Portada
mis comunidades
otras secciones
#5:
Cleese y Palin se educaron en Cambridge y Oxford, además de haber ido a muy buenos colegios donde les dan una formación de altísimo nivel. De ahí que crearan sketchs tan brillantes como el de “Romanus eunt domus”. No veo a
muchos humoristas capaces de algo tan fino, con ese punto de absurdez, y a la vez tan gracioso.
muchos humoristas capaces de algo tan fino, con ese punto de absurdez, y a la vez tan gracioso.
#1:
El vídeo del debate está dividido en cuatro partes:
1ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ni559bHXDg
2ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku3GcPrW9xg
3ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGI9UevrzGc
4ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXmJHlqMvvE
-----
Otro usuario juntó las cuatro partes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYMpObbt2rs
1ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ni559bHXDg
2ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku3GcPrW9xg
3ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGI9UevrzGc
4ª: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXmJHlqMvvE
-----
Otro usuario juntó las cuatro partes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYMpObbt2rs
#3:
#2 Más relacionados con el debate de 1979:
John Cleese, Michael Palin & Richard Burridge "Life of Brian" Debate Reflections (BBC Radio 4, 2013)
-----
Mervyn Stockwood (el entonces obispo de Southwark)
Stockwood appeared on the BBC chat show Friday Night, Saturday Morning on 9 November 1979, with Christian broadcaster Malcolm Muggeridge, arguing that the film Monty Python's Life of Brian was blasphemous. He told John Cleese and Michael Palin at the end of the discussion that they would "get [their] thirty pieces of silver": (minuto 6:55)
----
Malcolm Muggeridge
In 1979, along with Mervyn Stockwood, the Bishop of Southwark, Muggeridge appeared on the chat show Friday Night, Saturday Morning to discuss the film Life of Brian with Monty Python members John Cleese and Michael Palin. Although the Python members gave several reasons that they believed the film to be neither anti-Christian nor mocking the person of Jesus, both Muggeridge and the bishop insisted that they were being disingenuous and sophistical and insisted that the film "of course" was anti-Christian and blasphemous. Muggeridge further declared their film to be "buffoonery", "tenth-rate", "this miserable little film" and "this little squalid number". Furthermore, Muggeridge stated that the film "couldn't possibly destroy anyone's genuine faith"; in saying this, however, the Pythons were quick to point out the futility of criticising it so vitriolically in the first place, since Muggeridge did not think it was meaningful or impactful enough to affect anyone. According to Palin, Muggeridge arrived late and so missing the two scenes in which Jesus and Brian were distinguished as different people. This is however unlikely, considering that Muggeridge during the discussion made explicit reference to the one of these scenes (Sermon on the Mount), which begins in the 7th minute of the film. The discussion was moderated by Tim Rice, the lyricist for the musical Jesus Christ Superstar, which had also generated some controversy in Britain about a decade earlier over its depiction of Jesus.
The comedians later expressed disappointment in Muggeridge, whom all in Monty Python had previously respected as a satirist. Cleese said that his reputation had "plummeted" in his eyes, and Palin commented, "He was just being Muggeridge, preferring to have a very strong contrary opinion as opposed to none at all"
-----
's_Life_of_Brian Friday Night, Saturday Morning
On the edition of 9 November 1979, hosted by Tim Rice, a discussion was held about the then newly released film Monty Python's Life of Brian, which had been banned by many local councils and caused protests throughout the world with accusations that it was blasphemous. To argue in favour of this accusation were veteran broadcaster and noted Christian Malcolm Muggeridge, and Mervyn Stockwood (the then Bishop of Southwark). In defence of the film were two members of the Monty Python team, John Cleese and Michael Palin.
