Muggerridge is right (20-30 years ahead of his time) in that mocking Mohammed would create a "hullaballoo," which is a euphemism for a call for your death. Christians should turn the other cheek and if they do not, then they are condemned; you cannot say the same to a Hindu, Moslem, or Jew. As for Cleves' comment, intelligence rates lower than humility, love, and forebearance.
@andrjsh You're painting with rather a broad brush there but for argument's sake let's say you're right. So what? If making fun of Muhammed gives rise to death threats, what does that have to do with this debate? Are you saying Christians should do the same? Or that that's reason not to question the Church?
I don't see the relevance. It's just another distraction from the actual topic being discussed.
@megamarsvin Thanks for your reply. To flesh out my point: if someone feels that one can "get away with" mocking someone else, esp. a target that will not fight back, then, sadly, one may very well do it. It is part of the instinct to bully. To say it more bluntly: people who mock others are bullies, although they hide their contempt and intellectual violence under "criticism" or "honest discussion." (I am steeling myself for the cybersnot who will tell me that I misspelled "Cleese.")
@andrjsh I see it completely in reverse. For many hundreds of years the Catholic church "bullied" everyone who thought differently, and not just with jokes but with death and torture. Now the shoe is on the other foot and suddenly they cry foul if they are not handled with kid gloves, suddenly they play the victim.
Violence may stifle criticism, but wouldn't you agree that's a bad thing? If you're open to discussion you have to accept people may say things you don't want to hear.
@megamarsvin Thanks for writing back. I agree that the Church used "maternal persuasion" (no different, in its exterior aspect, than established Judaism, Zoroastrianism, or Islam), but two wrongs do not make a right. That is the whole point of Christianity, that at some point you stop hitting each other. I would say that criticism, critique, and debate are in one camp, while mockery & bullying are in another. The problem in any discussion is identifying the motives of the parties involved.
@andrjsh Agreed, but I have to say to see this film as a mockery of Jesus Christ is to miss the point entirely. As Eric said, you can't really make a funny film about Christ because there's little you can mock about either his life or his teachings.
Instead the film focuses on the origins of organized religion and how people misinterpret basically good messages (the sermon on the mound scene is a great example.) This it does mock but always intelligently and never maliciously.
So, Michael makes this brilliant point-- in all humility, like he says (2 min mark), and the so-called bishop slams him down with religiosity. Please don't assume this "bishop" speaks for Christianity. His mouth says one thing, but his heart is clearly revealed as pompous and false.
Part Quote "any body who might dredge up this miserable little film, and it's quite possible that it might as a piece of social history..."Malcolm Muggeridge.
How wrong he was to assume it would be nothing more than a show piece of the late 70's. When in fact it is known throughout the world as a cult classic and has been seen by millions of people whom have laughed heartily, enjoyed themselves and like me quoted many many lines from it and then laughed once again.
John and Michael are just FANTASTIC here. Calm and collected they sit back and let these two UTTER idiots condemn themselves with their own mouths. (John, I think in a documentary about The Life of Brain, many years later said that he was actually quite sorry for them.) Malcom and the Bishop TOTALLY play to the crowd with no substance to anything they say. John and Michael have all the best thought out points. The other two have NOTHING.
@vanillawild In any case, Life of Brian (or the miserable little Film as Muggeridge called it) is now consistantly voted the number 1 best Comedy film in the World.
The Life of Brian isn't about Christ at all. It's about mindless robots who do not question their own belief systems. Such as Stockwood and Muggeridge. Why do they keep talking about a 14 year old? I thought the film had an R rating? But Cleese is right about the stupidity of Christendom.
If these "experts" would actually research the death methods of the Romans and Jews they would understand that he was killed for political reasons. In addition, he exposed the lies of their religious leaders.
i have never heard of malcom muggeridge. i was not aware of his existence at all.
i have however heard of monty python. they are known as some of the greatest comedians of all time and their films are still very much watched today. So how can he say that they weren't some of the greatest minds or greatest artists?
This is a filibuster, I'd love to have heard more questions from Cleese and Palin. Its not like their the only ones who have explaining to do. I think that the final question behind all this is - does being offended mean you get special treatment from society, special previlege over others? This question isnt going away anytime soon, but we need to answer it quickly.
"May I make a point that is rather interesting"? NO. You can make a point and TRY to make it interesting but you FAILED.
