|Page 8 of 9:||      |
|Index||84 reviews in total|
This film could have been a lot better than they let it turn out. I know it's supposed to be Monty Python's best sketches from their first two seasons of television work, but it has ultimately a couple of good ones and a lot of boring ones. I recommend watching their feature films and disregarding this unless you are a true Python fan.
Maybe it's the film format or the lack of an audience, but the sketches just aren't lively and funny here. There are a few great moments, and it is interesting to see them film in actual locations (e.g., a real pet shop for the parrot sketch). But overall I recommend sticking with the TV versions.
Some of the sketches in this work better for Python than they did on TV. For example the "How To Defend Yourself Against Fresh Fruit" and "Nudge Nudge" sketches seem to work better on film. But a lot of the classic bits don't work as well as they did the first time the group performed them on "Monty Python's Flying Circus". The "Dead Parrot" sketch, for one, is not nearly as funny. But you do get to see Graham Chapman doing some extremely funny stuff in the "Upperclass Twit of the Year" sketch.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Although this film is only a retread of the most famous skits from the
first and second season of the famed TV-series you got no choice than
to go along with it and enjoy. There is not much new here and if the
Pythons are completely unknown to you you will probably find it
The choice to not alter too many lines from the original skits is a smart choice. It would ruin the whole idea to have some of the jokes rewritten to appeal to a wider audience. The Pythons have always had the attitude that either you get them or you don't.
Both Carol Cleveland and the former Mrs. Cleese, Connie Booth make appearances as in the TV-series and Terry Gilliam's animation is only slightly remodeled from the originals. So what can you say? Was it a bad idea to reproduce the skits - maybe. But to see the Pythons in full swing is always a pleasure so who cares? Maybe there will be a new Python reunion movie, minus the late Graham Chapman of course and that would probably be a lot worse. It is better to remember them when they were in top form and here they certainly are.
The guy from Chicago had it right. This movie is pretty lame. I just watched it from start to end, and found maybe 10 percent of it funny at best. Perhaps it's just me, but much of the Monty Python style of humor just doesn't seem to age well. I felt pretty much the same way about "The Meaning of Life" and said so there as well. In fact, I found most of this movie so boring I can't even muster the energy to write a nice, scathing review, because about the only thing memorable about it were the shots of good looking girls dressed in short skirts. Other than that, yawn.
This is not a good Monty Python movie. The sketches are mostly terrible and are sex-fixated. If you are not a major Python-fan you better miss this one. Look at the Live at Hollywood Bowl movie instead.
All this movie is is an updated version of the TV series but it can't be as bad as Meaning Of Life or Spamalot. The Lumberjack song is overrated and can be seen 3 different times THREE DIFFERENT TIMES one is in the original TV series the other is in Live At The Hollywood Bowl and it always starts the same "I didn't want to be (context changes then) I want to be a lumberjack." If you ask me And Now For Something Completely Different is slow yep slow. It's not that I don't mind slow movies it's just if they're about to a) go somewhere with it or b) set up the characters more but these reasons can't be it because it's a sketch movie. To add a bonus here the jokes are unfunny. If you've seen only either movie or TV Series watch one and not the other.
Quite indeed, that fabulous gang of Monty Python made four long movies
this one being the first one. The movie was also an attempt to make an
impact at the American audiences, but had very little effect. Sketches
were taken from first and second season episodes of the Monty Python's
Flying Circus and acted a-new. Second season sketches were still unseen
in Britain and some of them appeared for the first time in this movie.
For a fan of Monty Python this film does not offer anything new, just a bit different view on the subject. Sketches in the film are no way better nor worse than those appearing in the show. If you're a great fan of the Pythons, you'll still find this movie a decent addition to your bookshelf, between your Frank Sinatra and Demis Roussos albums.
Just to estimate this film without any pressure from the Spanish Inquisition, I shall give only 5/10. The film still manages to give some good laughs as anything a monty does, but the rest of the Python films are significantly better.
As has been pointed out, this is not a movie but a collection of skits done
by the Monty Python troupe on their TV series. This makes it tough for me
to rate it and comment on it as a movie but vanity prevents me from do so
Don't get me wrong, the stuff was and still is great. It includes some of my favorites: the Twit of the Year, the Re-enactment of Pearl Harbor, the Milkman Trap, the Flasher. If this had been done 20 or 30 years later, Monty Python would have put their TV episodes out on video tape or DVD. Heck, that has probably happened but who knew back in 1971?
"Completely Different" does have more of Terry Gilliam's on-the-cheap animation. And true to its title, the segues are ingenious.
Why can't we just admit this movie sucks? Enough of lame excuses such as "ok, I know this is not their best movie, but..." No buts. The original TV sketches have aged better. My humble advice is, stick to the Grail and LIfe of Brian and pretend they never did any other film -and then you can call them Best Comedy Group.
|Page 8 of 9:||      |
|Plot summary||Ratings||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|