The timing of my blog, and when I started writing reviews, which was in the 1990s has meant that there were many films which I watched an enjoyed in my earlier years that were never reviewed. From time to time I will provide a retrospective review and re-watch and do a fresh review of an older film. In this instance I saw that Netflix has some of the Monty Python films, and I decided to watch Life of Brian once again. It was a toss up between Holy Grail and Life of Brian but I decided that I really wanted to see a few scenes again. I can almost recite most of Holy Grail without seeing it, but I will return to it again. So here below is Life of Brian, a movie that I was told that my Dad left the theatre back in the day when it was released.
Monty Python Life of Brian: This classic comedy film was released back in 1979. Interestingly it has been in the news lately because John Cleese has gone on record saying that a scene in which one of the Judean People’s Front members, played by Eric Idle, wants to be a woman and have a child and be called “Loretta” from that point forward, would not be removed in this upcoming stage play. Incidentally that’s NOT the People’s Front of Judea; Splitters!!!
There is a stage adaptation coming for the parody film, and 83yo Cleese stated that despite the new world sensitivities to trans-issues and those in transition, this scene remains. When thinking about this, I have to say that there is so much more offensive material in this film which could be attacked using the 2023 sensibilities. I think that factually the Loretta scene is correct in that the male character doesn’t have a womb, and therefore cannot have a child naturally, despite the group acknowledging that Loretta can have right to fight for her right to have a child. Other sensitive topics can include the overarching parallel life ark for Brian with Jesus Christ could of course be challenged. So much humour is brought forward against people with challenges like stuttering, or lisping or other speech challenges. The entire scene with Michael Palin, who just this week turned 80yo, playing Pontious Pilot and the discussion about his friend Biggus Dickus is simply comedy gold. But scene after scene for me strikes a chord.
From the sermon on the mount scene with the people in the back getting into a fight about having a big nose. To later the stoning scene with the local women all wearing beards to attend, women weren’t allowed at stonings. To the Roman centurion who spends the time with Brian to correct his grammar, by conjugating verbs with him, for the graffiti being put all over the walls. Later the stuttering of Eric Idle in the crucifiction line. You see, this troupe of six men (John Cleese, Eric Idle, Michael Palin, Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones and Graham Chapman) played most of the various roles in the movie for both men and women. They were cutting edge for their time in both TV and movies.
I am hard pressed to find another movie that I find funnier. Yes, Something About Mary also had me laughing in the theatre as loud and hard as I have ever done, but this movie and Holy Grail hold a special place in my heart. It isn’t for everyone, I will admit. Like my Dad. But this blog isn’t for everyone either, and it is my opinion about a given film. I would recommend it to anyone who is in need of a good laugh.
This bring me to the Easter Egg for this week. It’s funny that I have stumbled on two in the last two weeks. First one was in Jurassic Park when Jaws was streaming on Nedry’s computer. This one in Life of Brian happens after Brian’s Mom tells the crowd to “go away” and stop following Brian who has been a naughty boy. As she is walking through the crowd with Brian you can see this:
On the right next to John Cleese is Beatle George Harrison. He famously gathered up funds for Life of Brian when the comedy troupe couldn’t get funding. For Holy Grail bands like Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin, who liked watching the TV show and were good friends with Eric Idle, had wanted to see the movie. Harrison was approached for Life of Brian, and then was made part of the film. Fun!
Review bombing: I read an article about review bombing on CBC and I think it’s an interesting perspective of this modern world and internet connectivity that we share when it comes to entertainment. I will admit that I have not watched the live-action, remake of the The Little Mermaid, the classic 1989 animation film from Disney, which was the beginning of the resurgence of Disney back into making animated films. I use the words “live action” loosely as obviously we don’t have live action fish singing or speaking or Sebastian the crab for that matter.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/little-mermaid-review-bombing-1.6864613
The article speaks to Rotten Tomatoes and other review sites that provide a number for the viewers to decide the overall rating of a film. Since the announcement of a dark skinned Ariel, played by Halle Bailey, there has been this uproar from the same types of people who get upset that Bud Light has a spokesperson who is a transgender influencer. But as you can see, the impact can be very real. In the review world, according to the news item there have been an influx of 1-star reviews for The Little Mermaid, bringing the overall scores down, and prompting Rotten Tomatoes to adjust the scoring for those who have actually seen the film. That brings about a number of issues about reviews, their authenticity, their value and whether they can be trusted overall. Of course people can make their own decisions about whether to watch a movie or not. But critics and reviewers can have an impact, especially with the cost of attending a movie in the theatre. People want to see something that is regarded as “good”, or at least worth the money.
I am firm believer in that people should make up their own minds. Writing about it is a choice. I do this because it is an outlet for me. I also like movies and discussions about movies, TV shows and entertainment generally. I am not racially motivated, and I certainly don’t want to punish Disney or others for their choices in what they choose to fund. I have bigger problems with Disney in the troubling trend of doing cash grabs for previous animated films by making these live-action versions like with Aladdin (don’t get me started about Will Smith trying to play Robin Williams as the Genie) or Jungle Book, Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Mulan, Dumbo or others. They have done this with mixed success. Or talk about what they have done with the Star Wars franchise, which just makes me shudder! Oh, and by the way, there is a Snow White live action film coming for 2024! While I don’t see these movies in a theatre (my way of protest) I choose not to falsely downgrade them in my review when I eventually do see them for free somewhere.
In a world that is connected more than ever, we must also recognize and critically think about where the source of some of the negativity can come. For me, I will see what I choose, write about it, and despite being someone who does reviews, I won’t put too much weight in the views of others who I don’t know or trust. Roger Ebert you are sadly missed to be an independent film critic voice for those out there these days.
Mondays With Robbie 