"People MIGHT dredge up this film"??? I have it on video, on DVD and special collector's edition DVD and I don't think that I have a single friend who doesn't know almost the entire script by heart.
There is nothing in that squalid little tenth rate book they call the Bible that will ever make me change my mind.
The most gratifying thing about this debate is knowing that time has vindicated the Pythons and not the bishop or Muggeridge. As dismissive as they are of the film, it now reflects modern religious thought far more than their pronouncements.
Today's so-called god is pretty much the same as Zeus for ancient Romans. Religion to an astheist is nothing but a fairytale. Faith is OK, but religion is evil. Against common sense.
@p796 The Abrahamic desert God evolved from Zeus and other deities the same way Jesus' stories are plagiarized from older "prophets" and cult leaders.
Faith is belief without evidence and very dangerous because it promotes people to dismiss logical reasoning and empirical evidence and replaces it with projection, delusion and wish thinking.
It makes me want to throw a brick at the computer. How can't they understand that the film isn't about Jesus? Have they even seen it? Because if they have they weren't paying much attention or something.
@ziggiette They arrived 15 minutes late to see a screening of the film prior to the debate, missing the establishing scenes demonstrating that Brian and Jesus were two different characters, and hence contended that it was a send-up of Christ himself.
Malcolm Muggeridge decided to convert to Catholicism at 79, he'd only JUST become a Christian 10 years prior to this after being a heavy smoker, drinker and womanizer. So... are we really going to take this old man's opinion seriously? To me, he sounds like a scared old fool who realized the error of his ways after reflecting on his wrongdoings and felt the only way to be 'saved' was to believe in a fairy tale.
Lovely to see how the world has moved on. Nobody would dream of wheeling a couple of berks like this for a prime time talk show now, they are banished to dark corners of niche programming.
@gabiotta I'm afraid to say that isn't the case here in Ireland. Even in the last twelve months I've seen an old nun gassing on and on about visions. She was allowed to talk uninterrupted for about twenty minutes, I've never seen any other guest given that sort of airtime on the show. This was on The Late Late Show, Irelands most popular talk show. The host (Ryan Tubridy) and the audience lapped it up. It was really quite shocking.
A great "debate"-- interview, really-- by Woody Allen, of Billy Graham is on YouTube somewhere. One very relig guy, one not-so relig. guy. Both are funny, gentle and kind with each other. Too bad kindness wasn't in Muggeridge's arsenal. He behaved like an asshole in this.
Why did they not stress the point that the film does not focus on Jesus himself and only partially focuses on religion? Much more focus is put on the nature of Romans and Hebrews living at that time. The only religious part of the film are the people mistaking Brian for the messiah. Other than that there is noting. Brian wasn't even killed for any religious reasons he was killed for being a rebel.
Personally, I love Life of Brian and these Stockwood and Muggeridge are acting childish and with limited information - for example, they arrived late at the screening of the film and so they did not see the crucial first scenes which establish the fact that Jesus and Brian are differenr people so therefore their argument is void. End of.
so thrs no problem to take young children to the church or tell them about santa claus or the easter bunny but god forbid if we take them to watch the film...what a load of bollocks!
@danielvanraders I wouldn't say he was an idiot, but he certainly was Mis-Guided. Some would say he was a Hypocrite. Apparently he was quite a heavy drinker and Womanizer in his Time.
@thexalon It was Aristophanes who ridiculed Socrates - Aristophanes was a masterful satyrist. One hour's detention and write it out fifty times, thexalon.
@thexalon Indeed. In fact, Greek theatre often made fun of famous people. There was one incident where the actors appeared in front of him wearing a mask of his face.
@thexalon ("wouldn't make Socrates appear as a clown") Nor did he remember Cleese quoting Brian saying "Make up your own mind", which is about the most socratic thing I've heard today.
@thexalon Not mention the last hing Socrates said at his execution a joke. His studnets ask how they should bury him. He says, "Any way, you want to, if you can catch me," (suggesting his rue self will be set free by death.
The film SHOULD have been to ridicule Christianity. The way it is practiced, the Bible, the religious dogma. The whole lot needs to be criticized and yes, ridiculed.
@TwoTube2 Yes, these two reactionary and really incredibly dull guys have not got a leg to stand on. The Python film is a comedy classic that hits the damn archaic and frankly immoral religious dogma in all the right places.
