- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Time Bandits the series on Apple TV canceled after one season.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 8:53 pm
Posted on 9/16/24 at 8:53 pm
Terry Gilliam was right to storm off the set of this one. He knew.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. 
8
Posted on 9/16/24 at 9:02 pm to SouthEasternKaiju
Surprise, surprise
Posted on 9/16/24 at 9:12 pm to SoFla Tideroller
Posted on 9/17/24 at 8:19 am to SouthEasternKaiju
How much did they pay Gilliam, Taika Waititi, the cast, and the production? And anyone could see this coming.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 8:34 am to SouthEasternKaiju
I may have made it through the first episode. However far I made it, it wasn't enough for me to have any desire to watch the 2nd. The show was like a D+ series (think: Hannah Montana or iCarly) without the audience/laugh-tracks and a much larger production budget.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 8:39 am to Bard
quote:
The show was like a D+ series
I just don't get how they keep fricking up these shows with bad production.
Jason Pargin had a really good take on one reason why they look so fake. The clothing is too clean/perfect. None of it looks worn or used, so it seems incredibly fake. When he said this, it all made sense, b/c this is a recurring theme in cheaply made shows. I have no idea why production efforts with huge budgets keep making this mistake (although admittedly, looking at the picture in OP, this doesn't apply as much to Time Bandits as much as things like WOT)
Posted on 9/17/24 at 8:57 am to SouthEasternKaiju
I gotta be honest, i never watched the original and thought “more please”
I thought WTF? which is a normal Terry Gilliam response.
I thought WTF? which is a normal Terry Gilliam response.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:11 am to SammyTiger
quote:
I gotta be honest, i never watched the original and thought “more please”
It's a great movie, but definitely a time and place kind of thing.
I'll never understand how someone takes a movie like Time Bandits, removes the most obvious novelty in the movie and plugs an aging Phoebe from Friends in the lead... and GETS FINANCING.
Only politics wastes more money than Hollywood. It must be why they interbreed so much.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Jason Pargin had a really good take on one reason why they look so fake. The clothing is too clean/perfect.
For this show it was what I refer to as "the magic character" effect, in this instance it's the 11yr old kid. I get that the show's main character needs to be seen as important, but the writing here was of that juvenile level where all adults are idiots while the main character (in this case, the young boy) has to be central to every solution (the solution is their idea, only they can accomplish it, etc). This was also a big weakness in Star Trek: Discovery (Michael was the center of everything).
To go back to my last post a bit, when the show is geared to be a goofy, intentional comedy centered on a Mary Sue-ish character like the D+ shows, then it can work. The bright colors, the shallow reasonings, the inexplicable idiocy/obtuseness of other characters, the cleanliness, etc. are all part of that genre. This show was like the unexpected result of a drunken one-night fling between one of the later Harry Potter movies and an episode of Blossom. While they could look similar, those are two different themes and by trying to be both at the same time, the show failed at doing either well enough to be considered worthwhile.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:29 am to AUCom96
I wonder how many ideas start as an original concept and then they have to hammer some preexisting IP over it to get funding.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:34 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
Terry Gilliam was right to storm off the set of this one. He knew.
Gilliam is familiar with disastrous productions to say the least. He can spot signs at this point.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:41 am to SammyTiger
quote:
I wonder how many ideas start as an original concept and then they have to hammer some preexisting IP over it to get funding.
IP used to secure funding? Yes.
Original concepts? Those tend to be few and far between.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:50 am to teke184
quote:
IP used to secure funding? Yes. Original concepts? Those tend to be few and far between.
i’m saying which came first?
Studios don’t want original concepts. They need some built in audience. and most probably start as a studio idea.
But I am sure a few of these things start off as a script or a pitch and the studio says, can you tie in some other preexisting property.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 10:10 am to SouthEasternKaiju
Thank god, now we can try to forget it ever happened.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 10:53 am to SouthEasternKaiju
One can understand the thought process though:
Hey, what about Time Bandits? That was a fun movie for kids and adults.
Yeah, so would we cast, *ahem*, you know, "little people" for a remake/reboot?
Oh, G-d no. Haven't you heard? Dinklage and such.
Oh, yeah, you're right.
How about Phoebe from Friends?
Great, get Waititi involved, shoot it in New Zealand - just throw a bunch of fricking money at it.
Can't miss!
Hey, what about Time Bandits? That was a fun movie for kids and adults.
Yeah, so would we cast, *ahem*, you know, "little people" for a remake/reboot?
Oh, G-d no. Haven't you heard? Dinklage and such.
Oh, yeah, you're right.
How about Phoebe from Friends?
Great, get Waititi involved, shoot it in New Zealand - just throw a bunch of fricking money at it.
Can't miss!
Posted on 9/17/24 at 10:54 am to SouthEasternKaiju
Rare ATV+ miss
Posted on 9/17/24 at 11:22 am to Pettifogger
quote:
Rare ATV+ miss
Now, this is true. Certainly HBO/Max and ATV have a much better record than Disney SW, recent Marvel and the like.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 2:10 pm to rebelrouser
quote:
Taika Waititi,
Talk about someone who seems hellbent on wasting every drop of goodwill he earned through his earlier movies.
Posted on 9/17/24 at 2:15 pm to Bard
quote:
For this show it was what I refer to as "the magic character" effect, in this instance it's the 11yr old kid. I get that the show's main character needs to be seen as important, but the writing here was of that juvenile level where all adults are idiots while the main character (in this case, the young boy) has to be central to every solution (the solution is their idea, only they can accomplish it, etc). This was also a big weakness in Star Trek: Discovery (Michael was the center of everything).
I think you hit the nail on the head on why non-Star Trek fans liked Discovery and regular fans didn't - even though the captain is the "main" character of each Star Trek series, it's still an ensemble cast and there are whole episodes dedicated to other members of the crew. The captain is not ALWAYS the center focus; it seemed like Discovery was hellbent on having a "central" character which is just not Star Trek.
That "kid solves everything" is a trope from early cartoons where kids (the audience) were of course rooting for the kid to solve everything. They eventually got away from that in the 90s (mostly). Weird to see that trope making a come back.
quote:
To go back to my last post a bit, when the show is geared to be a goofy, intentional comedy centered on a Mary Sue-ish character like the D+ shows, then it can work. The bright colors, the shallow reasonings, the inexplicable idiocy/obtuseness of other characters, the cleanliness, etc. are all part of that genre. This show was like the unexpected result of a drunken one-night fling between one of the later Harry Potter movies and an episode of Blossom. While they could look similar, those are two different themes and by trying to be both at the same time, the show failed at doing either well enough to be considered worthwhile.
I agree that Mary Sue characters are much better served in comedies. The "solves everything" is less of the primary narrative but rather the "lets get back to the jokes". Of course, this means the comedy has to WORK (I'm looking at you, She-Hulk). If it isn't funny then no one cares to watch a character, regardless of gender, having no character growth of any kind.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News