|
Post by jno on Apr 22, 2017 17:04:16 GMT
So which do you like the most? - And Now for Something Completely Different (1971)
- Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
- Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979)
- Monty Python's The Meaning of Life (1983)
PICK ONLY ONE!
|
|
|
Post by ace5150 on Apr 22, 2017 17:58:54 GMT
Never "got" the Python legend, especially their films. Some sketches are iconic, so for me, And Now For Something.... as there are a few jokes I smirk at. Only a few, mind.
|
|
|
Post by pr1 on Apr 22, 2017 18:24:07 GMT
Holy Grail.
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 22, 2017 19:11:38 GMT
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python_filmography#FilmsGranted, it's a possible film but Wikipedia only lists 4 officially under 'films' also, so you'd better head there make an edit mias. Despite only listing 4 as films it then goes on to say 'Hollywood Bowl' is 'a 1982 British concert comedy film'. Gets my vote too, despite the rubbish ending, it is great throughout.
|
|
|
Post by billymedhurst on Apr 22, 2017 22:34:50 GMT
And Now for Something Completely Different !
|
|
|
Post by jno on Apr 23, 2017 3:39:22 GMT
No votes for 'The Meaning of Life' yet, to be honest I didn't really it find it that funny - only really the Grim Reaper and Mr Creosote the first time around.
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Apr 23, 2017 9:34:46 GMT
Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
A top filum.
I even really like the ending. Great stuff..
|
|
|
Post by gustav on Apr 27, 2017 22:19:52 GMT
To me the films have lasted better than the original shows, at least with regard to Life of Brian, Holy Grail and Meaning of Life. Apart from Terry Gilliam's animation I find the tv shows hard going now. However, I think the films are great and I always laugh. If I had to pick one it would be Brian.
|
|
|
Post by jno on May 1, 2017 3:39:49 GMT
So what's the story on the Monty Python team then, Cleese leaves the TV show only to return for the films? How come? Did someone convince him to come back or was it purely ££££ ?
|
|
|
Post by pr1 on May 1, 2017 3:59:01 GMT
So what's the story on the Monty Python team then, Cleese leaves the TV show only to return for the films? How come? Did someone convince him to come back or was it purely ££££ ? Cleese left the tv show because he felt it was becoming repitotious. He did the Holy Grail because it was something different. The mid '70s was also still a time when appearing in a movie was considered more prestigious than doing tv. I would imagine having all the Pythons in the movie was a major factor when it came to securing financing.
|
|
|
Post by Portland Road on May 2, 2017 9:12:37 GMT
Hard to choose between 'Grail' and 'Brian'. ANFSCD was also good, but I prefer seeing the sketches in their original context in the TV series - 'Blackmail' being a particular case in point, with its incidental music etc.
'Meaning Of Life' was unfortunately a bit crude and smutty, as per much TV and film of that period (early 80s). In this respect it hasn't worn well.
|
|
|
Post by I used to think I was a parrot on May 4, 2017 22:39:23 GMT
Take this bus to Cuba!
I voted for The Meaning of Life, but they are all very good. I prefer Grail to Brian of the historical films.
|
|
|
Post by jno on May 5, 2017 4:23:52 GMT
Love it!
|
|
|
Post by KarinB on May 11, 2017 11:56:24 GMT
Never "got" the Python legend, especially their films. ............................... Agree with this.
|
|
|
Post by bensonrad on Jun 7, 2017 22:26:25 GMT
Life of Brian for me, tis a classic
|
|
manta
On Wages
What’s French for en-suite?
Posts: 73
|
Post by manta on Jan 8, 2023 21:32:03 GMT
Grail is very good but I think you need to be a fan. Brian is a standalone awesome film. Let us not forget George H for saving it for us. “He’s not the Messiah, he’s a very naughty boy!”
|
|
|
Post by azza200 on Jan 8, 2023 21:44:23 GMT
Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
|
|
|
Post by kelotoph on Jan 9, 2023 11:41:01 GMT
I voted for 'Brian', although the Holy Grail would be a very close second. I think that 'Brian' was largely misinterpreted as a slur on Christianity, hence all the controversy when it was released, but when I look back at it, I think it is a very clever observation about organised religion and the narrow-mindedness and subsequent hatred that it can foster. Yes, it clearly uses New Testament Christianity as a basis, but only as background to demonstrate how people can be sucked in to dogmatic beliefs, sometimes to the detriment of common sense. The 'Loretta' scene is prescient of the gender recognition issue that we apparently face today.
|
|
|
Post by metro1962 on Jan 9, 2023 13:30:40 GMT
I watched a Documentary of the making of Life of Brian some time ago (I think it was called that) and I do remember the Python team (when they were out in America) deliberately set up the controversary from the very start by sending out letters saying that the film was disgusting etc etc and that started the ball rolling. I do like LoB and love the way they blended biblical & modern times especially with the unions ie Reg and Co. So I plumped for Brian and Grail being 2nd. I think they missed a trick with Meaning of Life and Mr Creosote character was a bit too much for me.
|
|
|
Post by Portland Road on Jan 12, 2023 9:28:03 GMT
'The Meaning Of Life' seems to be overlooked now. I think it is kept off the radar because IIRC it was a rather crude film, made at a time (1983) when 'smut' was at its peak.
