Lost in La Mancha

I came to this after watching the finally finished Gilliam's Quijote. It probably works better to watch this one, the "sketch", the "failed attempt", after you saw the finished product.

That film, the finished one, is imperfect and chaotic. And that's good. It it as a film, what it was as a work in progress. It reveals Gilliam, and has a special place in his carrer. It's the final product of an obsession, and it follows the path of its very theme.

This one is nice, because we see in it some of the anchors that were kept in the later finished film, and that would probably have worked better in the original, at least from a cinematic point of view. It is clear that Gilliam had in mind the replacement of the "book layers" of the original Quijote by the layers of films in films. In other words, he wanted a world where several layers of paralel realities would affect each other, contaminate them, blur them. This is something he has been doing all his life as a filmmaker, and as such it is apt that he adapts Quijote.

In the book, at least in my reading, Sancho is the pivot, he is the articulation of all the layers, the one that keeps all the madness tolerable, and the one who places us, the "viewers" in the narrative. So having Johnny Depp play that role would have been magnificient. We can only imagine how it would have been, watching the few conversations between Gilliam and Depp in this documentary, watching the short bits of footage that were recorded (the fish fight is amazing) and trying to imagine Depp whenever we see Driver.

I got the impression that Depp was the one who suggested what is in fact the beginning of the new film. At least the breaking of the 4th wall in the matter of "la nuit américaine". That shows he understands the layers. He is a very fine actor.

Take this little film as a piece of a grander puzzle in the mind of an interesting guy. A Quijote film will probably always be better as a sum of bits and pieces, chaos and unreachable goals... This fits. I had a little too much of burocracy (whose fault, who's gonna pay, who should have done what...) and too little of Gilliam's mind. But these documentaries almost always fall on that trap.

"The Man Who Killed Quijote" was the first film in 2018 that completes a seamingly "lost project". We'll likely get Welles' The Other Side of the Wind later this year.. Year for completions, and probably for disappointments. Welles also had an ongoing Quijote project for half his life. Ah, those windmills...

J.K. Rowling said that Director Terry Gilliam's `Time Bandits' was the inspiration for the Harry Potter series. Then who is better to fail than such a visionary-he already did with ` Adventures of Baron Munchausen.' But wait, he fails again with his incomplete `The Man Who Killed Don Quixote.'

In grand dramatic style, the mighty one falls, and in the process instructs us all about the difficulties of working outside Hollywood with shaky European financing and following a dream against all odds-and along the way endearing himself to us all.

Movies on movies abound by the hundreds, from the elegant `Day for Night' to the seedy `Boogie Nights.' None has shown, however, a filmmaker's pain and frustration the way this documentary, `Lost in La Mancha,' does. Directors Keith Fulton and Louis Pepe, at Gilliam's request, document his failed attempt to screen the Quixote story. They create a cautionary tale about moviemaking, especially vain attempts at adapting great literature. In this case, Orson Welles spent 20 years grubbing for funding for `Quixote' and died without the picture; in 1972 Arthur Hiller directed Peter O'Toole in a tepid `Man of La Mancha.'

Gilliam's previous successes (`The Fisher King,' `12 Monkeys') were good enough for him to round up $30 million for this film (half of what was really needed), yet the ghost of `Munchausen' seems to visit every scene: If Gilliam is not talking about its flaws, everyone else seems to be referencing it as the disasters pile up in pre-production and mount during the first week of production.

Of Biblical proportions are the extraordinary desert rains and the NATO jets over the Spanish desert. Of human dimension are Jean Rochefort (Quixote) and his ailing 70-year old prostate. To spice it all further is the difficulty of getting Vanessa Paradis to the set. In the end, Rochefort's illness damns the project, but Gilliam, we are told in the end, will try to buy back the script from the insurance company!

No one who loves film should miss this inside story of a gifted director pursuing a losing cause just as his fictional subject fought windmills 400 years ago (or Welles a quarter a century ago). Although Cervantes regularly ridiculed Quixote, readers became fonder of him with each insult. The more idealistic Gilliam becomes in the face of failure, the more the audience will love the creative 61-year-old director, who believes enough in his vision to continue shooting `images' after everyone else has forsaken the project: `The movie already exists in here [his head]. I have visualized it so many times . . . .' As `Black Hawk Down' should make recruits think more carefully about the glory of war, aspiring filmmakers should see `Lost in La Mancha' before devoting a life to the windmills of Hollywood. However, the romance of the most influential art form in all of civilization will convert the Orson Welleses and Terry Gilliams regardless of the pain.

