed - and continues to inform - much of my own work. Salmon & Dusk certainly owes the film a few drinks. There's still no other director I'd prefer to see take on a cinematic version.
But, as with anything (or anyone) you've loved forever, the flaws are generally the first thing you notice. It's the reason internet fan forums are so full of bile for the object of their desire. Certainly, rewatching Gilliam's oeuvre in a short period of time made me acutely aware of the niggles I have. In brief, I often came away wishing for more clarity and a little less narrative flabbiness. To me, there's a bit too much getting bogged down in world creation, a few films taking at least half an hour to get down to the business of storytelling.
I suspect, however, that most of my complaints say more about myself than they do about him. I'm currently arse-deep in the third draft of The Relic - a young adult book to be published August 2012. For the first time in my writerly life I'm working closely with someone - my wonderful editor - who truly knows what she's doing. It's been a fantastic experience so far and a fascinating shift from working solo to a collaborative effort. I did consider throwing an artistic strop early in the drafting process, but never really found grounds. Well, not yet.
What I've found most rewarding about the edit is the need for clarity, paring back the prose until the sharpest of stories is revealed. As a result, it's pretty much all I'm currently looking for elsewhere, which probably didn't put me in the most receptive frame of mind to reassess Gilliam's freewheeling approach to film-making.
Ah, but these are excuses. I had a great time recording HYPHENATES, but did come away worried that I'm far too critical for my own good. Perhaps it's the curse of the professional reviewer, but I worry that I find it increasingly difficult to whole-heartedly embrace anything without inserting a caveat or two. (Breakfast - 3.5 stars! A little heavy on the yoghurt.) Perhaps some things really are too good for analysis.
I haven't listened to the podcast yet - I have issues with hearing my voice played back (which is probably a little odd for a podcaster) - but, if you do, and I seem to be unkind to Terry, just remember I do love him, really. Well, mostly. I mean, some of his films are quite good. Bits of them are brilliant, at least.
HELL IS FOR HYPHENATES