REEL ESTATE

FOR SALE Gorgeous antebellum Georgian plantation house with white pillars and plenty of land (though growing veg has proved difficult for previous owner). Generous staff quarters and manicured gardens that are perfect for Southern belles who love pretty clothes to woo rakish suitors who know how to kiss. Nearby mills make great business tie-ins for the right mistress. Don’t delay in viewing – tomorrow is another day but this beauty will be off the market soon.

HINDSIGHT CORNER

IAN Mc KELLAN

STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION

1987

Patrick Stewart: ‘When I told [Ian McKellan] I was going to sign the contract [for Star Trek: The Next Generation], he almost bodily prevented me from doing so. ‘‘No!” he said. “No, you must not do that. You must not. You have too much important theatre work to do. You can’t throw that away to do TV. You can’t. No!”’

Years later

‘In the years since, we have become dear pals and X-Men colleagues, and Ian has acknowledged that he was wrong and I was right. More than once, in fact – primarily because I like making him say those words.’

FLOP CULTURE

He beat the studio, but Terry Gilliam struggled to bank an audience for his 1984-dystopian dream-film. Maybe some movies just take time…

Why it was a good idea (on paper)

No one needed to tell Terry Gilliam to dream bigger. After the joyous adventure film Time Bandits, Gilliam combined his own vaulting fancies with the influences of Kafka/Orwell for a retro-futurist paean to the dreams of the little man. Call it 1984½: Terry did.

What went wrong?

Modestly budgeted, immoderately imagined, Gilliam’s lavish alt-universe – handmade, ambitious – would always be tough to realise. He spent five years on the script, aided by co-writers Charles Alverson, Tom Stoppard and Charles McKeown. George Gibbs (effects) claimed the shoot was harder than Raiders of the Lost Ark; co-producer Patrick Cassavetti called it ‘a nightmare’. But Gilliam, who brought the film in on budget and schedule even over a tough nine months, faced his ‘worst nightmare’ after production.

Universal pulled the film from release, with MCA president Sidney Sheinberg using test screenings to push for an edit with ‘commercial viability’. When Gilliam refused, the studio hacked out the ‘Love Conquers All’ cut: shorter, soppier, not better. Or Gilliam-er. The irony of a film about bureaucracy and oppression becoming entangled in oppressive bureaucracy was much noted. But the little guy won. Gilliam placed an ad in Variety, reading, ‘Dear Sid Sheinberg: when are you going to release my film, Brazil?’ The LA Film Critics Association gave Brazil awards for picture, direction and screenplay. A release was duly granted – but audiences didn’t fly in en masse and reviews were mixed.

Redeeming feature

Hilarious and humane, subversive and staggeringly realised: Brazil doesn’t need redeeming.

What happened next?

Undeterred, Gilliam dreamed bigger and flopped harder with The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, before the successes of The Fisher King and 12 Monkeys. With 132-and ‘final’ 142-minute cuts becoming available, Brazil generated growing cult acclaim, its influence stretching from Batman (1989) to Loki.

Should it be remade?

No. Personal visions often need cherishing. Brazil has Gilliam embedded in its DNA: best keep it that way.