Even T.S. Eliot knew there was life in the images: `But as if a magic lantern threw the nerves in patterns on a screen . . ..'

Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong… But to start at the beginning. There was finally something in the cinemas from the background of movie-making, about how the movies are made and what are the costs. They were high in this case… It was really fascinating to see the project falling apart so quickly. I think it would have been a wonderful movie if made, proof of this are all former Gilliam's works. But I also think that there could have been more about the movie itself (not just the catastrophes) like storyboards, and definitely more about the plot. Because at least I would rather hear Gilliam talking about the plot than hear him saying f*** for the umpteenth time. I just think that little bit more details would have been fine. But maybe Gilliam didn't say more on purpose, maybe he still wants to make the movie so he keeps it secret yet. We'll see. But if he ever does make it, I'll make sure not to miss it.

Filmmaker & Monty Python alumni Terry Gilliam has dreamed for years of making a movie about Don Quixote. He finally got the chance to make his dream movie, "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote," in 2000, starring Johnny Depp and, in the title role of Don Quixote, French actor Jean Rochefort. But due to budget problems, shooting schedule problems, horrible weather problems, and the unfortunate ill health of actor Rochefort, the production was a disaster from the word go. After only 6 days of troubled shooting, "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" was completely abandoned.

Fortunately, out of the wreckage of Terry Gilliam's never-finished film comes "Lost In La Mancha," a brilliant documentary that captures everything that went wrong with the movie, from the first eight weeks of pre-production (which wasn't smooth sailing either) to the disastrous six-day shoot that followed. We see both sides to Gilliam throughout the movie---one minute he's giddy with delight at making his dream movie, the next minute he's blowing his obscenity-laden top over his project collapsing all around him. And it's not just Gilliam who suffers, as *everyone* involved with the movie, both in front of & behind the camera, gets dragged down right along with him as all hell breaks loose on the doomed production.

Watching "Lost In La Mancha" is not only fascinating, but it's also very educational, giving the viewer a first-hand look at what goes on behind the scenes of mounting a movie, including all of the business aspects involved such as financing & other professional agreements that have to be made before a single frame is shot. It's also a sad documentary to watch, too. Looking at all the terrific hardware, costumes and set pieces that were created for the movie (including marvelous life-size marionette puppets that can march in perfect synchronicity), plus the widescreen footage of the scant few scenes Gilliam shot before the production was shut down, the viewer is given a genuine glimpse of the movie that *might* have been, and is all the more saddened---and sympathetic with Gilliam & his team---because of it.

Happily, though, all is not lost for "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" just yet. Terry Gilliam is reportedly preparing for a second attempt at shooting the movie, and, having seen the movie's potential in this excellent documentary, I wish Gilliam all the best in the world in finally bringing his Don Quixote movie to the big screen. Judging by the glimpses of it in "Lost In La Mancha," I definitely believe it will be a truly great movie. :-)

"The Man Who Killed Don Quixote" has the makings of a brilliant film. It's a twisted take on Cervantes from the mind of director Terry Gilliam, starring Jean Rochefort, Johnny Depp, and Vanessa Paradis. The only problem is that the film has not been made. It REFUSES to be made.

Filmmakers Keith Fulton and Louis Pepe initially set out to chronicle Gilliam as he made his quixotic dream come true. Instead they captured the floods, bombings, and various "acts of God" that shut the movie down. The result is "Lost in La Mancha", a documentary about a courageous but capsizing production. It works because by presenting Gilliam's story, Fulton and Pepe also illustrate the joy and pain that all filmmakers experience to some degree. We often witness Gilliam's frustration, but we also see his delight when his vision briefly comes to life.

One is left with a new appreciation for the daring movies that do make it through production, as well as some hope for the completion of "The Man Who Killed Don Quixote". Gilliam is depicted as a dreamer, not a failure. "Lost in La Mancha" is an enjoyable celebration of those who tilt at windmills.