list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Monty Python's The Meaning of Life on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Monty_Python_s_The_Meaning_of_Life/23139/default.aspx Title: Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
Year: 1983
Director: Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones
Plot: The Meaning of Life is without a doubt the most tasteless of the Monty Python feature films; it also happens to be one of the funniest. Life's questions are "answered" in a series of outrageous vignettes, beginning with a pre-credits sequence at a staid London insurance company which transforms before our eyes into a pirate ship. One of our favorite bits involve the National Health doctors who try to claim a healthy liver from a still-living donor, pointing out that there's nothing in his contract preventing this. And of course, there's the scene with the world's most voracious glutton, who brings the art of vomiting to new heights before his spectacular demise. Be warned: though hilarious, this may be the grossest bit of comedy filmmaking ever conceived (there aren't enough words in the world to describe it in detail!). Loyal Pythonites Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and Michael Palin star in The Meaning of Life and share writing responsibilities, while Jones is in the director's chair this time out. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 9
Number of Lists: 46
Number of blog posts: 6
Number of discussion threads: 4
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 12 May 2009 03:50:47 GMTMonty Python's The Meaning of Life1983Terry Gilliam, Terry JonesThe Meaning of Life is without a doubt the most tasteless of the <a href="/players/P____50219/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Monty Python</a> feature films; it also happens to be one of the funniest. Life's questions are "answered" in a series of outrageous vignettes, beginning with a pre-credits sequence at a staid London insurance company which transforms before our eyes into a pirate ship. One of our favorite bits involve the National Health doctors who try to claim a healthy liver from a still-living donor, pointing out that there's nothing in his contract preventing this. And of course, there's the scene with the world's most voracious glutton, who brings the art of vomiting to new heights before his spectacular demise. Be warned: though hilarious, this may be the grossest bit of comedy filmmaking ever conceived (there aren't enough words in the world to describe it in detail!). Loyal Pythonites <a href="/players/P____84701/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Graham Chapman</a>, <a href="/players/P____85223/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Cleese</a>, <a href="/players/P____91577/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Terry Gilliam</a>, <a href="/players/P____95365/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Eric Idle</a>, <a href="/players/P____96368/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Terry Jones</a> and <a href="/players/P___105433/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Michael Palin</a> star in The Meaning of Life and share writing responsibilities, while Jones is in the director's chair this time out. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide9Taggedy Taggged (6-10)46643http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u34955xbhar.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Monty_Python_s_The_Meaning_of_Life/23139/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2009/1/12/39410.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 1/12/2009 2:01:36 PM
Body: Alexis Dos Santos‘ World Dramatic Competition entry Unmade Beds follows a Spanish guy named Axl and a Belgian girl named Vera who meet in London and, according to the catalogue description, “circle each other’s orbits—their fates almost inevitably intertwined.” In case you were having trouble deconstructing the meaning behind the film’s title, the catalogue is also helpful in that regard: “They may be slightly crumpled works in progress—like the unmade beds where they slumber—but Axl, Vera, and their friends are as vital as a crisp new day.” Also vital and crisp are Dos Santos’ answers to the 4 Questions We Ask Everyone, in which he references Nan Goldin, Monty Python and Wong Kar Wai, and contemplates spending his last hours on Earth watching porn. Tell us about your movie: who did you work with, what did you shoot on, why did you make it? Give us the reductive, 25-word or less, “It’s like [pop culture reference a] meets [pop culture reference b]!” pitch, then explain what the quick and dirty sell leaves out. Unmade Beds is a film that portraits an age, a time and a place: young people in London today. I made this film in London with an international cast: Fernando Tielve, Deborah Francois, Michiel Huisman, Iddo Goldberg and Richard Lintern. It’s a script I’ve been working on for a long time. If this film was an object, it would be two boxes found in an empty warehouse, containing pictures, polaroids, cds, personal diaries, tickets for concerts, comics books, drawings and a bunch of empty bottles. One box would belong to a boy called Axl, the other one to a girl called Vera. Going through their things you can kind of guess what their lives are like, what they think, what they fear and what they long for. You can see their lives and how their stories slowly intertwine. Ok, this isn’t quite the “quick and dirty sell pitch” that i was asked to do, so let’s try again. My influences usually come from music, art literature and photography, more than films. So: “It’s like Nan Goldin photographs put together to a soundtrack of Daniel Johnston’s tapes.” Or… “It’s like In the Mood for Love meets My Own Private Idaho. But in London today, no Chinese dresses, no rent boys, no Shakespeare. With lots of concerts, booze, dance, sex and with a moving but happy ending punctuated with a very eclectic soundtrack.” Sorry, I found this question particularly difficult to answer. If you funded your film through a “day job” or through working on projects that were not your own, tell us about that. If not, tell us a story from your past work life, before you became a professional filmmaker. I never worked a day in my life. OK, I made a few commercials and a couple of music videos, but I didn’t feel like I was working then. I wish I could say that I used to be a male stripper or a porn director whilst I was trying to raise money for this film, but unfortunately that was not the case. I did get paid during the development process, which helped a lot. And I stayed at the Cannes Cinefondation Residence in Paris for a few months, and that also helped. Before that I was very busy making my first film GLUE, but that’s another story. Have you been to Sundance before? If you haven’t, what are you most (or least) looking forward to based on your impressions of the festival? I look forward to the snow. I started skiing when I was 7 and I even got a couple of medals for some slalom competitions when I was a teenager. That was the only sport I was ever good at. Plus, I look forward to hearing what people think of my film. I like it a lot. I hope people will like it as much as I do. Let’s get hypothetical: You’re on death row. The night of your execution, you’re allowed to watch any two films of your choice. What would you pick for your last-night-on-Earth double feature? Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life and Wes Anderson’s The Royal Tenenbaums. Or maybe just a couple of porn films and a long playlist with all my favorite music… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:01:36 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog1/12/2009 2:01:36 PM Alexis Dos Santos‘ World Dramatic Competition entry Unmade Beds follows a Spanish guy named Axl and a Belgian girl named Vera who meet in London and, according to the catalogue description, “circle each other’s orbits—their fates almost inevitably intertwined.” In case you were having trouble deconstructing the meaning behind the film’s title, the catalogue is also helpful in that regard: “They may be slightly crumpled works in progress—like the unmade beds where they slumber—but Axl, Vera, and their friends are as vital as a crisp new day.” Also vital and crisp are Dos Santos’ answers to the 4 Questions We Ask Everyone, in which he references Nan Goldin, Monty Python and Wong Kar Wai, and contemplates spending his last hours on Earth watching porn. Tell us about your movie: who did you work with, what did you shoot on, why did you make it? Give us the reductive, 25-word or less, “It’s like [pop culture reference a] meets [pop culture reference b]!” pitch, then explain what the quick and dirty sell leaves out. Unmade Beds is a film that portraits an age, a time and a place: young people in London today. I made this film in London with an international cast: Fernando Tielve, Deborah Francois, Michiel Huisman, Iddo Goldberg and Richard Lintern. It’s a script I’ve been working on for a long time. If this film was an object, it would be two boxes found in an empty warehouse, containing pictures, polaroids, cds, personal diaries, tickets for concerts, comics books, drawings and a bunch of empty bottles. One box would belong to a boy called Axl, the other one to a girl called Vera. Going through their things you can kind of guess what their lives are like, what they think, what they fear and what they long for. You can see their lives and how their stories slowly intertwine. Ok, this isn’t quite the “quick and dirty sell pitch” that i was asked to do, so let’s try again. My influences usually