According to Monty Python - The Case Against, by Robert Hewison, the show "began affably enough, with Cleese and Palin talking on their own to their host, Tim Rice – himself the lyricist of Jesus Christ Superstar, which had also faced accusations of blasphemy a decade earlier. Hewison continues "but while a second clip from the film was being shown, Stockwood and Muggeridge were brought on to the set. The full effect of the entry of the Bishop in his sweeping purple cassock and chunky cross was missed by the television audience, who found him already seated beside a bronzed and gleaming Malcolm Muggeridge when the film excerpt ended. Rice explained that Stockwood and Muggeridge had seen the film earlier in the day and invited their comments. With that, the gloves were off."[6]
The debate quickly became heated and included the following exchange:
Muggeridge: "I started off by saying that this is such a tenth-rate film that I don't believe that it would disturb anybody's faith."
Palin: "Yes, I know you started with an open mind; I realise that."
The Pythons initially seemed shocked by the aggression of the attack, especially because all four had met before the show, when there had been no hint as to what was to come.
The Bishop made the point that without Jesus this film would not exist, and ignored the Pythons' protestations that the film was about the abuse of faith, not faith itself.
In his diaries, published in 2006, Michael Palin wrote of the Bishop:
"He began, with notes carefully hidden in his crotch, tucked down well out of camera range, to give a short sermon, addressed not to John or myself but to the audience. In the first three or four minutes he had brought in Nicolae Ceauşescu and Mao Tse-tung and not begun to make one point about the film. Then he began to turn to the movie. He accused us of making a mockery of the work of Mother Teresa, of being undergraduate and mentally unstable. He made these remarks with all the smug and patronising paraphernalia of the gallery-player, who believes that the audience will see he is right, because he is a bishop and we're not".[7]
Muggeridge complained about the ease with which the Pythons "were able to extract humour from the most solemn of mysteries". He said he was upset that this film was, to him, denigrating the one man who inspired every great artist, writer, composer, etc. Cleese was keen to point out that there were other religions, and that civilisation existed before Christ. Michael Palin says of this incident in the book The Pythons, edited by Bob McCabe, that when Muggeridge said "that Christianity had been responsible for more good in the world than any other force in history", Cleese said "what about the Spanish Inquisition?"
The studio audience appeared to be on the side of the Pythons throughout, especially when Cleese said, "four hundred years ago, we would have been burnt for this film. Now, I'm suggesting that we've made an advance."
At some points, the Pythons tried to control the audience, who, they felt, were showing inappropriate partisanship in their favour.
Cleese, defending the film, went on to say that it was about "closed systems of thought, whether they are political or theological or religious or whatever: systems by which, whatever evidence is given to a person, he merely adapts it, fits it into his ideology".
As the debate went on, the Pythons found it harder to be polite. According to Palin, the Bishop was "outrageously dismissing any points we made as 'rubbish' or 'unworthy of an educated man'".
Stockwood was particularly upset at the use of the crucifixion, forgetting the distinction between it as Christian symbol and its use as a traditional Roman punishment. The debate ended with the Bishop pointing at the Pythons and saying "you'll get your thirty pieces of silver".
Cleese has frequently said that he enjoyed the debate, because, he believed, the film was "completely intellectually defensible". However, after viewing the debate again in 2013 for BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Cleese said that it left him bored and he realised that there was no attempt at a proper discussion, and no attempt to find any common ground.
Palin told McCabe: "It turned out, after the show, that they'd missed the first fifteen minutes of the film, because they'd been having a nice lunch. John was brilliant in that show. I remember it used to be Douglas Adams's favourite bit of television ... He thought it was such a rivetting piece of TV, and it really is". Palin also claimed that, after the discussion, both his foes said "How pathetic, hopeless and meaningless and juvenile it was. Instead of there being any sort of division between us afterwards, they came up as though we'd all been 'showbiz' together, out doing an entertainment, with the Bishop saying 'That all seemed to go very well'. I hadn't realised they weren't being vindictive, they were just performing to the crowd."
Also backstage, according to Palin, he had met Raymond Johnston from the Nationwide Festival of Light, a prominent Christian group who had been campaigning to have Life of Brian banned.[8] Instead of aggression, though, Johnston was most complimentary to Palin, saying he had been embarrassed by the performance of the Bishop. Palin says "[Johnston] had found it quite clear that Brian and Jesus were separate people", and that the film was making some "very valid points about organised religions".
