Slashdot Mirror
Monty Python 40 Years Old Today!
cheros was one of several readers to note that today, Oct 5, in 1969 was the very first airing of Monty Python. Although not every sketch has aged
particularly well, you'd be hard pressed to find a more influential and funny show. Heck, look at the Icon we use here to indicate humorous stories! Who among us can't claim to have viewed the Holy Grail at least
somewhere in the double digits.
For something completely different.
Monty Python was a long time ago.
It is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker!
It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed it to the perch it'd be pushing up the daisies!
Its metabolic processes are now 'istory! It's off the twig!
It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!!
Just pining for the fjords.
You must be ne... wait a minute, 5 digit ID? who did you buy that off?! :P
"It says 'Romans Go Home'." "No it doesn't!"
"He has a wife, you know..."
Oh, heck, just see here.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
What, the American or the European version?
Monty Python, when it started, was about doing something different, absurd, and rebellious. Humo(u)r was stale and repetitive at the time. The devolution of their innovative comedy into a mine for endlessly repeated quotes is antithetical to its spirit. That's why my favorite Monty Python sketch is their performance of the Dead Parrot Sketch at the Secret Policeman's Ball: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTV3lQc4AmQ
Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
The I Love Lucy and The Honeymooners shows are arguably much more influential (and funnier) than Monty Python, as far as actual influence goes.
No they aren't.
MP may have been funny and set the standard for sketch comedy, it doesn't really have much influence on popular culture.
Yes it does.
The two shows mentioned above have essentially defined the groundwork and format for all sitcoms to follow.
No they haven't.
Whether popular culture should be used to judge the positive influence of something could be debated, of course.
No it couldn't.
The Life of Brian is especially worth a second view if you saw it when you were younger.
Matthias: Look, I don't think it should be a sin, just for saying "Jehovah".
[Everyone gasps]
Jewish Official: You're only making it worse for yourself!
Matthias: Making it worse? How can it be worse? Jehovah! Jehovah! Jehovah!
Jewish Official: I'm warning you! If you say "Jehovah" one more time (gets hit with rock) RIGHT! Who did that? Come on, who did it?
Stoners: She did! She did! (suddenly speaking as men) He! He did! He!
Jewish Official: Was it you?
Stoner: Yes.
Jewish Official: Right...
Stoner: Well you did say "Jehovah. "
[Crowd throws rocks at the stoner]
Jewish Official: STOP IT! STOP IT! STOP IT RIGHT NOW! STOP IT! All right, no one is to stone _anyone_ until I blow this whistle. Even... and I want to make this absolutely clear... even if they do say, "Jehovah. "
[Crowd stones the Jewish Official to death]
This is an excellent opportunity to honor Monty Python by honoring the group's mastery of shock and irreverence and stop quoting, word for word skits and films! The irony is killing me slowly.
Highly apropos XKCD comic on the subject.
I disagree. Because you are quoting something surreal does not make it any less surreal. Monty Python is surreal humor, not original humor. Of course, the shock and awe of seeing it the first time is very effective. But that should in no way prevent you from continually enjoying it. If it being original was a requisite to the innate humor, the very act of placing it statically on a medium would remove the humor from it.
Of course it's quotable in the same way David Lynch is quotable or Salvador Dali's Persistence of Memory is replicated in anything from The Simpsons to T-shirts. I think that XKCD comic has little to no merit in claiming that Python was loved for their mastery of shock or defiance of convention. They were loved for their humor--be it unique, it was still not entirely original. Quoting Monty Python should make no one more depressed than quoting Shakespeare or Homer. Stop fretting about being unoriginal and enjoy it.
My work here is dung.
I believe the GP was looking for an argument, not contradiction.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Strangely appropriate for this thread, and really /. in general.
Q: WHAT DO YOU WANT?
M: Well, I was told outside that...
Q: Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!
M: What?
Q: Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!
M: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!!
Q: OH, oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse.
M: Oh, I see, well, that explains it.
Q: Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.
M: Oh, Thank you very much. Sorry.
Q: Not at all.
M: Thank You.
(Under his breath) Stupid git!!
he came in here for an argument? this is "abuse'. You want Room 12-A just along the corridor.
For most of Monty Python's Flying Circus, the opening credits consisted of the Liberty Bell March played over surreal animations from Terry G., with the last note replaced by a loud `squish' sound as a giant foot squashed the rest of the animated stuff.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
My nipples explode with delight!
Your brain is not a computer.
Apart from the aqueducts, roads and sanitation?
I'll go out and come in again...
"Seems random" != "is random"
Big xkcd fan, but that particular one is totally without merit--the Pythons were obsessive rewriters. Every sketch went through multiple drafts, they chose their topics and precise wording very carefully. They put a lot of effort into finding the absolute most effective way of surprising the audience, and they usually succeeded. The brilliance of Python is that they took the kind of humor that doesn't rely on surprise (a la Laurel and Hardy), and made it so surprising that everyone mistakes it for surprise-humor. Most comedy incorporates surprise, but nothing stays surprising forever--the comedy that stands the test of time is the comedy that doesn't depend on it. Take surprise out of Python and you still have some of the best-written jokes the world has ever produced. The most common format for their sketches was essentially to repeat the same joke over and over again with different wording--Dead Parrot, Crunchy Frog, Spam, Spanish Inquisition, Self-Defense, etc. After the first twenty seconds, there's nothing left to surprise you even the first time you see it. The humor is in the flawless execution--and that's why it's so obsessively quoted and rewatched.
The original Howling Frog is a fictional character and has no UID.
They addressed this yesterday in a BBC special. Firstly Graham Chapman is dead and secondly they felt like they were repeating themselves at the end of the original series which is why they quit. Terry Gilliam said that if they would come back they should make the first 4 episodes absolutely awful so by the next one only 2 people would be watching and then when they made their most brilliant show ever these guys would rush out and try to explain to incredulous people how brilliant it was. (Oh, and remakes suck.)
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
That's the one thing that was really awkward when I was working IT: how to politely get away from folks when they start the one man Monty Python recitation of skits.
That is easy, just say:
And now for something completely different...
and walk away.
we are the knights who say...."Whoosh"!!
I hadn't seen either I Love Lucy or The Honeymooners in decades, so I looked up some clips on YouTube and had a look. The result? Not funny. Not funny at all. The prototypes of every sitcom since (a dead, worthless genre, IMHO), plus a healthy portion of nasty dated stereotypes. No thank you!
Not only was Monty Python funny, it changed what we consider funny. It changed what we laugh it. Few other shows can claim to have redefined a genre, but Monty Python did just that. Here's to 40 more years of silly walks, dead parrots and arguments!
...laura
Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say Ni at will to old Slashdotters. There is a pestilence upon this site, nothing is sacred. Even those who arrange and design non-stories are under considerable economic stress in this period in history.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
On this day, make every Anonymous Coward show up as 'Bruce'.
Three sir!
I got this from a friend, and while I can't prove or disprove its veracity, I like to believe it really happened:
Here in Vancouver there are often sightings of celebrities in town for the filming of some project. So one day several years ago, a fellow is walking along downtown and is amazed to see John Cleese walking toward him. This fellow happens to be a Monty Python fanatic. We all know the type; he can (and does) quote many of their skits verbatim.
So the story goes, as he sees his comedic idol walking toward him on the street, he is suddenly in a panic as to what he should say to him. As Cleese is about to walk past he blurts out "Is this the place for an argument"? Without pausing or missing a step, Cleese exclaims "I TOLD YOU ONCE"!