come from music, art literature and photography, more than films. So: “It’s like Nan Goldin photographs put together to a soundtrack of Daniel Johnston’s tapes.” Or… “It’s like In the Mood for Love meets My Own Private Idaho. But in London today, no Chinese dresses, no rent boys, no Shakespeare. With lots of concerts, booze, dance, sex and with a moving but happy ending punctuated with a very eclectic soundtrack.” Sorry, I found this question particularly difficult to answer. If you funded your film through a “day job” or through working on projects that were not your own, tell us about that. If not, tell us a story from your past work life, before you became a professional filmmaker. I never worked a day in my life. OK, I made a few commercials and a couple of music videos, but I didn’t feel like I was working then. I wish I could say that I used to be a male stripper or a porn director whilst I was trying to raise money for this film, but unfortunately that was not the case. I did get paid during the development process, which helped a lot. And I stayed at the Cannes Cinefondation Residence in Paris for a few months, and that also helped. Before that I was very busy making my first film GLUE, but that’s another story. Have you been to Sundance before? If you haven’t, what are you most (or least) looking forward to based on your impressions of the festival? I look forward to the snow. I started skiing when I was 7 and I even got a couple of medals for some slalom competitions when I was a teenager. That was the only sport I was ever good at. Plus, I look forward to hearing what people think of my film. I like it a lot. I hope people will like it as much as I do. Let’s get hypothetical: You’re on death row. The night of your execution, you’re allowed to watch any two films of your choice. What would you pick for your last-night-on-Earth double feature? Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life and Wes Anderson’s The Royal Tenenbaums. Or maybe just a couple of porn films and a long playlist with all my favorite music… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/12/39407.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/12/2009 2:01:18 PM
Body: Alexis Dos Santos‘ World Dramatic Competition entry Unmade Beds follows a Spanish guy named Axl and a Belgian girl named Vera who meet in London and, according to the catalogue description, “circle each other’s orbits—their fates almost inevitably intertwined.” In case you were having trouble deconstructing the meaning behind the film’s title, the catalogue is also helpful in that regard: “They may be slightly crumpled works in progress—like the unmade beds where they slumber—but Axl, Vera, and their friends are as vital as a crisp new day.” Also vital and crisp are Dos Santos’ answers to the 4 Questions We Ask Everyone, in which he references Nan Goldin, Monty Python and Wong Kar Wai, and contemplates spending his last hours on Earth watching porn. Tell us about your movie: who did you work with, what did you shoot on, why did you make it? Give us the reductive, 25-word or less, “It’s like [pop culture reference a] meets [pop culture reference b]!” pitch, then explain what the quick and dirty sell leaves out. Unmade Beds is a film that portraits an age, a time and a place: young people in London today. I made this film in London with an international cast: Fernando Tielve, Deborah Francois, Michiel Huisman, Iddo Goldberg and Richard Lintern. It’s a script I’ve been working on for a long time. If this film was an object, it would be two boxes found in an empty warehouse, containing pictures, polaroids, cds, personal diaries, tickets for concerts, comics books, drawings and a bunch of empty bottles. One box would belong to a boy called Axl, the other one to a girl called Vera. Going through their things you can kind of guess what their lives are like, what they think, what they fear and what they long for. You can see their lives and how their stories slowly intertwine. Ok, this isn’t quite the “quick and dirty sell pitch” that i was asked to do, so let’s try again. My influences usually come from music, art literature and photography, more than films. So: “It’s like Nan Goldin photographs put together to a soundtrack of Daniel Johnston’s tapes.” Or… “It’s like In the Mood for Love meets My Own Private Idaho. But in London today, no Chinese dresses, no rent boys, no Shakespeare. With lots of concerts, booze, dance, sex and with a moving but happy ending punctuated with a very eclectic soundtrack.” Sorry, I found this question particularly difficult to answer. If you funded your film through a “day job” or through working on projects that were not your own, tell us about that. If not, tell us a story from your past work life, before you became a professional filmmaker. I never worked a day in my life. OK, I made a few commercials and a couple of music videos, but I didn’t feel like I was working then. I wish I could say that I used to be a male stripper or a porn director whilst I was trying to raise money for this film, but unfortunately that was not the case. I did get paid during the development process, which helped a lot. And I stayed at the Cannes Cinefondation Residence in Paris for a few months, and that also helped. Before that I was very busy making my first film GLUE, but that’s another story. Have you been to Sundance before? If you haven’t, what are you most (or least) looking forward to based on your impressions of the festival? I look forward to the snow. I started skiing when I was 7 and I even got a couple of medals for some slalom competitions when I was a teenager. That was the only sport I was ever good at. Plus, I look forward to hearing what people think of my film. I like it a lot. I hope people will like it as much as I do. Let’s get hypothetical: You’re on death row. The night of your execution, you’re allowed to watch any two films of your choice. What would you pick for your last-night-on-Earth double feature? Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life and Wes Anderson’s The Royal Tenenbaums. Or maybe just a couple of porn films and a long playlist with all my favorite music… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:01:18 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/12/2009 2:01:18 PM Alexis Dos Santos‘ World Dramatic Competition entry Unmade Beds follows a Spanish guy named Axl and a Belgian girl named Vera who meet in London and, according to the catalogue description, “circle each other’s orbits—their fates almost inevitably intertwined.” In case you were having trouble deconstructing the meaning behind the film’s title, the catalogue is also helpful in that regard: “They may be slightly crumpled works in progress—like the unmade beds where they slumber—but Axl, Vera, and their friends are as vital as a crisp new day.” Also vital and crisp are Dos Santos’ answers to the 4 Questions We Ask Everyone, in which he references Nan Goldin, Monty Python and Wong Kar Wai, and contemplates spending his last hours on Earth watching porn. Tell us about your movie: who did you work with, what did you shoot on, why did you make it? Give us the reductive, 25-word or less, “It’s like [pop culture reference a] meets [pop culture reference b]!” pitch, then explain what the quick and dirty sell leaves out. Unmade Beds is a film that portraits an age, a time and a place: young people in London today. I made this film in London with an international cast: Fernando Tielve, Deborah Francois, Michiel Huisman, Iddo Goldberg and Richard Lintern. It’s a script I’ve been working on for a long time. If this film was an object, it would be two boxes found in an empty warehouse, containing pictures, polaroids, cds, personal diaries, tickets for concerts, comics books, drawings and a bunch of empty bottles. One box would belong to a boy called Axl, the other one to a girl called Vera. Going through their things you can kind of guess what their lives are like, what they think, what they fear and what they long for. You can see their lives and how their stories slowly intertwine. Ok, this isn’t quite the “quick and dirty sell pitch” that i was asked to do, so let’s try again. My influences usually come from music, art literature and photography, more than films. So: “It’s like Nan Goldin photographs put together to a soundtrack of Daniel Johnston’s tapes.” Or… “It’s like In the Mood for Love meets My Own Private Idaho. But in London today, no Chinese dresses, no rent boys, no Shakespeare. With lots of concerts, booze, dance, sex and with a moving but happy ending punctuated with a very eclectic soundtrack.” Sorry, I found this question particularly difficult to answer. If you funded your film through a “day job” or through working on projects that were not your own, tell us about that. If not, tell us a story from your past work life, before you became a professional filmmaker. I never worked a day in my life. OK, I made a few commercials and a couple of music videos, but I didn’t feel like I was working then. I wish I could say that I used to be a male stripper or a porn director whilst I was trying to raise money for this film, but unfortunately that was not the case. I did get paid during the development process, which helped a lot. And I stayed at the Cannes Cinefondation Residence in Paris for a few months, and that also helped. Before that I was very busy making my first film GLUE, but that’s another story. Have you been to Sundance before? If you haven’t, what are you most (or least) looking forward to based on your impressions of the festival? I look forward to the snow. I started skiing when I was 7 and I even got a couple of medals for some slalom competitions when I was a teenager. That was the only sport I was ever good at. Plus, I look forward to hearing what people think of my film. I like it a lot. I hope people will like it as much as I do. Let’s get hypothetical: You’re on death row. The night of your execution, you’re allowed to watch any two films of your choice. What would you pick for your last-night-on-Earth double feature? Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life and Wes Anderson’s The Royal Tenenbaums. Or maybe just a couple of porn films and a long playlist with all my favorite music… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_July_7_Foodie_Heaven/625/32249/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: indieabby88