Looking back, Michael Palin recalled in The Guardian: "[w]e had done our homework, thinking we were going to get into quite a tough theological argument, but it turned out to be virtually a slanging match. We were very surprised by that. I don't get angry very often, but I got incandescent with rage at their attitude and the smugness of it". Cleese preferred to sum it all up by saying "I always felt we won that one by behaving better than the Christians".[8]
The programme and the events surrounding it were told in a Pythonesque fashion in the 2011 television film Holy Flying Circus, broadcast on BBC Four in October 2011.
After this debate, a parody of the discussion appeared on the satirical comedy show Not The Nine O'Clock News. Chaired by a host played by Pamela Stephenson (who herself would later appear as a guest on Friday Night, Saturday Morning), the parody discussion involved a bishop (played by Rowan Atkinson) defending his new film, General Synod's Life of Christ, which was accused of being "a thinly disguised and blasphemous attack on the members of Monty Python, men who are, today, still revered throughout the western world."
John Cleese, Michael Palin & Richard Burridge "Life of Brian" Debate Reflections (BBC Radio 4, 2013)
-----
Mervyn Stockwood (el entonces obispo de Southwark)
Stockwood appeared on the BBC chat show Friday Night, Saturday Morning on 9 November 1979, with Christian broadcaster Malcolm Muggeridge, arguing that the film Monty Python's Life of Brian was blasphemous. He told John Cleese and Michael Palin at the end of the discussion that they would "get [their] thirty pieces of silver": (minuto 6:55)
----
Malcolm Muggeridge
In 1979, along with Mervyn Stockwood, the Bishop of Southwark, Muggeridge appeared on the chat show Friday Night, Saturday Morning to discuss the film Life of Brian with Monty Python members John Cleese and Michael Palin. Although the Python members gave several reasons that they believed the film to be neither anti-Christian nor mocking the person of Jesus, both Muggeridge and the bishop insisted that they were being disingenuous and sophistical and insisted that the film "of course" was anti-Christian and blasphemous. Muggeridge further declared their film to be "buffoonery", "tenth-rate", "this miserable little film" and "this little squalid number". Furthermore, Muggeridge stated that the film "couldn't possibly destroy anyone's genuine faith"; in saying this, however, the Pythons were quick to point out the futility of criticising it so vitriolically in the first place, since Muggeridge did not think it was meaningful or impactful enough to affect anyone. According to Palin, Muggeridge arrived late and so missing the two scenes in which Jesus and Brian were distinguished as different people. This is however unlikely, considering that Muggeridge during the discussion made explicit reference to the one of these scenes (Sermon on the Mount), which begins in the 7th minute of the film. The discussion was moderated by Tim Rice, the lyricist for the musical Jesus Christ Superstar, which had also generated some controversy in Britain about a decade earlier over its depiction of Jesus.
The comedians later expressed disappointment in Muggeridge, whom all in Monty Python had previously respected as a satirist. Cleese said that his reputation had "plummeted" in his eyes, and Palin commented, "He was just being Muggeridge, preferring to have a very strong contrary opinion as opposed to none at all"
-----
's_Life_of_Brian Friday Night, Saturday Morning
On the edition of 9 November 1979, hosted by Tim Rice, a discussion was held about the then newly released film Monty Python's Life of Brian, which had been banned by many local councils and caused protests throughout the world with accusations that it was blasphemous. To argue in favour of this accusation were veteran broadcaster and noted Christian Malcolm Muggeridge, and Mervyn Stockwood (the then Bishop of Southwark). In defence of the film were two members of the Monty Python team, John Cleese and Michael Palin.
