Touches You

Such a frustrating disappointment

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

A fan of Gilliam's work but long out of the loop, I stumbled upon Tideland quite by chance knowing nothing about it. I settled down with it my expectations high.My early impression as the film unfolded was that the grotesque realism was laid on rather too thickly, and yet it never quite managed to reach the heights of true grotesquerie. With an intentionally Gothic backdrop, for example, it may have worked. Instead, the realism of the presentation just left me feeling it was overblown. The adaptation of a young girl to a clearly very dysfunctional family environment seemed unbelievable, particularly in her maintenance of her innocence. The many breaks I took here, and throughout what was to follow, were to some small degree motivated by discomfort by what was portrayed, but mostly I was just bored. Somehow the presumably grotesque seemed banal. In trying to confine itself within the bounds of realism, it failed by becoming unbelievable.I felt nothing for the central character, nor for her parents. Nor was I to subsequently develop any empathy with the central character or the two other main characters she was subsequently to meet.Some of the acting was good, though never excellent. Take a star for that. Likewise some of the camera-work. The ending almost made me feel perhaps the whole exercise hadn't been a complete waste of my time, but not quite. Still, another star for that and... well, that's about it.This being Gilliam, I turned to many of the good reviews this film received in search of what I must surely have missed, but found glowing arguments unconvincing. I'll probably read the novel at some point in further quest of enlightenment. But for now, my apologies, Mr. G. This is not a worthy addition to your body of work.

Two questions. Is this film any good? Easy! Yes it's a master piece!Will I enjoy it? This is much harder to answer.The plot and characters are strange, but unlike a lot of Gilliam work it is just fantastically implausible as appose to total fantasy. The story is simple and for the most part is just the main character, a young girl, playing. The girl in the movie is mesmerising! Which makes you feel a bit strange watching this in the first place. Add the scenes where the child experiences glimpses of adult life and the film becomes down right uncomfortable. The lack of progressive story line made the film feel a long watch (you don't feel like you are ever getting anywhere) but the direction of Ferland and her performance is something magical to behold.

This is a film about a prepubescent child and her imagination that must be viewed through the eyes of a prepubescent child. Furthermore, one must have appreciation for and the understanding of the capacity young children have for creative imagination if it's not stifled and crippled by adult imposed structure 24/7 about what to do, how to do it and when to do it while they're growing up. Thus we have an opportunity to experience, albeit in an abysmally poor and at times gruesome environment, the self-organizing imagination of a young girl as she copes with a world around her she cannot control much. The story is told from that perspective, even if it's not all in first person. Gilliam says as much in the short video Foreword on the DVD and Blu-ray distributions of the film. I do not know if this was in the theatrical release. Failure to do this -- viewing it as an adult -- greatly risks seeing it superficially with gross misinterpretations and missing the complete depth it contains.There is plenty of fact and fiction, with reality and fantasy. However, there are also plenty of clues, some subtle, that the young girl, Jeliza-Rose, retains full capability to distinguish between all of them, even though she consciously chooses to ignore some facts and realities because it's convenient. That she grossly misinterprets what she observes in a couple of scenes is the result of *not* being an adult and therefore does not have the knowledge and experiences required to fully understand what is occurring. Thus, she develops her own based on what she does know and has previously experienced. What would be repulsive to an adult, isn't necessarily so to a child of 9 or 10 that doesn't have the depth of understanding that would make it repulsive. This is often called "innocence" and it can sometimes spare children from trauma as their lack of comprehension about what they've observed allows it to blow by.View the film with the eyes and mind of a 10-year old child, leaving behind the worldly knowledge and experiences of an adult, and appreciate the resilient imagination and innocence of childhood as it copes with a world containing poverty, abysmal parenting, tragedy and some gruesome events, without losing basic sanity. Gets an 8/10 from me for its effectiveness in delivering that through Gilliam's direction, the cinematography and excellent portrayal of Jeliza-Rose by Jodelle Ferland, a difficult role for a child her age.

This movie moved, repulsed and disturbed me. As I watched I found myself cringe, recoil in horror, dread for Jeliza Roses's fate and saddened by all the pain, misery and confusion that that child was exposed to, with no one to care for her but egotistical adults and deranged madmen. In an emotional level I responded tremendously to the movie and although a good deal of these responses were less than agreeable, the fact that this film produced such stimuli in my person proves that it has heart to spare- a mean, bashing, horrific,depressing and sad heart it may be but a heart nonetheless. I can only suggest this film to brave movie buffs who are willing to subject themselves to the one of the most bizarre, terrifying and moving experiences of their life. My congratulations to Gilliam for directing yet another brave and stimulating film... even if it may very well become yet another obstacle in Gilliam's already endangered film career.