Cleese makes a good point about progress being achieved by the mere fact that such a film, no matter how lightweight and throwaway, can be made and shown without ecclesiastical retribution. A whole gamut of (intelligently crafted)films should be made on Mohammed giving a wry twist on his life and the Islamic faith to put this rival or coequal religious, historical and social phenomenon into greater perspective as well. The reaction and debate they would stimulate would be healthy.
@Anglican08 Go and read what the definition of argumentum ad hominem is. I didn't say that his position is incorrect because he's a moron, I just said that he's a moron. No ad hominem here. :)
Also, the failed comedian says that all great artists have been inspired by christ, forgetting, as John Cleese/Cheese points out, all the arab artwork, Buddhist artwork, african artwork ect.
This debate is almost impossible to watch. I would like to point out to anyone watching who supports the bishop and his comedic sidekick that since this interview death has been ridiculed on a very successful children's educational sketch show, Horrible Histories. To say what the bishop keeps repeating that you wouldn't make a film about the death of such and such a person is rubbish. Death can be funny.
Pretty interesting to watch they discussing about a negative impact over a 14 years old boy that the film would may cause. I'm actually saw the movie when I was 14 and the first thing that came into my mind when I was seeing tue crucifiction scene was what a genius and wonderful way to deal with something mysterious and scare as death. I felt in peace with myself and my day was better after watched such a funny movie.
Stockwood again scores a hit in saying that the film took the figure of Christ & reduced him to a hapless clown & a void, which historically or artistically (ignoring religiously) was an easy option for a shallow work of art trying to address a huge subject, i.e. ridiculing religious sentiment.
Palin coming out with the student agitprop stuff on the hypocrisy of the church establishment in contemporary society is pretty shallow & beside the point
@kcirdrab Erm, kcidrab, you do realize that the figure of Christ is only seen at the start and is referred as "a bloody do-gooder" by an ungrateful ex-leper, hence, Life of Brian had nothing to do with Jesus right? You know, showing that Brian and Jesus are two different characters right? RIGHT?! You know, I'd question your critical and viewing skills if you missed that. Or are you one of those clowns seen above who go for patronizing jibes instead of proper debate?
@kcirdrab Whether or not Brian is a metaphor for Christ is surely an irrelevance; the central theme of the film is not to ridicule Christ himself, not even to ridicule Christianity - the point is to convey the point that throughout history, people have followed power unquestioningly (not just religion) - it is ridiculing the people that follow religion blindly, not the ideals or the personalities within the religion
@cheesyhtfc Agreed, if Cleese & Palin had said that here no problem, but they didn't, they were squirming & lying about it all thru this debate instead of being honest
@kcirdrab That is exactly what John says. It's Muggeridge that twists it to say that the film is ridiculing faith/trying to convert people. John isn't saying that; he's saying that the film is ridiculing people who do not critically analyse the faith that they so blindly follow. It's the others who are clearly not listening to John's response and are just repeating what they think, irrespective of what John is saying. Ironically, that is exactly the behaviour that the film ridicules...
As a Christian myself, I can say that these two religious men do in fact seem quite closed minded themselves, and are clearly making themselves the "bad guys" in this debate.
In the future? Well 32 years later, I guess that's me :P I love monty python, they're brilliant, the life of brian is brilliant, priests need to shut up and get over this satire!
"how dare you make accusations without evidence" Oh the fucking irony. The sad thing is, 30 years later and Religious people still go on like this.
BagOfGloo 13 hours ago
400 hundred years ago we would have been burnt for this film. I'm suggesting we've made an advance.
0ddc1 3 days ago
Muggerridge is right (20-30 years ahead of his time) in that mocking Mohammed would create a "hullaballoo," which is a euphemism for a call for your death. Christians should turn the other cheek and if they do not, then they are condemned; you cannot say the same to a Hindu, Moslem, or Jew. As for Cleves' comment, intelligence rates lower than humility, love, and forebearance.
andrjsh 4 days ago
@andrjsh You're painting with rather a broad brush there but for argument's sake let's say you're right. So what? If making fun of Muhammed gives rise to death threats, what does that have to do with this debate? Are you saying Christians should do the same? Or that that's reason not to question the Church?