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 7/7/2008 6:30:10 PM
Body: Man, forget "No Reservations." Check out the German movie it's based on, "Mostly Martha." I didn't even bother seeing the Americanized version. It looked really sugar-coated. I also think "Spanglish" gets overlooked a lot. I for one really enjoyed this movie, and was surprised by Adam Sandler's performance in it. And it makes me hungry every time I watch him make that fantastic-looking sandwich. And while I loved "Waitress," some of those pie recipes just don't stand up...I'm not a huge fan of mashing up the berries in my berry pies. Finally, I'll just mention "Monty Python's Meaning of Life," although it's really more of an anti-foodie movie. We've got Mr. Creosote, who eats so much he explodes, and then the party attendees killed by eating bad fish.
]]>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:30:10 GMTindieabby88Weekly Theme7/7/2008 6:30:10 PMMan, forget "No Reservations." Check out the German movie it's based on, "Mostly Martha." I didn't even bother seeing the Americanized version. It looked really sugar-coated. I also think "Spanglish" gets overlooked a lot. I for one really enjoyed this movie, and was surprised by Adam Sandler's performance in it. And it makes me hungry every time I watch him make that fantastic-looking sandwich. And while I loved "Waitress," some of those pie recipes just don't stand up...I'm not a huge fan of mashing up the berries in my berry pies. Finally, I'll just mention "Monty Python's Meaning of Life," although it's really more of an anti-foodie movie. We've got Mr. Creosote, who eats so much he explodes, and then the party attendees killed by eating bad fish. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Gore_is_where_you_find_it/222/31644/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 6/24/2008 7:02:49 PM
Body: Thank you for linking those for me, June! You are very sweet and pretty too... Have I told you lately that I love you? (it's ok, Froggy doesn't mind.... she knows all about 'us') ... I will be listing some of the interesting ones from "vol. 2" very shortly.... Thanks Again!
]]>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:02:49 GMTDr_GorHORROR MOVIES 1016/24/2008 7:02:49 PMThank you for linking those for me, June! You are very sweet and pretty too... Have I told you lately that I love you? (it's ok, Froggy doesn't mind.... she knows all about 'us') ... I will be listing some of the interesting ones from "vol. 2" very shortly.... Thanks Again! http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Gore_is_where_you_find_it/222/31587/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: divinemsjunebug
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 6/24/2008 1:16:12 AM
Body: That is really interesting, Gor. It is really amazing how desensatized (spelling) I am anymore, half of these movies I kept thinking - there isn't any gorey scenes in that movie, but when I started thinking about it, yes there are some pretty gorey scenes. [quote user="Dr_Gor"] Here are some interesting and/or surprising titles listed in John McCarty's "Official Splatter Movie Guide, vol. 1" (1989) ... (I apologize that my 'link a movie' function isn't working but, if you are unfamiliar with any of these titles you can easily find them on SPOUT or IMDb) ... Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls (1970) ; Caligula (1980) ; Conan The Barbarian (1982) ; Death Wish II - IV ('82 - '87) ; Gremlins (1984) ; The Hunting Party (1971) ; Indiana Jones and The Temple Of Doom (1984) ; The Long Riders (1980) ; Monty Python and The Holy Grail (1975) ; Monty Python's The Meaning Of Life (1983) ; Outland (1981) ; Raiders Of The Lost Ark (1981) ; Sharkey's Machine (1981) ; Southern Comfort (1981) ; 10 to Midnight (1983) ; The Terminator (1984) ; They Live (1988) ; The Wall (1982) ....[/quote]
]]>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 05:16:12 GMTdivinemsjunebugHORROR MOVIES 1016/24/2008 1:16:12 AMThat is really interesting, Gor. It is really amazing how desensatized (spelling) I am anymore, half of these movies I kept thinking - there isn't any gorey scenes in that movie, but when I started thinking about it, yes there are some pretty gorey scenes. [quote user="Dr_Gor"] Here are some interesting and/or surprising titles listed in John McCarty's "Official Splatter Movie Guide, vol. 1" (1989) ... (I apologize that my 'link a movie' function isn't working but, if you are unfamiliar with any of these titles you can easily find them on SPOUT or IMDb) ... Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls (1970) ; Caligula (1980) ; Conan The Barbarian (1982) ; Death Wish II - IV ('82 - '87) ; Gremlins (1984) ; The Hunting Party (1971) ; Indiana Jones and The Temple Of Doom (1984) ; The Long Riders (1980) ; Monty Python and The Holy Grail (1975) ; Monty Python's The Meaning Of Life (1983) ; Outland (1981) ; Raiders Of The Lost Ark (1981) ; Sharkey's Machine (1981) ; Southern Comfort (1981) ; 10 to Midnight (1983) ; The Terminator (1984) ; They Live (1988) ; The Wall (1982) ....[/quote] http://www.spout.com/blogs/cinemarian/archive/2008/5/13/29036.aspx Post By: CinemaRian
Post To: CinemaRian Blog
Post Date: 5/13/2008 9:48:36 PM
Body: Dispite my love of British humor I have never warmed to Monty Python. I have never seen the cult TV show that the four films (the only I havn't seen is 1971's And Now For Something Complety Different) are inspired by. but the he three most famous strike me as cold and rather heartless, although they are intermittantly funny. For those who don't know, Monty Python's Flying Circus was a Saturday Night Live - esq sketch comedy show (although it wasn't live), often with absurd humor. It was never particularly popular during it's run but became a cult sensation, and eventully the stars of the show (particularly John Cleese) came to be regarded as British comic geniouses. The stars play virtually all the main and supporting roles in the movies (including female parts), only occasionaly using outside actors. Although the humor of The Meaning of Life is allegidly supposed to more philisophical than the other films, I don't see very much here that's particuarly deep. The film is devided into several different sketches of varying quality (the only one that is totally sucessful is a very surreal search for a fish in the middle of the film). Often they have a funny idea and run the joke into the ground by repeating it over and over again. Aside from the aforementioned fish sequences, most of the humor is chuckle-funny but rarly goes beyond that, and is often really vulgar (you do not want to be eating when you see the fat guy at the end of the film). But beyond the success or failure of the jokes, a bigger problem that I have felt with all of the Python films that I have seen is that there is not much heart in them, it's like comedy by computer (to a lesser extent, this is also a flaw of the Airplane! -style movies). Sometimes, the jokes come off as rather cruel, not so much on the targets, but on us, the audince. There is a certain nihlism to a film like this, sense everything is equally targeted, so the film never takes the side of anything. I might not mind if the movie was funnier, but I did in this case. Monty Python's The Meaning of Life (1983)
]]>Wed, 14 May 2008 01:48:36 GMTCinemaRianCinemaRian Blog5/13/2008 9:48:36 PMDispite my love of British humor I have never warmed to Monty Python. I have never seen the cult TV show that the four films (the only I havn't seen is 1971's And Now For Something Complety Different) are inspired by. but the he three most famous strike me as cold and rather heartless, although they are intermittantly funny. For those who don't know, Monty Python's Flying Circus was a Saturday Night Live - esq sketch comedy show (although it wasn't live), often with absurd humor. It was never particularly popular during it's run but became a cult sensation, and eventully the stars of the show (particularly John Cleese) came to be regarded as British comic geniouses. The stars play virtually all the main and supporting roles in the movies (including female parts), only occasionaly using outside actors. Although the humor of The Meaning of Life is allegidly supposed to more philisophical than the other films, I don't see very much here that's particuarly deep. The film is devided into several different sketches of varying quality (the only one that is totally sucessful is a very surreal search for a fish in the middle of the film). Often they have a funny idea and run the joke into the ground by repeating it over and over again. Aside from the aforementioned fish sequences, most of the humor is chuckle-funny but rarly goes beyond that, and is often really vulgar (you do not want to be eating when you see the fat guy at the end of the film). But beyond the success or failure of the jokes, a bigger problem that I have felt with all of the Python films that I have seen is that there is not much heart in them, it's like comedy by computer (to a lesser extent, this is also a flaw of the Airplane! -style movies). Sometimes, the jokes come off as rather cruel, not so much on the targets, but on us, the audince. There is a certain nihlism to a film like this, sense everything is equally targeted, so the film never takes the side of anything. I might not mind if the movie was funnier, but I did in this case. Monty Python's The Meaning of Life (1983) http://www.spout.com/blogs/bigjefflebowski/archive/2008/3/1/25761.aspx Post By: BigJeffLebowski