According to Monty Python - The Case Against, by Robert Hewison, the show "began affably enough, with Cleese and Palin talking on their own to their host, Tim Rice – himself the lyricist of Jesus Christ Superstar, which had also faced accusations of blasphemy a decade earlier. Hewison continues "but while a second clip from the film was being shown, Stockwood and Muggeridge were brought on to the set. The full effect of the entry of the Bishop in his sweeping purple cassock and chunky cross was missed by the television audience, who found him already seated beside a bronzed and gleaming Malcolm Muggeridge when the film excerpt ended. Rice explained that Stockwood and Muggeridge had seen the film earlier in the day and invited their comments. With that, the gloves were off."[6]
The debate quickly became heated and included the following exchange:
Muggeridge: "I started off by saying that this is such a tenth-rate film that I don't believe that it would disturb anybody's faith."
Palin: "Yes, I know you started with an open mind; I realise that."
The Pythons initially seemed shocked by the aggression of the attack, especially because all four had met before the show, when there had been no hint as to what was to come.
The Bishop made the point that without Jesus this film would not exist, and ignored the Pythons' protestations that the film was about the abuse of faith, not faith itself.
In his diaries, published in 2006, Michael Palin wrote of the Bishop:
"He began, with notes carefully hidden in his crotch, tucked down well out of camera range, to give a short sermon, addressed not to John or myself but to the audience. In the first three or four minutes he had brought in Nicolae Ceauşescu and Mao Tse-tung and not begun to make one point about the film. Then he began to turn to the movie. He accused us of making a mockery of the work of Mother Teresa, of being undergraduate and mentally unstable. He made these remarks with all the smug and patronising paraphernalia of the gallery-player, who believes that the audience will see he is right, because he is a bishop and we're not".[7]
Muggeridge complained about the ease with which the Pythons "were able to extract humour from the most solemn of mysteries". He said he was upset that this film was, to him, denigrating the one man who inspired every great artist, writer, composer, etc. Cleese was keen to point out that there were other religions, and that civilisation existed before Christ. Michael Palin says of this incident in the book The Pythons, edited by Bob McCabe, that when Muggeridge said "that Christianity had been responsible for more good in the world than any other force in history", Cleese said "what about the Spanish Inquisition?"
The studio audience appeared to be on the side of the Pythons throughout, especially when Cleese said, "four hundred years ago, we would have been burnt for this film. Now, I'm suggesting that we've made an advance."
At some points, the Pythons tried to control the audience, who, they felt, were showing inappropriate partisanship in their favour.
Cleese, defending the film, went on to say that it was about "closed systems of thought, whether they are political or theological or religious or whatever: systems by which, whatever evidence is given to a person, he merely adapts it, fits it into his ideology".
As the debate went on, the Pythons found it harder to be polite. According to Palin, the Bishop was "outrageously dismissing any points we made as 'rubbish' or 'unworthy of an educated man'".
Stockwood was particularly upset at the use of the crucifixion, forgetting the distinction between it as Christian symbol and its use as a traditional Roman punishment. The debate ended with the Bishop pointing at the Pythons and saying "you'll get your thirty pieces of silver".
Cleese has frequently said that he enjoyed the debate, because, he believed, the film was "completely intellectually defensible". However, after viewing the debate again in 2013 for BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Cleese said that it left him bored and he realised that there was no attempt at a proper discussion, and no attempt to find any common ground.
Palin told McCabe: "It turned out, after the show, that they'd missed the first fifteen minutes of the film, because they'd been having a nice lunch. John was brilliant in that show. I remember it used to be Douglas Adams's favourite bit of television ... He thought it was such a rivetting piece of TV, and it really is". Palin also claimed that, after the discussion, both his foes said "How pathetic, hopeless and meaningless and juvenile it was. Instead of there being any sort of division between us afterwards, they came up as though we'd all been 'showbiz' together, out doing an entertainment, with the Bishop saying 'That all seemed to go very well'. I hadn't realised they weren't being vindictive, they were just performing to the crowd."
Also backstage, according to Palin, he had met Raymond Johnston from the Nationwide Festival of Light, a prominent Christian group who had been campaigning to have Life of Brian banned.[8] Instead of aggression, though, Johnston was most complimentary to Palin, saying he had been embarrassed by the performance of the Bishop. Palin says "[Johnston] had found it quite clear that Brian and Jesus were separate people", and that the film was making some "very valid points about organised religions".