I don't see the relevance. It's just another distraction from the actual topic being discussed.
megamarsvin 2 days ago
@megamarsvin Thanks for your reply. To flesh out my point: if someone feels that one can "get away with" mocking someone else, esp. a target that will not fight back, then, sadly, one may very well do it. It is part of the instinct to bully. To say it more bluntly: people who mock others are bullies, although they hide their contempt and intellectual violence under "criticism" or "honest discussion." (I am steeling myself for the cybersnot who will tell me that I misspelled "Cleese.")
andrjsh 2 days ago
@andrjsh I see it completely in reverse. For many hundreds of years the Catholic church "bullied" everyone who thought differently, and not just with jokes but with death and torture. Now the shoe is on the other foot and suddenly they cry foul if they are not handled with kid gloves, suddenly they play the victim.
Violence may stifle criticism, but wouldn't you agree that's a bad thing? If you're open to discussion you have to accept people may say things you don't want to hear.
megamarsvin 1 day ago
@megamarsvin Thanks for writing back. I agree that the Church used "maternal persuasion" (no different, in its exterior aspect, than established Judaism, Zoroastrianism, or Islam), but two wrongs do not make a right. That is the whole point of Christianity, that at some point you stop hitting each other. I would say that criticism, critique, and debate are in one camp, while mockery & bullying are in another. The problem in any discussion is identifying the motives of the parties involved.
andrjsh 1 day ago
@andrjsh Agreed, but I have to say to see this film as a mockery of Jesus Christ is to miss the point entirely. As Eric said, you can't really make a funny film about Christ because there's little you can mock about either his life or his teachings.
Instead the film focuses on the origins of organized religion and how people misinterpret basically good messages (the sermon on the mound scene is a great example.) This it does mock but always intelligently and never maliciously.
megamarsvin 1 day ago
i have watched the life of brian countless times and never once did i relate it to Jesus and have never related it to the 'incarnation'
TheSplendidMrHaza22 4 days ago
Wow last minute piss me off. What the guy said is BULLSHIT >:[
devxc 5 days ago
So, Michael makes this brilliant point-- in all humility, like he says (2 min mark), and the so-called bishop slams him down with religiosity. Please don't assume this "bishop" speaks for Christianity. His mouth says one thing, but his heart is clearly revealed as pompous and false.
frithar 6 days ago
"it's not a very funny building though"
"....it has gargoyles on it"
maxwheeler92 1 week ago
Monty Python 1, Religion 0.
Cgreene159 1 week ago 3
Comedy should have no boundaries. Religion should.
Somai82 1 week ago 4
Part Quote "any body who might dredge up this miserable little film, and it's quite possible that it might as a piece of social history..."Malcolm Muggeridge.
How wrong he was to assume it would be nothing more than a show piece of the late 70's. When in fact it is known throughout the world as a cult classic and has been seen by millions of people whom have laughed heartily, enjoyed themselves and like me quoted many many lines from it and then laughed once again.
bigfella11 1 week ago
John and Michael are just FANTASTIC here. Calm and collected they sit back and let these two UTTER idiots condemn themselves with their own mouths. (John, I think in a documentary about The Life of Brain, many years later said that he was actually quite sorry for them.) Malcom and the Bishop TOTALLY play to the crowd with no substance to anything they say. John and Michael have all the best thought out points. The other two have NOTHING.
vanillawild 2 weeks ago
@vanillawild In any case, Life of Brian (or the miserable little Film as Muggeridge called it) is now consistantly voted the number 1 best Comedy film in the World.
soeffingwhat 1 week ago
The Life of Brian isn't about Christ at all. It's about mindless robots who do not question their own belief systems. Such as Stockwood and Muggeridge. Why do they keep talking about a 14 year old? I thought the film had an R rating? But Cleese is right about the stupidity of Christendom.
If these "experts" would actually research the death methods of the Romans and Jews they would understand that he was killed for political reasons. In addition, he exposed the lies of their religious leaders.
bashfulbrother 2 weeks ago
i have never heard of malcom muggeridge. i was not aware of his existence at all.
i have however heard of monty python. they are known as some of the greatest comedians of all time and their films are still very much watched today. So how can he say that they weren't some of the greatest minds or greatest artists?
96marzie 2 weeks ago
What, has this guy never read Aristophanes? Oh wait, dumb question...