Post To: BigJeffLebowski Blog
Post Date: 3/1/2008 3:26:51 PM
Body: "If you haven't seen it, please do."-Richard Dawkins, parenthetically discussing Monty Python's The Meaning of Life in his book The God Delusion. If Monty Python's The Meaning of Life is remembered less fondly than their earlier classics Monty Python and the Holy Grail and The Life of Brian, this is not to say that the film has fewer laughs or that the point of Monty Python's satire has in any way been blunted. Granted, the humor is arguably the Pythons' most vulgar and can at times come across as crude. But watching The Meaning of Life a quarter of a century after its release, what remains shocking is not the wealth of projectile vomit, naked breasts, or children singing about sperm; what continues to alienate and to offend is the film's surprisingly direct attack on what it considers a terribly misguided society. And the worst offender? Christian ideology and rhetoric.The Pythons -- Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin -- were always practitioners of silly sophistication, and their combination of the intellectual and the low brow is one of the many factors that has assured them a wide and varied audience. Few performers have the confidence, the skill, and the intelligence to pull off this Trojan Horse; Steve Martin's signature arrow-through-the-head belied a deeply philosophical bent, and few would find in Take the Money and Run evidence of the mature filmmaker Woody Allen would become over the next decade. But it can be argued that no one has been more innovative, more inspired, and more inspiring than Monty Python.It is in The Meaning of Life, their last film, that the Pythons most fully indulge their dual passions for both silliness and sophistication. It has been argued that by this late point in their career, the Pythons' well was running dry; of this I remain unconvinced. To its credit, The Meaning of Life is the most technically proficient of the Monty Python films, and though its momentum does wane due to its episodic nature, revisiting the sketch format of "Monty Python's Flying Circus" allows the film to throw a few punches it may have pulled were it constrained to a plot.Also to the film's credit, even without a single unified narrative running through it, The Meaning of Life is no less thematically coherent than Holy Grail or The Life of Brian. Lurking beneath the anarchic surface is an unexpectedly intelligent and barbed attack on consumerism, religion, and other modern social maladies that ultimately clutter, confuse, and complicate our lives. What materializes through the grotesquerie is a strong call for logic and science; I believe that this subtly didactic tone and blatant disdain for abuses of commerce and faith (which could be misread as elitism) is the main reason The Meaning of Life is so often overlooked in the Python oeuvre.Granted, this film doesn't mark the first time the Pythons have levelled some blows at organized religion, but it may be the first time they have allowed a whiff of malice to creep in. It would not be entirely erroneous to reason that if an anti-Christian sensibility were solely to blame for The Meaning of Life's somewhat besmirched reputation, then the near-universally praised The Life of Brian should have similar detractors. While there are those who consider The Life of Brian a deeply insensitive and offensive work, they are considerably fewer and represent a much smaller, much more specific demographic. Why is this?Whether consciously or unconsciously, the Pythons seem to have been using The Life of Brian as a test to see just how much they could get away with. It is clearly their most crafted film, a necessity given its subject matter. But while The Life of Brian may represent the culmination of a lot of the Pythons' subtextual themes and deals far more overtly with the Christian mythology, it does so in a largely joking, nudging way. If one were so inclined, he or she could easily watch and enjoy The Life of Brian without subscribing to (or even acknowledging) its critical, subversive ideology. Perhaps this is the key to great satire, to be able to hide your teeth in a smile. Regardless, it would be far more difficult for a devout theist to enjoy The Meaning of Life, which frequently seems dissatisfied merely pointing out the faulty logic of pious rhetoric, preferring instead to (literally) sing and dance around the point. There is no context to soften the blow as there is in The Life of Brian; you can almost hear the Pythons laughing at their audience even as they laugh with them, insisting, "You think this is nonsense? You should see yourselves!"To this end, what many find offensive I find refreshing. I respect an artist who can make big ideas palatable for the general public. While many young people may not know of Russell's teapot, they may have instead heard of The Flying Spaghetti Monster or The Invisible Pink Unicorn. What these two symbols of modern day Atheism/Skepticism have in common with Monty Python is a belief that the manifestations of religious fundamentalism are so ludicrous, so fantastical, and so willfully offensive to logic that they can only be responded to with nonsense of equal measure; anyone who ignores reason will not be swayed by it, no matter how sound.An unfortunate reality is that disciples will not always take the right lessons from their masters. Just as the church often perverts the religion it sets out to uphold, so too have subsequent filmmakers and comedians taken the Pythons' willingness to push the boundaries of taste but have ignored or left behind their intelligence and sense of purpose. The Pythons are a bright bunch and are undoubtedly reluctant fathers to the gross-out school of comedic one-upmanship which has flourished in their wake. And so before you criticize The Meaning of Life for excess, for vulgarity, and for abuse of power with deleterious intent, consider first that its targets are guilty of the same (and to a much greater degree). At least Monty Python have taken the time and the care to look behind the curtain before it is hung.
]]>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 20:26:51 GMTBigJeffLebowskiBigJeffLebowski Blog3/1/2008 3:26:51 PM&quot;If you haven&#39;t seen it, please do.&quot;-Richard Dawkins, parenthetically discussing Monty Python&#39;s The Meaning of Life in his book The God Delusion. If Monty Python&#39;s The Meaning of Life is remembered less fondly than their earlier classics Monty Python and the Holy Grail and The Life of Brian, this is not to say that the film has fewer laughs or that the point of Monty Python&#39;s satire has in any way been blunted. Granted, the humor is arguably the Pythons&#39; most vulgar and can at times come across as crude. But watching The Meaning of Life a quarter of a century after its release, what remains shocking is not the wealth of projectile vomit, naked breasts, or children singing about sperm; what continues to alienate and to offend is the film&#39;s surprisingly direct attack on what it considers a terribly misguided society. And the worst offender? Christian ideology and rhetoric.The Pythons -- Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin -- were always practitioners of silly sophistication, and their combination of the intellectual and the low brow is one of the many factors that has assured them a wide and varied audience. Few performers have the confidence, the skill, and the intelligence to pull off this Trojan Horse; Steve Martin&#39;s signature arrow-through-the-head belied a deeply philosophical bent, and few would find in Take the Money and Run evidence of the mature filmmaker Woody Allen would become over the next decade. But it can be argued that no one has been more innovative, more inspired, and more inspiring than Monty Python.It is in The Meaning of Life, their last film, that the Pythons most fully indulge their dual passions for both silliness and sophistication. It has been argued that by this late point in their career, the Pythons&#39; well was running dry; of this I remain unconvinced. To its credit, The Meaning of Life is the most technically proficient of the Monty Python films, and though its momentum does wane due to its episodic nature, revisiting the sketch format of &quot;Monty Python&#39;s Flying Circus&quot; allows the film to throw a few punches it may have pulled were it constrained to a plot.Also to the film&#39;s credit, even without a single unified narrative running through it, The Meaning of Life is no less thematically coherent than Holy Grail or The Life of Brian. Lurking beneath the anarchic surface is an unexpectedly intelligent and barbed attack on consumerism, religion, and other modern social maladies that ultimately clutter, confuse, and complicate our lives. What materializes through the grotesquerie is a strong call for logic and science; I believe that this subtly didactic tone and blatant disdain for abuses of commerce and faith (which could be misread as elitism) is the main reason The Meaning of Life is so often overlooked in the Python oeuvre.Granted, this film doesn&#39;t