Looking back, Michael Palin recalled in The Guardian: "[w]e had done our homework, thinking we were going to get into quite a tough theological argument, but it turned out to be virtually a slanging match. We were very surprised by that. I don't get angry very often, but I got incandescent with rage at their attitude and the smugness of it". Cleese preferred to sum it all up by saying "I always felt we won that one by behaving better than the Christians".[8]
The programme and the events surrounding it were told in a Pythonesque fashion in the 2011 television film Holy Flying Circus, broadcast on BBC Four in October 2011.
After this debate, a parody of the discussion appeared on the satirical comedy show Not The Nine O'Clock News. Chaired by a host played by Pamela Stephenson (who herself would later appear as a guest on Friday Night, Saturday Morning), the parody discussion involved a bishop (played by Rowan Atkinson) defending his new film, General Synod's Life of Christ, which was accused of being "a thinly disguised and blasphemous attack on the members of Monty Python, men who are, today, still revered throughout the western world."
Comentarios
El vídeo del debate está dividido en cuatro partes:
1ª:
2ª:
3ª:
4ª:
-----
Otro usuario juntó las cuatro partes:
#1 La de mierda que les llovió a los Python por aquella película...
¡Y mira que es magistral!
Relacionado:
John Cleese Talks Religion and the 'Life of Brian' | The Dick Cavett Show (Diciembre 1979):
----
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Life_of_Brian#Release
Life of Brian opened on 17 August 1979 in five North American theatres and grossed US$140,034 ($28,007 per screen) in its opening weekend. Its total gross was $19,398,164. It was the highest grossing British film in North America that year. Released on 8 November 1979 in the UK.
------
Welease Bwian (2003, The Guardian): https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2003/mar/28/artsfeatures1
Life of Brian received its world premiere in New York on August 17 1979, the same week as Apocalypse Now and The Muppet Movie.
[..]
Unperturbed, the Festival of Light, supported by the Church of England Board for Social Responsibility, began circulating anti-Brian literature and even encouraged their Christian members to pray for the film's downfall.
With protests almost inevitable, distributors CIC moved cautiously, deciding to launch Brian in just one London cinema, waiting until after the religiously sensitive Christmas period to put it out on general release.
So Life of Brian opened exclusively at the Plaza, Lower Regent Street, on November 8 1979 and, in spite of hymn-singing demonstrators outside, went on to break box-office records, raking in £40,000 in its first week, smashing the previous house record set by Jaws.
#2 Más relacionados con el debate de 1979:
John Cleese, Michael Palin & Richard Burridge "Life of Brian" Debate Reflections (BBC Radio 4, 2013)
-----
Mervyn Stockwood (el entonces obispo de Southwark)
Stockwood appeared on the BBC chat show Friday Night, Saturday Morning on 9 November 1979, with Christian broadcaster Malcolm Muggeridge, arguing that the film Monty Python's Life of Brian was blasphemous. He told John Cleese and Michael Palin at the end of the discussion that they would "get [their] thirty pieces of silver": (minuto 6:55)
----
Malcolm Muggeridge
In 1979, along with Mervyn Stockwood, the Bishop of Southwark, Muggeridge appeared on the chat show Friday Night, Saturday Morning to discuss the film Life of Brian with Monty Python members John Cleese and Michael Palin. Although the Python members gave several reasons that they believed the film to be neither anti-Christian nor mocking the person of Jesus, both Muggeridge and the bishop insisted that they were being disingenuous and sophistical and insisted that the film "of course" was anti-Christian and blasphemous. Muggeridge further declared their film to be "buffoonery", "tenth-rate", "this miserable little film" and "this little squalid number". Furthermore, Muggeridge stated that the film "couldn't possibly destroy anyone's genuine faith"; in saying this, however, the Pythons were quick to point out the futility of criticising it so vitriolically in the first place, since Muggeridge did not think it was meaningful or impactful enough to affect anyone. According to Palin, Muggeridge arrived late and so missing the two scenes in which Jesus and Brian were distinguished as different people. This is however unlikely, considering that Muggeridge during the discussion made explicit reference to the one of these scenes (Sermon on the Mount), which begins in the 7th minute of the film. The discussion was moderated by Tim Rice, the lyricist for the musical Jesus Christ Superstar, which had also generated some controversy in Britain about a decade earlier over its depiction of Jesus.
