Monty Python's and Now for Something Completely Different

The film itself contains some well written pieces, however it is more like a preview or 'mix tape' of some Monty Python sketches. I feel that the acting (though good),comparatively lacked the energy and feeling of spontaneity given in the original versions of the sketches which were performed on T.V. There were also small changes to the dialogue of the sketches that (though maybe just because I've seen the original sketches so many times), did not fit as well. The whole movie didn't tie together as well as the T.V episodes did. I can remember watching the movie in 2003 when I was seven or eight, it was my first introduction to Monty Python and I found it hilarious, but since watching their other work I have come to see this movie as a lower-quality version. Since this movie is simply strung together classic sketches of Monty Python, I recommend simply watching the episodes or their other movies instead. This was probably their worst work.

Monty Python used this collection of sketches from their first and second TV series (re-packaged and staged again) to break into the American market. A gamble, but a successful one.

All the greats are here – Parrot Sketch, Dirty Fork, Hell's Grannies, Fresh Fruit Self Defence, Marriage Guidance – and more besides. The animated links, specially created for the movie, are funny and well put-together: and new versions of Killer Cars and the story of the Spot are excellent. In many cases the film versions of the sketches outshine those in the TV series and are more memorable, particularly those which first appeared in series 1.

This is a very good introduction to the team and a strong reminder of their early work for the BBC.

This is disappointing.

I recall eagerly watching these skits on TeeVee. The shows were live, and the comedy edgy. These guys had gas and were ready to take risks. Energy.

This is a relatively overproduced version of some of those skits, interlaced with many of Terry Gilliam's comic animations.

Well, I think Gilliam has a hard time finding a niche that fits mine. Not a one of his bits was amusing to me then or now. The idea behind the python humor generally is the ability to take one small comic twist (mean grannies, dead parrot) and elaborate with unbounded silliness, often into a different context. Added is the "fold" that they know they are being silly and actively acknowledge it while turning up the dial. There is added into this movie version, for instance, a military narrator who comments on the silly factor.

Gilliam's approach is more a matter of visual oddity rather than silliness. He attempts visual puns via twisted realities, shaped by his animation technology. This worked for South Park because they were able to weave comic narrative on the cutouts. Gilliam — here and in his later movies — relies on the odd visual first. All else is secondary.

The real Pythonistas are dull here. There is no other way to say it. Skits that in the show are effective (Nudge nudge, Dead parrot, Lumberjack) were so because they had an edge. Here, they are stale leftovers.

The only really good bit was something invented for the film, taking advantage of the larger palette: the "Upper Class Twit of the Year" contest. You can see that this has the energy of a new birth on it, not rote reperformance.

Missing from this collection is their classic bit where someone goes to the argument department.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Do we really have to grade this among the other Pythons films, as best, worst or anything? Personally I don't feel like to. It's surely not my best, but its got some fine characteristics. It's pure early Pythons.

Actually it's no film, it's a non-stop trip of absurd humour, featuring shorts, lots of animations, silly commentary, politically incorrect, 100% English jokes, some of which are REALLY silly - the difference here is that we have a commentary within the film which blames of the film which really has taken a wrong turn and has become quite silly. Self parody, originality and sarcasm. And embarrassment, of course!

About the animations: Python animations (made by the masterman Terry Gilliam) are awesome. No insult here, I really enjoyed the film, even the silliest bits, but the animations are so good that they're the best in this one, as far as I am concerned. So the animations are mixed and edited within managing to create a genuine Python style.

Those not familiar with Pythons, I recommend to start over with LIFE OF BRYAN or HOLY GRAIL. Actually its quite 'difficult' humour but give it a try if you like something different!

This film really didn't need to be made - but at the time, after two excellent TV series, the Pythons were under pressure to produce a big-screen version for wider distribution.

Thus a number of sketches from the first two series were rewritten, tightened up, and re-enacted, entirely on film. The actual new material is probably around 2% of the script, and I hold the view that many of the sketches were inferior to their TV versions, and much of the better series 1 and 2 stuff (Spanish Inquisition, Silly Walks etc.) didn't even make it to ANFSCD for some reason.

It's interesting to watch the differences in production and compare this material to how it was originally done, and the new devices for linking one sketch to the next keep you on your toes.

But ultimately if you want to watch early python sketches, the TV versions are more rewarding.