mark the first time the Pythons have levelled some blows at organized religion, but it may be the first time they have allowed a whiff of malice to creep in. It would not be entirely erroneous to reason that if an anti-Christian sensibility were solely to blame for The Meaning of Life&#39;s somewhat besmirched reputation, then the near-universally praised The Life of Brian should have similar detractors. While there are those who consider The Life of Brian a deeply insensitive and offensive work, they are considerably fewer and represent a much smaller, much more specific demographic. Why is this?Whether consciously or unconsciously, the Pythons seem to have been using The Life of Brian as a test to see just how much they could get away with. It is clearly their most crafted film, a necessity given its subject matter. But while The Life of Brian may represent the culmination of a lot of the Pythons&#39; subtextual themes and deals far more overtly with the Christian mythology, it does so in a largely joking, nudging way. If one were so inclined, he or she could easily watch and enjoy The Life of Brian without subscribing to (or even acknowledging) its critical, subversive ideology. Perhaps this is the key to great satire, to be able to hide your teeth in a smile. Regardless, it would be far more difficult for a devout theist to enjoy The Meaning of Life, which frequently seems dissatisfied merely pointing out the faulty logic of pious rhetoric, preferring instead to (literally) sing and dance around the point. There is no context to soften the blow as there is in The Life of Brian; you can almost hear the Pythons laughing at their audience even as they laugh with them, insisting, &quot;You think this is nonsense? You should see yourselves!&quot;To this end, what many find offensive I find refreshing. I respect an artist who can make big ideas palatable for the general public. While many young people may not know of Russell&#39;s teapot, they may have instead heard of The Flying Spaghetti Monster or The Invisible Pink Unicorn. What these two symbols of modern day Atheism/Skepticism have in common with Monty Python is a belief that the manifestations of religious fundamentalism are so ludicrous, so fantastical, and so willfully offensive to logic that they can only be responded to with nonsense of equal measure; anyone who ignores reason will not be swayed by it, no matter how sound.An unfortunate reality is that disciples will not always take the right lessons from their masters. Just as the church often perverts the religion it sets out to uphold, so too have subsequent filmmakers and comedians taken the Pythons&#39; willingness to push the boundaries of taste but have ignored or left behind their intelligence and sense of purpose. The Pythons are a bright bunch and are undoubtedly reluctant fathers to the gross-out school of comedic one-upmanship which has flourished in their wake. And so before you criticize The Meaning of Life for excess, for vulgarity, and for abuse of power with deleterious intent, consider first that its targets are guilty of the same (and to a much greater degree). At least Monty Python have taken the time and the care to look behind the curtain before it is hung. http://www.spout.com/blogs/lopezdash/archive/2007/12/10/22694.aspx Post By: lopezdash
Post To: The Movie Blog
Post Date: 12/10/2007 1:02:19 PM
Body: From the Entertainment and Culture blog over at New York Magazine comes a list of THE TEN MOST ANTI-CHRISTIAN MOVIES OF ALL TIME. What a title, eh? 10. Carrie (1976) After the titular protagonist gets her first period at school, her crazy, devoutly Christian mother locks her in a closet and tells her to pray, explaining that only sinners menstruate (Wikipedia says this is false). Luckily, Carrie has telekinetic powers, which she uses to toss her mom across a room, electrocute her principal, and burn down her high school's gymnasium, killing hundreds of students. Parents, take note.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJe0iVo8y3A 9. Priest (1995) Antonia Bird's film — which caused a flash of protest when Miramax released it — follows Linus Roache's gay priest as he struggles against his vow of celibacy, and his inability to help a young girl who confesses that her father is abusing her. Perhaps better described as anti-celibacy than anti-Christian, the film ends with a moment of grace that casts the film's view of faith in a somewhat gentler light, but it's hard to overstate how violently some religious viewers responded to the image of a Catholic priest doing it with Trainspotting's Robert Carlyle.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHVNbV1zPDU 8. Footloose (1984) Despite its canonical status as an eighties classic, we’re willing to bet that if an original script like Footloose — in which fun-loving teen Kevin Bacon arrives in a small town where preacher John Lithgow has banned rock music and dancing — landed on a Hollywood exec’s desk today, they’d be too afraid to produce it, lest it offend some key demographic. It’s Lithgow’s villain who really makes the movie: Soft-spoken and patronizing when he’s not spitting out the fire and brimstone ("He’s testing us!!"), his performance is a bone-chilling portrait of smug self-righteousness and could easily blend in among any number of Sunday-morning-TV preachers. The only thing missing is a bad hairpiece. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH2t6T7rhCU 7. Dogma (1999) Sure, not all of the jokes were funny. Also, its plot is almost as incomprehensible as the Bible's. Even so, you've got to admire Kevin Smith for having the nerve to cast George Carlin as a cardinal (who tries to make Catholicism more accessible by replacing the crucifix with a statue of Jesus giving a thumbs-up), Chris Rock as the thirteenth apostle (who was omitted from the Bible for being black), and Alanis Morrisette as God (this really pissed off Christians, since her second album had just come out and it was a total stinker). Plus, he got Disney to pay for it!Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3zEraHgfO4 6. Jesus Camp (2006) Documentary filmmakers Rachel Grady and Heidi Ewing probably never set out to make Evangelical Christians look crazy, but when they showed up at the Kids on Fire School of Ministry, a children's Bible camp in Devils Lake, North Dakota, and set up their cameras, that's exactly what happened. The home-schooled little rascals roll around on the floor speaking in tongues, take strategic pointers from radical Islam, and bless a cardboard cutout of President Bush (see above). Disgraced pastor Ted Haggard even shows up to decry the horrors of homosexuality, presumably in between visits to his gay, meth-dealing masseur.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CgvgjfwyPs 5. The Name of the Rose (1986) True, the heroes of Umberto Eco's religio-literary mystery are themselves monks — played by Sean Connery and Christian Slater in the movie version — but that doesn't stop this thriller, set in a medieval abbey where the faithful are dying in pursuit of a long-lost and forbidden copy of Aristotle's Poetics, from being one of cinema's most damning looks at religious superstition. Not the least because,besides the two leads, practically every monk in this film (1) is hideous-looking and (2) dies a horrible, excruciating death. It's as if H.R. Giger and Dario Argento collaborated on the film version of God Is Not Great. Don't miss the scene where Ron Perlman eats a rat.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_hkLBVnc 4. The Magdalene Sisters (2002) There have been plenty of movies in recent years about priestly abuse — God only knows why — but few are more single-minded in their condemnation than Peter Mullan's harrowing look at three unfortunate young Irish Catholic women who wind up under the custody of a Magdalene convent for wayward girls in the sixties. Between the beatings and rapes they're subjected to at the hands of sadistic nuns and lewd priests, and the brutality of the ostensibly God-fearing society outside the convent walls, Mullan's film plays at times like Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS remade in monastic disguise. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJYiJQ-jbkM 3. The Boys of St. Vincent (1993) This four-hour Canadian telefilm is a difficult, complex portrait of a Catholic orphanage ruled over by a pedophilic priest (Henry Czerny, in a role that launched him into a career of playing creepy bastards). But the film isn't anti-Christian because it's yet another movie about a priest who can't keep his hands off the flock; it's anti-Christian because its primary theme is the creeping danger of Catholicism's emphasis on submission of the self to those above you on the pecking order, whether that's a priest, a Church administrator, or God Himself. 2. Monty Python's The Meaning of Life (1983) The blasphemous Life of Brian would have been the obvious choice here, but that one just gently chides the Jesus myth, whereas the Pythons' final film actually eviscerates the pettiness of religion in everyday life, never more effectively than in the hilarious musical number "Every Sperm Is Sacred," sung by a miserably poor and overpopulated Catholic household while their preening, repressed Protestant neighbors look on in pity. ("When Martin Luther nailed his protest up to the church door in 1517, he may not have realized the full significance of what he was doing, but 400 years later, thanks to him, my dear … I can go down the road any time I want and walk into Harry's and hold my head up high and say in a loud, steady voice, 'Harry, I think I'll have a French Tickler, for I am a Protestant!'")Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8 1. The Canterbury Tales (1972) Although he made what many still consider to be the quintessential Jesus movie (The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 1964), Italian Marxist homosexual poet Pier Paolo Pasolini was no fan of religious dogma, and his sex-drenched, free-form adaptation of Geoffrey Chaucer's poem constantly thumbs its nose at the falsely pious. But Pasolini saves the big one for the end: The film ends with a shocking and hilarious vision of Hell in which Satan cracks open his butt cheeks and shits out streams of screaming friars. In close-up. Repeatedly. Sadly, we were unable to find this clip on YouTube, but then we realized we could put it up ourselves. Enjoy, because it won't last long.