The comedians later expressed disappointment in Muggeridge, whom all in Monty Python had previously respected as a satirist. Cleese said that his reputation had "plummeted" in his eyes, and Palin commented, "He was just being Muggeridge, preferring to have a very strong contrary opinion as opposed to none at all"
-----
's_Life_of_Brian Friday Night, Saturday Morning
On the edition of 9 November 1979, hosted by Tim Rice, a discussion was held about the then newly released film Monty Python's Life of Brian, which had been banned by many local councils and caused protests throughout the world with accusations that it was blasphemous. To argue in favour of this accusation were veteran broadcaster and noted Christian Malcolm Muggeridge, and Mervyn Stockwood (the then Bishop of Southwark). In defence of the film were two members of the Monty Python team, John Cleese and Michael Palin.
According to Monty Python - The Case Against, by Robert Hewison, the show "began affably enough, with Cleese and Palin talking on their own to their host, Tim Rice – himself the lyricist of Jesus Christ Superstar, which had also faced accusations of blasphemy a decade earlier. Hewison continues "but while a second clip from the film was being shown, Stockwood and Muggeridge were brought on to the set. The full effect of the entry of the Bishop in his sweeping purple cassock and chunky cross was missed by the television audience, who found him already seated beside a bronzed and gleaming Malcolm Muggeridge when the film excerpt ended. Rice explained that Stockwood and Muggeridge had seen the film earlier in the day and invited their comments. With that, the gloves were off."[6]
The debate quickly became heated and included the following exchange:
Muggeridge: "I started off by saying that this is such a tenth-rate film that I don't believe that it would disturb anybody's faith."
Palin: "Yes, I know you started with an open mind; I realise that."
The Pythons initially seemed shocked by the aggression of the attack, especially because all four had met before the show, when there had been no hint as to what was to come.
The Bishop made the point that without Jesus this film would not exist, and ignored the Pythons' protestations that the film was about the abuse of faith, not faith itself.
In his diaries, published in 2006, Michael Palin wrote of the Bishop:
"He began, with notes carefully hidden in his crotch, tucked down well out of camera range, to give a short sermon, addressed not to John or myself but to the audience. In the first three or four minutes he had brought in Nicolae Ceauşescu and Mao Tse-tung and not begun to make one point about the film. Then he began to turn to the movie. He accused us of making a mockery of the work of Mother Teresa, of being undergraduate and mentally unstable. He made these remarks with all the smug and patronising paraphernalia of the gallery-player, who believes that the audience will see he is right, because he is a bishop and we're not".[7]
Muggeridge complained about the ease with which the Pythons "were able to extract humour from the most solemn of mysteries". He said he was upset that this film was, to him, denigrating the one man who inspired every great artist, writer, composer, etc. Cleese was keen to point out that there were other religions, and that civilisation existed before Christ. Michael Palin says of this incident in the book The Pythons, edited by Bob McCabe, that when Muggeridge said "that Christianity had been responsible for more good in the world than any other force in history", Cleese said "what about the Spanish Inquisition?"
The studio audience appeared to be on the side of the Pythons throughout, especially when Cleese said, "four hundred years ago, we would have been burnt for this film. Now, I'm suggesting that we've made an advance."
At some points, the Pythons tried to control the audience, who, they felt, were showing inappropriate partisanship in their favour.
Cleese, defending the film, went on to say that it was about "closed systems of thought, whether they are political or theological or religious or whatever: systems by which, whatever evidence is given to a person, he merely adapts it, fits it into his ideology".
As the debate went on, the Pythons found it harder to be polite. According to Palin, the Bishop was "outrageously dismissing any points we made as 'rubbish' or 'unworthy of an educated man'".