Tristior 2 weeks ago
Mervyn Stockwood looks like an Alexander Armstrong character.
badmovebaker 2 weeks ago
John Cleese= legend.
SpiderMaax 2 weeks ago 3
Wasn't Socrates charged with blasphemy by the city authorities? Just saying.
Ukka68 3 weeks ago 3
This is a filibuster, I'd love to have heard more questions from Cleese and Palin. Its not like their the only ones who have explaining to do. I think that the final question behind all this is - does being offended mean you get special treatment from society, special previlege over others? This question isnt going away anytime soon, but we need to answer it quickly.
Ukka68 3 weeks ago
"May I make a point that is rather interesting"? NO. You can make a point and TRY to make it interesting but you FAILED.
"People MIGHT dredge up this film"??? I have it on video, on DVD and special collector's edition DVD and I don't think that I have a single friend who doesn't know almost the entire script by heart.
There is nothing in that squalid little tenth rate book they call the Bible that will ever make me change my mind.
MrSelidor7 3 weeks ago
The most gratifying thing about this debate is knowing that time has vindicated the Pythons and not the bishop or Muggeridge. As dismissive as they are of the film, it now reflects modern religious thought far more than their pronouncements.
lewisejackson 1 month ago 2
upper class privileged knobs having a love in, yawn..
LittleDrummerBoy234 1 month ago
LET MICHAEL TALK. DAMNIT.
TheExLeper 1 month ago 3
Who watched Life of Brian because you wanted to relate to the incarnation? Raise your hand!
p796 1 month ago
God has nothing to do with Malcom's poor mental ability. It's Satan's job.
p796 1 month ago
Today's so-called god is pretty much the same as Zeus for ancient Romans. Religion to an astheist is nothing but a fairytale. Faith is OK, but religion is evil. Against common sense.
p796 1 month ago
@p796 The Abrahamic desert God evolved from Zeus and other deities the same way Jesus' stories are plagiarized from older "prophets" and cult leaders.
Faith is belief without evidence and very dangerous because it promotes people to dismiss logical reasoning and empirical evidence and replaces it with projection, delusion and wish thinking.
Somai82 1 week ago
I didn't know there were people from the dark ages left in the 1970s...
quarknugget 1 month ago
It makes me want to throw a brick at the computer. How can't they understand that the film isn't about Jesus? Have they even seen it? Because if they have they weren't paying much attention or something.
ziggiette 1 month ago
@ziggiette
Because if they did it would undermine their faith in stupidity.
hyspeses 1 month ago
Comment removed
HaikuMcEwan1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ziggiette They arrived 15 minutes late to see a screening of the film prior to the debate, missing the establishing scenes demonstrating that Brian and Jesus were two different characters, and hence contended that it was a send-up of Christ himself.
HaikuMcEwan1 1 month ago
the Christian guy got proved so wrong at the end, John just completely destroyed his argument
aussie4life96 1 month ago
John cleese' reaction at 12:46 haha! What we all feel and think about these morons
turnbats 1 month ago
Malcolm Muggeridge decided to convert to Catholicism at 79, he'd only JUST become a Christian 10 years prior to this after being a heavy smoker, drinker and womanizer. So... are we really going to take this old man's opinion seriously? To me, he sounds like a scared old fool who realized the error of his ways after reflecting on his wrongdoings and felt the only way to be 'saved' was to believe in a fairy tale.
TheFantasticAsh 1 month ago
What are you talking about Muggeridge?! It's a comedy film! It's not trying to change your mind, it's trying to laugh at you!
DrAltais 1 month ago
The life of brian and the Monty python series are now very well known.... but now who has ever heard of Malcolm Muggeridge
EamonOregan 1 month ago
200 years from now, the Life of Brian will still be watched, and these other idiots will be remembered only for this interview.
frabjous79 1 month ago
Lovely to see how the world has moved on. Nobody would dream of wheeling a couple of berks like this for a prime time talk show now, they are banished to dark corners of niche programming.
gabiotta 1 month ago
@gabiotta I'm afraid to say that isn't the case here in Ireland. Even in the last twelve months I've seen an old nun gassing on and on about visions. She was allowed to talk uninterrupted for about twenty minutes, I've never seen any other guest given that sort of airtime on the show. This was on The Late Late Show, Irelands most popular talk show. The host (Ryan Tubridy) and the audience lapped it up. It was really quite shocking.
