Neil Gaiman’s ‘Statuesque’ is a model effort

Jan. 02, 2010 | 5:55 p.m.

If you made a short list of the most important comic book writers of the last two decades, one of the names right near the top of that list would have to be Neil Gaiman, whose 75-issue run on “The Sandman” (1989-1996) stands as a towering achievement in graceful storytelling and genre ambition. He’s gone on to plenty of other great successes (“Coraline” and “The Graveyard Book” may actually live up to the overused and always suspicious term “instant classic”), and today we bring you a project that pulled him away from his familiar perch behind the writing desk. The whimsical short film “Statuesque” was written and directed by Gaiman and stars Bill Nighy and Amanda Palmer.


Fun. Happy New Year everyone.

— Geoff Boucher  


Neil Gaiman portrait

Neil Gaiman and the stuff that dreams are made of

Neil Gaiman on the Hollywood future of “Sandman”

Gaiman says Alan Moore was the Beatles: “I was Gerry & Pacemakers”

“Crying Game” director Neil Jordan will direct “Graveyard Book”

Alan Moore on “Watchmen” film: “I will be spitting venom all over it.”

Exclusive set photos: “Coraline” coming to life

Henry Selick’s maquettes charm the Con

Bill Nighy proud to be “a zombie, a vampire and a squid” on screen


4 Responses to Neil Gaiman’s ‘Statuesque’ is a model effort

  1. LAME says:

    It is unfortunate that Amanda Palmer is in this film. But then again she is dating Neil.

  2. Prentis says:

    Neil Gaiman should hold onto his day job. I saw Statuesque and it is a confused muddle of nonsense. I've seen deeper films from first year film school students. Gaiman is most unimpressive when it comes to the human experience. His books suffer from an immature grasp of life and the complexities of emotional relationships. He tries to make up for it by being "mysterious" but his stories are just childish and crudely drawn. I've read enough of his work to see that he refuses to mature or to learn. When it comes to film, his instincts are even worse. Film demands an even more profound comprehension of human nature and Neil Gaiman doesn't have it. Statuesque is the equivalent of lame stick figures and a one note joke. The thing I hate most about Gaiman's work is the deep sense of let down and that feeling I've wasted my time. Apparently, Gaiman is a Scientologist, which would explain his stunted development.

  3. Filmmaker says:

    I know that the internet is a graveyard of bad art, but this film is just crap disguised as "art." Director Neil Gaiman obviously thinks he's ready to direct, but I can tell you that he knows nothing about directing and cannot direct actors. How you get a bad performance out of Bill Nighy is one for the books. Amanda Palmer is self conscious and has all the presence of a lump. The story is beyond dumb; what's the book for? Why? Who feels what for whom? Gaiman's lack of artistic maturity grows more obvious year by year and in an older artist, it is deeply unattractive. I've lost all respect for Gaiman at this point.

  4. WanderingBy says:

    Boy you really hate Neil Gaiman, don't you, LAME-Prentis-Filmmaker? I sense you need a bit of age and maturity, yourself. Not because of what you commented, but how. I sense a young teen reader. 'Film demands an even more profound comprehension of human nature', than does literature or comics/graphic novels…? Where do music and paintings rank on your profound-comprehensionometer?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

E-mail It
Powered by ShareThis