Stockwood was particularly upset at the use of the crucifixion, forgetting the distinction between it as Christian symbol and its use as a traditional Roman punishment. The debate ended with the Bishop pointing at the Pythons and saying "you'll get your thirty pieces of silver".
Cleese has frequently said that he enjoyed the debate, because, he believed, the film was "completely intellectually defensible". However, after viewing the debate again in 2013 for BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Cleese said that it left him bored and he realised that there was no attempt at a proper discussion, and no attempt to find any common ground.
Palin told McCabe: "It turned out, after the show, that they'd missed the first fifteen minutes of the film, because they'd been having a nice lunch. John was brilliant in that show. I remember it used to be Douglas Adams's favourite bit of television ... He thought it was such a rivetting piece of TV, and it really is". Palin also claimed that, after the discussion, both his foes said "How pathetic, hopeless and meaningless and juvenile it was. Instead of there being any sort of division between us afterwards, they came up as though we'd all been 'showbiz' together, out doing an entertainment, with the Bishop saying 'That all seemed to go very well'. I hadn't realised they weren't being vindictive, they were just performing to the crowd."
Also backstage, according to Palin, he had met Raymond Johnston from the Nationwide Festival of Light, a prominent Christian group who had been campaigning to have Life of Brian banned.[8] Instead of aggression, though, Johnston was most complimentary to Palin, saying he had been embarrassed by the performance of the Bishop. Palin says "[Johnston] had found it quite clear that Brian and Jesus were separate people", and that the film was making some "very valid points about organised religions".
Looking back, Michael Palin recalled in The Guardian: "[w]e had done our homework, thinking we were going to get into quite a tough theological argument, but it turned out to be virtually a slanging match. We were very surprised by that. I don't get angry very often, but I got incandescent with rage at their attitude and the smugness of it". Cleese preferred to sum it all up by saying "I always felt we won that one by behaving better than the Christians".[8]
The programme and the events surrounding it were told in a Pythonesque fashion in the 2011 television film Holy Flying Circus, broadcast on BBC Four in October 2011.
After this debate, a parody of the discussion appeared on the satirical comedy show Not The Nine O'Clock News. Chaired by a host played by Pamela Stephenson (who herself would later appear as a guest on Friday Night, Saturday Morning), the parody discussion involved a bishop (played by Rowan Atkinson) defending his new film, General Synod's Life of Christ, which was accused of being "a thinly disguised and blasphemous attack on the members of Monty Python, men who are, today, still revered throughout the western world."
Debate, debate lo que se dice debate… yo veo ahí unos colegas de tertulia tomando té
#4 Porque tienen clase, ahora los debates son lo de Telecinco o Lasexta
#4 Es que eso es un debate. Los griteríos a los que estamos acostumbrados son otra cosa.
Cleese y Palin se educaron en Cambridge y Oxford, además de haber ido a muy buenos colegios donde les dan una formación de altísimo nivel. De ahí que crearan sketchs tan brillantes como el de “Romanus eunt domus”. No veo a
muchos humoristas capaces de algo tan fino, con ese punto de absurdez, y a la vez tan gracioso.
#5 Que buen gag el de las clases de latín.
#8, es que una cosa es ser un vándalo y otra un vándalo inculto. ¡Acabáramos!
Cleese fue alumno, y luego profesor de Latin, en St Peter's Preparatory School, no sé si la broma (además, protagonizada por Cleese) es una referencia a sus años como profesor o a sus años como alumno.
pero su padre encontraba el apellido ridículo y se lo cambió a Cleese al alistarse. Bueno, si los Hannover se cambiaron el apellido a Saxe-Coburg-Gotha y, luego, a Windsor porque les avergonzaba ser alemanes en Reino Unido, ¿por qué no cambiarse el apellido de Cheese a Cleese?
P.D.: Menudos profesores de Latin debieron tener
P.P.D.: Por cierto, buscando a qué instituto fue me acabo de enterar de que John Cleese debería haber sido, en realidad ... ¡John Cheese!