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Jan 13, 2023 20:33:33 GMT
'Meaning of Life' was the one that was always broadcast on the TV, but you're right, I haven't seen it in the schedules for ages. I prefer to think it's because it's cr*p with only a few funny moments and lots of dross.
For me 'Grail' is the winner, Sir Robin alone makes it so. 'Brian' is great of course but over-quoted and more obvious in its humour. 'Grail' is quite dark and surreal in places.
|
|
|
Post by Arch Stanton on Jan 14, 2023 10:07:31 GMT
'Meaning of Life' was the one that was always broadcast on the TV, but you're right, I haven't seen it in the schedules for ages. I prefer to think it's because it's cr*p with only a few funny moments and lots of dross. For me 'Grail' is the winner, Sir Robin alone makes it so. 'Brian' is great of course but over-quoted and more obvious in its humour. 'Grail' is quite dark and surreal in places. Grail is best. It’s funnier. I agree with your point about its surreality and darkness. Then again I was always more interested in King Arthur than Jesus (or Brian).
|
|
|
Post by AlanH on Jan 14, 2023 21:37:58 GMT
Life of Brian for me, but I regularly cheat with Holy Grail when Life of Brian's not looking... The first film is the odd one out, being sketch format and all familiar from the TV series (IIRC). Certainly my least favourite of the four. The Meaning of Life has sublime moments (Mr Creosote) and others that don't really gel.
|
|
|
Post by metro1962 on Jan 14, 2023 22:29:32 GMT
Am I right in thinking that And Now for Something Completely Different (1971) was blown up from TV to cinema?
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Jan 14, 2023 22:57:41 GMT
Am I right in thinking that And Now for Something Completely Different (1971) was blown up from TV to cinema? Not quite. It was the TV sketches re-recorded on film with some variations and new links. It is, as others have intimated, a bit of a strange choice for a cinema film but this is the era of TV comedies having (mostly bl00dy awful and non-sequitur) feature films, which, despite the poor standard, tended to do quite well. Wikipedia says the 'ANFSCD' was a vehicle to introduce the Pythons to the US market where the TV shows hadn't yet been shown. Ironically it didn't do anything much at the US box office until it was re-released a couple of years later AFTER the TV series had been shown.
|
|
|
Post by AlanH on Jan 15, 2023 0:30:47 GMT
Am I right in thinking that And Now for Something Completely Different (1971) was blown up from TV to cinema? All reperformed. I don't think there's anything that's BBC-sourced other than the scripts.
|
|
|
Post by coyote on Jan 15, 2023 1:40:10 GMT
There is another sort-of film, ' Monty Python Live At The Hollywood Bowl' capitalising on their US success, and with yet more variations on the 'Flying Circus' sketches. It was released in 1982 based mostly in their 1980 Hollywood Bowl shows but with some material from earlier performances. It's occasionally shown on TV and isn't bad. I went to the Hollywood Bowl when I was in LA years ago mainly because of its Beatles connection and it's a really cool natural amphitheatre of a venue.
|
|
|
Post by metro1962 on Jan 15, 2023 20:59:50 GMT
Am I right in thinking that And Now for Something Completely Different (1971) was blown up from TV to cinema? Not quite. It was the TV sketches re-recorded on film with some variations and new links. It is, as others have intimated, a bit of a strange choice for a cinema film but this is the era of TV comedies having (mostly bl00dy awful and non-sequitur) feature films, which, despite the poor standard, tended to do quite well. Wikipedia says the 'ANFSCD' was a vehicle to introduce the Pythons to the US market where the TV shows hadn't yet been shown. Ironically it didn't do anything much at the US box office until it was re-released a couple of years later AFTER the TV series had been shown. Am I right in thinking that And Now for Something Completely Different (1971) was blown up from TV to cinema? All reperformed. I don't think there's anything that's BBC-sourced other than the scripts. Must be my DVD transfer as it is pretty old and seemed washed out then or something.
|
|
|
Post by AlanH on Jan 16, 2023 0:33:15 GMT
I picked up the Blu-ray (only available in Germany) and that's much more how it should look.
|
|
manta
On Wages
What’s French for en-suite?
Posts: 73
|
Post by manta on Jan 16, 2023 21:30:12 GMT
I voted for 'Brian', although the Holy Grail would be a very close second. I think that 'Brian' was largely misinterpreted as a slur on Christianity, hence all the controversy when it was released, but when I look back at it, I think it is a very clever observation about organised religion and the narrow-mindedness and subsequent hatred that it can foster. Yes, it clearly uses New Testament Christianity as a basis, but only as background to demonstrate how people can be sucked in to dogmatic beliefs, sometimes to the detriment of common sense. The 'Loretta' scene is prescient of the gender recognition issue that we apparently face today. Absolutely kelotoph - and another wonderful quote " I'm not oppressing you, Stan -- you haven't got a womb. Where's the fetus going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?"
|
|