]]>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 18:02:19 GMTlopezdashThe Movie Blog12/10/2007 1:02:19 PMFrom the Entertainment and Culture blog over at New York Magazine comes a list of THE TEN MOST ANTI-CHRISTIAN MOVIES OF ALL TIME. What a title, eh? 10. Carrie (1976) After the titular protagonist gets her first period at school, her crazy, devoutly Christian mother locks her in a closet and tells her to pray, explaining that only sinners menstruate (Wikipedia says this is false). Luckily, Carrie has telekinetic powers, which she uses to toss her mom across a room, electrocute her principal, and burn down her high school&#39;s gymnasium, killing hundreds of students. Parents, take note.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJe0iVo8y3A 9. Priest (1995) Antonia Bird&#39;s film &mdash; which caused a flash of protest when Miramax released it &mdash; follows Linus Roache&#39;s gay priest as he struggles against his vow of celibacy, and his inability to help a young girl who confesses that her father is abusing her. Perhaps better described as anti-celibacy than anti-Christian, the film ends with a moment of grace that casts the film&#39;s view of faith in a somewhat gentler light, but it&#39;s hard to overstate how violently some religious viewers responded to the image of a Catholic priest doing it with Trainspotting&#39;s Robert Carlyle.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHVNbV1zPDU 8. Footloose (1984) Despite its canonical status as an eighties classic, we&rsquo;re willing to bet that if an original script like Footloose &mdash; in which fun-loving teen Kevin Bacon arrives in a small town where preacher John Lithgow has banned rock music and dancing &mdash; landed on a Hollywood exec&rsquo;s desk today, they&rsquo;d be too afraid to produce it, lest it offend some key demographic. It&rsquo;s Lithgow&rsquo;s villain who really makes the movie: Soft-spoken and patronizing when he&rsquo;s not spitting out the fire and brimstone (&quot;He&rsquo;s testing us!!&quot;), his performance is a bone-chilling portrait of smug self-righteousness and could easily blend in among any number of Sunday-morning-TV preachers. The only thing missing is a bad hairpiece. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH2t6T7rhCU 7. Dogma (1999) Sure, not all of the jokes were funny. Also, its plot is almost as incomprehensible as the Bible&#39;s. Even so, you&#39;ve got to admire Kevin Smith for having the nerve to cast George Carlin as a cardinal (who tries to make Catholicism more accessible by replacing the crucifix with a statue of Jesus giving a thumbs-up), Chris Rock as the thirteenth apostle (who was omitted from the Bible for being black), and Alanis Morrisette as God (this really pissed off Christians, since her second album had just come out and it was a total stinker). Plus, he got Disney to pay for it!Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3zEraHgfO4 6. Jesus Camp (2006) Documentary filmmakers Rachel Grady and Heidi Ewing probably never set out to make Evangelical Christians look crazy, but when they showed up at the Kids on Fire School of Ministry, a children&#39;s Bible camp in Devils Lake, North Dakota, and set up their cameras, that&#39;s exactly what happened. The home-schooled little rascals roll around on the floor speaking in tongues, take strategic pointers from radical Islam, and bless a cardboard cutout of President Bush (see above). Disgraced pastor Ted Haggard even shows up to decry the horrors of homosexuality, presumably in between visits to his gay, meth-dealing masseur.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CgvgjfwyPs 5. The Name of the Rose (1986) True, the heroes of Umberto Eco&#39;s religio-literary mystery are themselves monks &mdash; played by Sean Connery and Christian Slater in the movie version &mdash; but that doesn&#39;t stop this thriller, set in a medieval abbey where the faithful are dying in pursuit of a long-lost and forbidden copy of Aristotle&#39;s Poetics, from being one of cinema&#39;s most damning looks at religious superstition. Not the least because,besides the two leads, practically every monk in this film (1) is hideous-looking and (2) dies a horrible, excruciating death. It&#39;s as if H.R. Giger and Dario Argento collaborated on the film version of God Is Not Great. Don&#39;t miss the scene where Ron Perlman eats a rat.Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc-_hkLBVnc 4. The Magdalene Sisters (2002) There have been plenty of movies in recent years about priestly abuse &mdash; God only knows why &mdash; but few are more single-minded in their condemnation than Peter Mullan&#39;s harrowing look at three unfortunate young Irish Catholic women who wind up under the custody of a Magdalene convent for wayward girls in the sixties. Between the beatings and rapes they&#39;re subjected to at the hands of sadistic nuns and lewd priests, and the brutality of the ostensibly God-fearing society outside the convent walls, Mullan&#39;s film plays at times like Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS remade in monastic disguise. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJYiJQ-jbkM 3. The Boys of St. Vincent (1993) This four-hour Canadian telefilm is a difficult, complex portrait of a Catholic orphanage ruled over by a pedophilic priest (Henry Czerny, in a role that launched him into a career of playing creepy bastards). But the film isn&#39;t anti-Christian because it&#39;s yet another movie about a priest who can&#39;t keep his hands off the flock; it&#39;s anti-Christian because its primary theme is the creeping danger of Catholicism&#39;s emphasis on submission of the self to those above you on the pecking order, whether that&#39;s a priest, a Church administrator, or God Himself. 2. Monty Python&#39;s The Meaning of Life (1983) The blasphemous Life of Brian would have been the obvious choice here, but that one just gently chides the Jesus myth, whereas the Pythons&#39; final film actually eviscerates the pettiness of religion in everyday life, never more effectively than in the hilarious musical number &quot;Every Sperm Is Sacred,&quot; sung by a miserably poor and overpopulated Catholic household while their preening, repressed Protestant neighbors look on in pity. (&quot;When Martin Luther nailed his protest up to the church door in 1517, he may not have realized the full significance of what he was doing, but 400 years later, thanks to him, my dear &hellip; I can go down the road any time I want and walk into Harry&#39;s and hold my head up high and say in a loud, steady voice, &#39;Harry, I think I&#39;ll have a French Tickler, for I am a Protestant!&#39;&quot;)Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8 1. The Canterbury Tales (1972) Although he made what many still consider to be the quintessential Jesus movie (The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 1964), Italian Marxist homosexual poet Pier Paolo Pasolini was no fan of religious dogma, and his sex-drenched, free-form adaptation of Geoffrey Chaucer&#39;s poem constantly thumbs its nose at the falsely pious. But Pasolini saves the big one for the end: The film ends with a shocking and hilarious vision of Hell in which Satan cracks open his butt cheeks and shits out streams of screaming friars. In close-up. Repeatedly. Sadly, we were unable to find this clip on YouTube, but then we realized we could put it up ourselves. Enjoy, because it won&#39;t last long. http://www.spout.com/blogs/jlgdrd/archive/2007/6/22/11758.aspx Post By: jlgdrd
Post To: Wicked Fun
Post Date: 6/22/2007 6:46:00 PM
