Plot
A lonely girl gets trapped in an eerie fantasy world after her irresponsible parents die.
Release Year: 2005
Rating: 6.5/10 (16,396 voted)
Critic's Score: 26/100
Director:
Terry Gilliam
Stars: Jeff Bridges, Jennifer Tilly, Jodelle Ferland
Storyline Pre-teen Jeliza-Rose's parents are hopeless drug addicts. When pa, rocker Noah, finds ma OD's, he fears to be charged of homicide and takes her along to his ma's place, in a desolate country region. With Noah passed out, the girl mentally transfers to a fantasy worlds she and her doll heads enter magically. In its adventures she also stars the crazy locals, notably Dell, her domineering hag ma and adult, but retarded brother Dickens.
Writers: Tony Grisoni, Terry Gilliam
Cast: Jodelle Ferland
-
Jeliza-Rose
/
Sateen Lips
/
Glitter Gal
/
Mustique
/
Baby Blonde
Janet McTeer
-
Dell
Brendan Fletcher
-
Dickens
Jennifer Tilly
-
Queen Gunhilda
Jeff Bridges
-
Noah
Dylan Taylor
-
Patrick
Wendy Anderson
-
Woman
/
Squirrel
Sally Crooks
-
Dell's Mother
Filming Locations: Canada Saskatchewan Production Studios, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Box Office Details
Budget: $19,300,000
(estimated)
Opening Weekend: $7,276
(USA)
(15 October 2006)
(1 Screen)
Gross: $197,659
(Worldwide)
(15 April 2007)
Technical Specs
Runtime:
Did You Know?
Trivia:
In promotion for the opening weekend of this film, Director Terry Gilliam crashed the ticket line for
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. He signed autographs, told jokes, and took photos with fans, holding a sign proclaiming (in jest): "Studio-less Film Maker, Family to Support, Will Direct for Food". He is quoted as saying: "This is the state of independent film making. You got to get out on the street and beg again." "We have no shame anymore, just out on the streets hustling." "The first weekend is everything, if it doesn't do well the first weekend, it dies."
Quotes: Jeliza-Rose:
Squirrel butts don't glow.
User Review
The Age Of Unreason, Or...Why Terry Gilliam Can't Catch A Break
Rating: 10/10
Poor Terry Gilliam. The visionary director just can't catch a break.
Blessed with one of the most fertile imaginations in modern cinema,
equally renowned as an animator, filmmaker, and iconoclast, he has made
a handful of highly original, single-minded films, most of which are
now considered classics (although it tends to take a few years before
critical revisionism regards his work as such; I bet few recall The
Adventures of Baron Munchhausen was first considered a costly bomb on
par with Heaven's Gate). But of late he has had to suffer a critical
beating for his mainstream-designed The Brothers Grimm, not to mention
the well-documented collapse of The Man Who Killed Don Quixote (why
does the word schadenfreude come to mind?), and more often than not he
is regarded as somewhat of a brilliant madman with integrity to burn,
willing to battle Hollywood at any cost to keep his visions intact.
Now comes his adaptation of Mitch Cullin's Tideland, a category defying
film that is at turns poetic, disgusting, absurd, and darkly funny
(think the languid pacing of Spirit of the Beehive, the fever dream of
Alice in Wonderland, the wry insanity Psycho, and a large dose of
Terence Malik gone insane). In many ways, this is the purest Gilliam
film since Brazil (a film that also borrowed liberally from other
sources while maintaining its own originality), and hearkens back to
the days when auteurs were not only allowed to follow their wildest
muse but were expected to do so. And that, too, presents what will no
doubt be Tideland's greatest failing, as well as its highest
achievement. Cinema has become so cynical in the last twenty years - so
narrow in scope and so entertainment driven - that anything which
requires viewers to experience a motion picture on its own terms is
usually greeted with scorn. These would be very tough times, indeed,
for the likes of a young Fellini, Kubrick, and Lynch. That's not to say
Tideland is a perfectly misunderstood creation, although it should be
pointed out that those who are screaming foul about this film being
pointless, self indulgent, and too weird are likely the very same
people who ridiculed Grimm for being unoriginal, mainstream, and plain.
Yes, there were walkouts at its screenings, gasps of shock, even angry
grumbling. There were also laughs, applause, and continued debates
concerning what the film was really about (how often does that occur
these days after a screening?).
In the end, Tideland will likely please a select group who prefer to
experience cinema rather than opposing it with their own expectations
(there were those who were still talking about it two days following
its premiere, even when they hated it). But for those who are anxiously
wanting Time Bandits 2 or desire some degree of Pythonesque humor,
Tideland will disturb, bore, and profoundly bother to the point of
contempt. Nevertheless, it is a very unique and, at times, incredible
film, infused with at least two amazing performances, beautiful
photography, and one of the most enigmatic endings I've seen in ages.
Hate it or love it, few will be able to deny the lingering, ineffable
vibrations left by this film, or that it stands as further proof that
its director has stayed true to himself. Of course, prepare for the
yin/yang laments to come in spades: Grimm would have been a better film
had Gilliam been left to his own devices; Tideland would have been a
better film had Gilliam not been left to his own devices. Poor Terry
Gilliam; apparently he can do no right even when he does.
0