afjguk 1 month ago
Mervyn Stockwood is really pissing me off
benblij 1 month ago
A great "debate"-- interview, really-- by Woody Allen, of Billy Graham is on YouTube somewhere. One very relig guy, one not-so relig. guy. Both are funny, gentle and kind with each other. Too bad kindness wasn't in Muggeridge's arsenal. He behaved like an asshole in this.
frithar 1 month ago
Why did they not stress the point that the film does not focus on Jesus himself and only partially focuses on religion? Much more focus is put on the nature of Romans and Hebrews living at that time. The only religious part of the film are the people mistaking Brian for the messiah. Other than that there is noting. Brian wasn't even killed for any religious reasons he was killed for being a rebel.
floooooooooooooooood 1 month ago 3
Somebody should give these 2 a ticket for speaking too slow.
skibidido 2 months ago
It's disgusting that the Bible copies Life of Brian. They even gave the central character the same initials as John Cleese.
DayDreamAscent 2 months ago 12
It's a shame Anglican priests are allowed to get married. I bet this Muggeridge person is the world's most annoying husband.
anat1917 2 months ago
Comment removed
anat1917 2 months ago
1:2 A bishop speaking about evidence. xD
santajimi 2 months ago
Although one might disagree with his views, one must admit there's a reason Stockwood was the Bishop whereas Muggeridge was just a twat.
Lessdeth14 2 months ago
Personally, I love Life of Brian and these Stockwood and Muggeridge are acting childish and with limited information - for example, they arrived late at the screening of the film and so they did not see the crucial first scenes which establish the fact that Jesus and Brian are differenr people so therefore their argument is void. End of.
comedybuff4000 2 months ago
I'm a devout Catholic, and even I think that Muggleridge is the most embarrassing symbol of Christianity that I've seen in a long time...
nigelrugby 2 months ago 3
But think of the children! When will that argument go away? LOL Muggeridge is such a little bitch.
whatiwasgoingtosay 2 months ago
Muggeridge just fucking loves to hear himself talk!!!!!!!!!
bibibabkagirl 2 months ago
so thrs no problem to take young children to the church or tell them about santa claus or the easter bunny but god forbid if we take them to watch the film...what a load of bollocks!
vaibhav1P 2 months ago
"dredge up this miserable little film as a piece of social history"
can you say cult classic? awesome film?
Fanglespangle 2 months ago 2
Okay, now my question is 'how the crap does Cleese not start harming the bishop when he starts saying he must have been a useless little kid?'
CCNuck 2 months ago
AUGH. How the crap. I just. How can you be rude to Michael Palin in earnest mode?
CCNuck 2 months ago 3
God Malcom Muggeridge is a f*cking idiot
danielvanraders 2 months ago 64
@danielvanraders Is? - Was
spartonne 3 weeks ago
@danielvanraders I wouldn't say he was an idiot, but he certainly was Mis-Guided. Some would say he was a Hypocrite. Apparently he was quite a heavy drinker and Womanizer in his Time.
soeffingwhat 1 week ago
I see the Bishop has a nice big ring on his finger for people to kiss, after they've kiss his ass !
ralph12330 2 months ago
"You wouldn't 'guy' Socrates or make him appear as a clown."
Muggeridge seems like he's completely unfamiliar with Aeschylus' The Clouds, which did precisely that.
thexalon 2 months ago 40
@thexalon Nice observation mate, if your into that stuff Woody Allen wrote a satiric play about Socrates death.
OscarLp33t 2 months ago
@thexalon It was Aristophanes who ridiculed Socrates - Aristophanes was a masterful satyrist. One hour's detention and write it out fifty times, thexalon.
wentonmastermind 2 months ago
@thexalon Indeed. In fact, Greek theatre often made fun of famous people. There was one incident where the actors appeared in front of him wearing a mask of his face.
moominpic 1 month ago
@thexalon ("wouldn't make Socrates appear as a clown") Nor did he remember Cleese quoting Brian saying "Make up your own mind", which is about the most socratic thing I've heard today.
ReX342 1 month ago 2
@thexalon That is so true! You made me laugh out loud!
mackenziew 1 month ago
@thexalon
Nice point! But The Clouds was of Aristophanes, not Aeschylus.