Body: Years ago, a local film critic (living in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex) dismissed Crimes of Passion by saying, “Why doesn’t Ken Russell just go back to England?” as if this were a legitimate, professional reaction to any film. You just couldn’t help the feeling that she didn’t get it. “It” not being the film itself. It was awful but I don’t think it’s ever okay to pan a film because one’s sensibilities are offended. Or ravaged. Ironically I find myself in a similar situation after viewing Spike and Mike’s Sick and Twisted Festival of Animation. Call it Karmic Justice. I repeatedly wondered if I’d viewed this collection, say, 25 years ago, if I’d have been rolling in the proverbial aisles. Though I’d like to think I’m smarter today. From The Grand Guignol Theatre of 19th Century Paris, to Peter Jackson’s Dead Alive to the Mr. Creosote sketch in Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life, to the Itchy and Scratchy cartoon-within-a-cartoon featured on The Simpsons the practice of depicting the disturbing, the horrific, the unwatchable seems more and more prevalent. And in those particular cases, hilarious. With the release of films like Bonnie and Clyde, The Wild Bunch, The Godfather, Taxi Driver, it’s been theorized that film makers must steadily escalate the violence in their movies to lure audiences away from television, the result being that we have become progressively more inured to the maiming, mutilation, decapitation and other forms of torture and execution we bear witness to in the everyday business of visual entertainment. Remember the groundbreaking sketch when Dan Ackroyd, dressed as Julia Child, lopped off the end of her thumb on Saturday Night Live? I say groundbreaking because, yes, it was funny. The blood everywhere, so extravagant that “Child” was actually slipping in it. SNL demonstrated that you could be gory and tasteless and excessive and still be uproarious. Unfortunately, it also spawned uncountable comedic derivations, based on the unfortunate misconception that anything tasteless or absurdly, disproportionately grisly was de facto funny.The reason why I’ve gone on so long about this is because so much of S&M’s Animation Festival is composed of creepy, violent images that I can’t sort out whether they’re not funny because I’m just a sour old curmudgeon, or a closet candy-ass. Mondo Media’s Happy Tree Friends is rife with mutilation imagery, that I suppose, is plausible, but just random enough that the shock invites us to laugh. Just how far can you push the irony of physical trauma erupting repeatedly and whimsically? Perhaps the reason Eric Merola’s Fly Boy (homage to Di Palma’s Scarface) works better is that context gives it depth. We’re not expected to find hilarity in random ghastly occurrences that pop up to poison the cotton candy, to gouge out the eyes of Hello Kitty! But who am I to say? Maybe there are people who find the specious, vapid content of traditional cartoons to be so dull and insipid, so vacuous (so offensive?) that Spike and Mike provide respite. Catharsis. Spike and Mike’s Sick and Twisted Festival of Animation offers 23 new films and 2 special encores. It runs about 90 minutes, and features roughly the level and garden variety of quality you might expect from an assortment of 25 animated short subjects. Some of the pieces never transcend the amusement you might get from any quirky, novel animation, and unlike other animation festivals, none are intended as chiefly dramatic or reflective pieces. Though the best have layers of content. There is a great deal of impressive facility and imagination going on, even if the end result of most have very little impact. Cat Ciao, for example, has lots of intriguing craft and mechanics. The depth of field is vivid and inspired, even if the story is disappointing. And that’s the way it is throughout. It’s like a Christmas stocking with a few gemmy trinkets here and there but not much you’d want to take home. A couple (The Answer and Mule Dick ) are predicated on jokes that have been circulating for at least 15 years and others like Proper Urinal Etiquette and Krazy Kock are more clever in concept than in practice. Some, ironically, go on way past the point of being comical while others hit the punch line so quickly you have to do a double-take. Hippie Juice was terrible. By far the best are: Here Comes Dr. Tran, The Boy Who Could Smell the Future, My First Boner (after Schoolhouse Rock), Crab Revolution, Frog, and Ah, L’ Amour, with Proper Urinal Etiquette, Mr. J. Russell, No Neck Joe and Krazy Kock running second.
]]>Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:46:00 GMTjlgdrdWicked Fun6/22/2007 6:46:00 PMYears ago, a local film critic (living in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex) dismissed Crimes of Passion by saying, &ldquo;Why doesn&rsquo;t Ken Russell just go back to England?&rdquo; as if this were a legitimate, professional reaction to any film. You just couldn&rsquo;t help the feeling that she didn&rsquo;t get it. &ldquo;It&rdquo; not being the film itself. It was awful but I don&rsquo;t think it&rsquo;s ever okay to pan a film because one&rsquo;s sensibilities are offended. Or ravaged. Ironically I find myself in a similar situation after viewing Spike and Mike&rsquo;s Sick and Twisted Festival of Animation. Call it Karmic Justice. I repeatedly wondered if I&rsquo;d viewed this collection, say, 25 years ago, if I&rsquo;d have been rolling in the proverbial aisles. Though I&rsquo;d like to think I&rsquo;m smarter today. From The Grand Guignol Theatre of 19th Century Paris, to Peter Jackson&rsquo;s Dead Alive to the Mr. Creosote sketch in Monty Python&rsquo;s The Meaning of Life, to the Itchy and Scratchy cartoon-within-a-cartoon featured on The Simpsons the practice of depicting the disturbing, the horrific, the unwatchable seems more and more prevalent. And in those particular cases, hilarious. With the release of films like Bonnie and Clyde, The Wild Bunch, The Godfather, Taxi Driver, it&rsquo;s been theorized that film makers must steadily escalate the violence in their movies to lure audiences away from television, the result being that we have become progressively more inured to the maiming, mutilation, decapitation and other forms of torture and execution we bear witness to in the everyday business of visual entertainment. Remember the groundbreaking sketch when Dan Ackroyd, dressed as Julia Child, lopped off the end of her thumb on Saturday Night Live? I say groundbreaking because, yes, it was funny. The blood everywhere, so extravagant that &ldquo;Child&rdquo; was actually slipping in it. SNL demonstrated that you could be gory and tasteless and excessive and still be uproarious. Unfortunately, it also spawned uncountable comedic derivations, based on the unfortunate misconception that anything tasteless or absurdly, disproportionately grisly was de facto funny.The reason why I&rsquo;ve gone on so long about this is because so much of S&amp;M&rsquo;s Animation Festival is composed of creepy, violent images that I can&rsquo;t sort out whether they&rsquo;re not funny because I&rsquo;m just a sour old curmudgeon, or a closet candy-ass. Mondo Media&rsquo;s Happy Tree Friends is rife with mutilation imagery, that I suppose, is plausible, but just random enough that the shock invites us to laugh. Just how far can you push the irony of physical trauma erupting repeatedly and whimsically? Perhaps the reason Eric Merola&rsquo;s Fly Boy (homage to Di Palma&rsquo;s Scarface) works better is that context gives it depth. We&rsquo;re not expected to find hilarity in random ghastly occurrences that pop up to poison the cotton candy, to gouge out the eyes of Hello Kitty! But who am I to say? Maybe there are people who find the specious, vapid content of traditional cartoons to be so dull and insipid, so vacuous (so offensive?) that Spike and Mike provide respite. Catharsis. Spike and Mike&rsquo;s Sick and Twisted Festival of Animation offers 23 new films and 2 special encores. It runs about 90 minutes, and features roughly the level and garden variety of quality you might expect from an assortment of 25 animated short subjects. Some of the pieces never transcend the amusement you might get from any quirky, novel animation, and unlike other animation festivals, none are intended as chiefly dramatic or reflective pieces. Though the best have layers of content. There is a great deal of impressive facility and imagination going on, even if the end result of most have very little impact. Cat Ciao, for example, has lots of intriguing craft and mechanics. The depth of field is vivid and inspired, even if the story is disappointing. And that&rsquo;s the way it is throughout. It&rsquo;s like a Christmas stocking with a few gemmy trinkets here and there but not much you&rsquo;d want to take home. A couple (The Answer and Mule Dick ) are predicated on jokes that have been circulating for at least 15 years and others like Proper Urinal Etiquette and Krazy Kock are more clever in concept than in practice. Some, ironically, go on way past the point of being comical while others hit the punch line so quickly you have to do a double-take. Hippie Juice was terrible. By far the best are: Here Comes Dr. Tran, The Boy Who Could Smell the Future, My First Boner (after Schoolhouse Rock), Crab Revolution, Frog, and Ah, L&rsquo; Amour, with Proper Urinal Etiquette, Mr. J. Russell, No Neck Joe and Krazy Kock running second. http://www.spout.com/groups/Grew_up_in_the_80_s/Re_What_is_your_Favorite_Comedy_of_the_1980_s/38/10522/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: divinemsjunebug
Post To: Grew up in the 80's
Post Date: 6/9/2007 1:10:53 PM
Body: I STILL love watching all of those movies over and over. National Lamboon's Vacation has to be one of the best comedies out there. I don't think I ever laughed so hard at a movie...I probably have, but that is one of my favorites too. What about Monty Python's Meaning of Life, This is Spinal Tap, Victor/Victoria, What about History of the World Part I? Was that the 70s or the 80s I can't remember. Oh and Beetlejuice, one of my other favorites. God, there are soooooo many hilarious movies from that time...
]]>Sat, 09 Jun 2007 17:10:53 GMTdivinemsjunebugGrew up in the 80's6/9/2007 1:10:53 PMI STILL love watching all of those movies over and over. National Lamboon&#39;s Vacation has to be one of the best comedies out there. I don&#39;t think I ever laughed so hard at a movie...I probably have, but that is one of my favorites too. What about Monty Python&#39;s Meaning of Life, This is Spinal Tap, Victor/Victoria, What about History of the World Part I? Was that the 70s or the 80s I can&#39;t remember. Oh and Beetlejuice, one of my other favorites. God, there are soooooo many hilarious movies from that time... http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comedy/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomedy
Number of films tagged: 1086