#16 en realidad no fue por iniciativa propia sino del Gobierno Inglés cuando estallo la IGM porque no tenía sentido enfrentarse a los alemanes teniendo un gobernante alemán
#20, eso fue lo de Windsor, y más que por no tener sentido fue porque su primo Nikolai fue depuesto por los comunistas (y asesinado junto a toda su familia) y la fuerte germanofobia que se había instalado en la sociedad británica le hizo temer por su monarquía, así que decidió que good riddance. Antes de eso se habían cambiado de Hannover a Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.
Dicen que su primo Wilhelm, al enterarse, dijo jocosamente en referencia a una obra de Shakespeare, The Merry Wives of Windsor, que tenía pensado ver la obra The Merry Wives of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha
Curiosamente, en el siglo XVIII, los Romanov se emparejaron con alemanes cuando la emperatriz Yelisaveta trajo a su sobrino Peter Gottorp-Holstein (su hermana se había casado con un alemán) para nombrarle heredero, y le casó con otra alemana, Sophia von Anhalt-Zerbst. Sin embargo, las sucesivas generaciones no se hicieron llamar Gottorp-Holstein-Romanov sino solo Romanov, de modo que la aristocracia rusa era en realidad alemana pero reinaba con nombre de casa real pretendidamente ruso, cuando el linaje Romanov estaba más que diluido.
En cualquier caso, estuvo muy mal que se cambiase el padre de John el apellido de Cheese a Cleese, tendría que haber sido más ocurrente y haberse puesto Ashdown-Foresters, Beacon-Fell, Berkswell, Buxton-Blue, Parlick-Fell o Stilton
#8 Y ahora escríbelo cien veces. Si no está listo al amanecer, te corto los cojones.
#5 Yo tengo una camiseta con ese texto corregido.
La gente me mira raro en general cuando la llevo puesta...
#5 A ver, es que Cleese era profesor de latín, no tiene tanto que ver con ir a Oxford o Cambridge.
#15 Algo tiene que ver. A esas universidades no se entra sin tener un nivel muy alto. También fue al Clifton College, el cual conozco de primera mano, ya que tengo amigos que llevan a sus hijos ahí, y te puedo asegurar que el nivel educativo es algo que en España directamente no existe (al menos en Valencia, no sé si en Madrid o Barcelona hay colegios elitistas de ese tipo).
#27 A esas universidades se entra con pasta. La pasta lo puede todo.
#28 No es así exactamente. Es cierto que en esas universidades entran mayoritariamente estudiantes de colegios privados. He vivido muchos años en Reino Unido como para haberme dado cuenta de la brecha social tan grande que hay. No es que compren su entrada en “Oxbridge”, sino que reciben una educación claramente superior durante toda su vida. Por eso, a igualdad de capacidades intelectuales, el rico tiene más papeletas para entrar.
Había leído "el entonces obispo de South Park"
#6, no, el obispo de Southwark era Mervyn Stockwood.
El obispo de South Park es Eric Cartman.
El traje del presentador, lo mejor de la entrevista
La película que más me ha divertido en mi vida. Es genial
#10 Los caballeros de la Mesa Cuadrada (Monty Python and the Holy Grial) es más irregular, pero tiene escenas descacharrantes.
#11 pero da la sensación de inacabada por lo menos para mí pese al final que lo explica
#21 una trolleada más de los Monty Python y así además se ahorraron los costes de la batalla final contra los franceses
1979 y ya algunos estaban con el "con Mahoma no os atrevéis".
¡DISIDENTES!
Y aquí como parodia de esta entrevista, un sketch en el que Rowan Atkinson interpreta a un obispo que hizo una película sobre la vida de Jesús en una sociedad británica que sigue mayoritariamente la religión Pythónica:
#23 Por $deity, esto es oro puro.
Delapluma
No te lo pierdas,
#29 El detalle de decorar el set como una jungla (por las decenas de plantas de la entrevista original), con serpiente y todo, es también fino.
Dios! Esto es oro puro. No hay ningún video con subtitulos en español? (aparte de los que crea youtube que es para marcianos). Me gustaría pasárselo a amigos que no hablan inglés.