Apparently it is being reported on IMDB... Here's what the Leaky Cauldron had to say:

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/#article:8630

I think Gilliam would be great as long as he is not given control over the script. When he follows someone else's script and is not given producer power, he does excellent work.

This is great news, if true.... though I was hoping Cuaron could come back for one of the final pictures. I guess not?

I'm not a fan of Gilliam. I liked Twelve Monkeys, but The Brothers Grimm was crappy.

He's half baked and over rated. But like Groucho says he can be a good journeyman director when he tries. I'd really rather someone else though.

If not Cuaron, then I'd DEFINITELY go with Gilliam. Oh, boy, do I hope this turns out to be true! They've got to give me at least a BIT of hope for HBP, ever since they announced that Kloves was coming back as the screenwriter... *grumble*

Joy

I really suggest you check out some of this other pictures. Grimm is the only blemish.

All of this Gilliam hate is making my skin crawl.

Man's a freakin' genius.

Gilliam is brilliant. There's no way the Potter producers are going to take the risk and give it to him.

NOOOO... The brothers Grimm was the worst movie that I have ever ever ever seen in my life... The only time I have ever slept through some parts of a movie.

Grimm was one of his few watchable ones to me, because he didn't write it.
edit: and I've seen Time Bandits, Brazil, and the Fisher King -- in the theater when they first came out. And yeah I know he didn't write Fisher, that didn't help it enough though.

I find it funny that apparently the only Gilliam film people have seen here is The Brother's Grimm.

Brazil
12 Monkeys
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
The Adventures of Baron Munchausen
Monty Python and the Holy Grail

All are absolutely brill.

Terrible choice IMO.

I don't know why they would consider this. It could damage the BO potential of the franchise IMO.

I think both are highly overrated, especially 12 Monkeys.

Judging Gilliam on Brothers Grimm is like judging Spielberg on The Lost World or Robert Altman on Popeye. Or The Coen Brothers on Intolerable Cruelty.

*creepy-crawly sensation overwhelms Lennier*

Yeah, I'm not really feeling this choice.

It doesn't matter if Gilliam is great or horrible. He still won't be able to get those kids to act.

Now there's a true statement about this series...

As far as b/o potential goes, it is a great risk. I am not sure how to nfeel about it either. Gilliam is good in what he does, but I am not sure whether his style will fit into the Harry Potter franchise...

Films he produced have been great, but certainly not mainstream. If he's just the director, I think he'll keep the great stylistic momentum the series has been gaining. If he made the film completely bonkers it could take a slight toll on the ensuing films, but I can't see Warner Bros. letting that happen. Personally, I think it's a fantastic choice.

I really hope it's better than the previous film, it sucked.

That is a very true statement, especially considering Jo wanted him for the first movie but WB nixed the idea....

I can't possibly be the only one who enjoyed Brother's Grimm. Sure, there were problems with it, but I don't blame Gilliam; sounds like he had a terrible time dealing with the studio on that film.

And Monty Python and the Holy Grail is pure *genius*.

Joy

Exactly. When he is merely a director, and has no control over production or scripts, he does very good work. (Also Fisher King). I am sure that WB will keep a tight reign on him, which usually means he does very well.

Gilliam was JK Rowling's first choice actually -- she wanted him to direct the first film.

EDIT: Oops, sorry, posted before reading the other respondes. Didn't mean to duplicate.

I think he'd be a great director, it's too bad Half-Blood Prince is not that great....