Number of people who tagged: 253

Number of times used: 1340

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:38:24 GMT10862531340Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/war/MemberTagFilms.aspxwar
Number of films tagged: 6176

Number of people who tagged: 180

Number of times used: 607

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:50:24 GMT6176180607Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sex/MemberTagFilms.aspxsex
Number of films tagged: 2414

Number of people who tagged: 126

Number of times used: 548

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:42 GMT2414126548Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/british/MemberTagFilms.aspxbritish
Number of films tagged: 610

Number of people who tagged: 75

Number of times used: 264

]]>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:53:04 GMT61075264Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/marriage/MemberTagFilms.aspxmarriage
Number of films tagged: 3471

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 267

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:11 GMT347167267Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/religion/MemberTagFilms.aspxreligion
Number of films tagged: 1123

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 176

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:31:00 GMT112367176Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/history/MemberTagFilms.aspxhistory
Number of films tagged: 999

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 156

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:15:22 GMT99948156Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/perfectly-quirky/MemberTagFilms.aspxperfectly-quirky
Number of films tagged: 28

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 70

]]>Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:37:43 GMT282770Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/philosophy/MemberTagFilms.aspxphilosophy
Number of films tagged: 489

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 35

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:12:13 GMT4892635Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/performer/MemberTagFilms.aspxperformer
Number of films tagged: 2329

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 15

]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:02:52 GMT2329915Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/swashbuckler/MemberTagFilms.aspxswashbuckler
Number of films tagged: 412

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 11

]]>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:04:30 GMT412611Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/montypython/MemberTagFilms.aspxmontypython
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 6

]]>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 20:51:40 GMT446Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/python/MemberTagFilms.aspxpython
Number of films tagged: 26

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 18

]]>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 12:43:46 GMT26418Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/eating/MemberTagFilms.aspxeating
Number of films tagged: 41

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 4

]]>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:40:48 GMT4124Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/pythonesque/MemberTagFilms.aspxpythonesque
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 4

]]>Mon, 06 Aug 2007 17:16:28 GMT424Tag