SweeneyStyles 1 week ago
@thexalon Not mention the last hing Socrates said at his execution a joke. His studnets ask how they should bury him. He says, "Any way, you want to, if you can catch me," (suggesting his rue self will be set free by death.
HConstantine 3 days ago
The film SHOULD have been to ridicule Christianity. The way it is practiced, the Bible, the religious dogma. The whole lot needs to be criticized and yes, ridiculed.
flutterandwow 2 months ago
This was a good debate. I can just feel John Cleese's frustration dealing with these gentlemen.
TwoTube2 3 months ago
@TwoTube2 Yes, these two reactionary and really incredibly dull guys have not got a leg to stand on. The Python film is a comedy classic that hits the damn archaic and frankly immoral religious dogma in all the right places.
flutterandwow 2 months ago
Cleese makes a good point about progress being achieved by the mere fact that such a film, no matter how lightweight and throwaway, can be made and shown without ecclesiastical retribution. A whole gamut of (intelligently crafted)films should be made on Mohammed giving a wry twist on his life and the Islamic faith to put this rival or coequal religious, historical and social phenomenon into greater perspective as well. The reaction and debate they would stimulate would be healthy.
asceticification 3 months ago
I so wish we'd stuck with the norse and pagan religions (in the uk)
abrelosojo 3 months ago
John is so well educated ...I long for a more secular society
cocteaua 3 months ago 3
Sorry to sound like one of those 'closed minded people', but Malcolm Muggeridge is a genuine moron. Pure and simple.
ubernaffa 3 months ago
@ubernaffa well done, that's an Ad hominem attack, a logical fallacy.
Anglican08 3 months ago
@Anglican08 Go and read what the definition of argumentum ad hominem is. I didn't say that his position is incorrect because he's a moron, I just said that he's a moron. No ad hominem here. :)
ubernaffa 3 months ago
@ubernaffa but you just stated he's a moron. "pure and simple." The implication being he's not worth listening to.
Anglican08 3 months ago
Also, the failed comedian says that all great artists have been inspired by christ, forgetting, as John Cleese/Cheese points out, all the arab artwork, Buddhist artwork, african artwork ect.
JazzyAnimation 3 months ago 2
The audience, though, seem to love the pythons.
JazzyAnimation 3 months ago
This debate is almost impossible to watch. I would like to point out to anyone watching who supports the bishop and his comedic sidekick that since this interview death has been ridiculed on a very successful children's educational sketch show, Horrible Histories. To say what the bishop keeps repeating that you wouldn't make a film about the death of such and such a person is rubbish. Death can be funny.
JazzyAnimation 3 months ago
I think bishop mervyn stockwood would have a heart attack if he saw what the likes of south park were making of jesus now!
chinesegeordie 3 months ago
Pretty interesting to watch they discussing about a negative impact over a 14 years old boy that the film would may cause. I'm actually saw the movie when I was 14 and the first thing that came into my mind when I was seeing tue crucifiction scene was what a genius and wonderful way to deal with something mysterious and scare as death. I felt in peace with myself and my day was better after watched such a funny movie.
fernandoaldado 3 months ago
6.54 - Muggeridge is attacking LOB as a work of art rather than objecting to its theme, & lands another big hit
kcirdrab 3 months ago
Stockwood again scores a hit in saying that the film took the figure of Christ & reduced him to a hapless clown & a void, which historically or artistically (ignoring religiously) was an easy option for a shallow work of art trying to address a huge subject, i.e. ridiculing religious sentiment.
Palin coming out with the student agitprop stuff on the hypocrisy of the church establishment in contemporary society is pretty shallow & beside the point
kcirdrab 3 months ago
@kcirdrab Erm, kcidrab, you do realize that the figure of Christ is only seen at the start and is referred as "a bloody do-gooder" by an ungrateful ex-leper, hence, Life of Brian had nothing to do with Jesus right? You know, showing that Brian and Jesus are two different characters right? RIGHT?! You know, I'd question your critical and viewing skills if you missed that. Or are you one of those clowns seen above who go for patronizing jibes instead of proper debate?
EvilRadiatedMonkey 3 months ago
@EvilRadiatedMonkey if u don't see the charater of "Brian" is a metaphor for Christ you're ..... retarded, that's all I can say - lol
kcirdrab 3 months ago
@kcirdrab Whether or not Brian is a metaphor for Christ is surely an irrelevance; the central theme of the film is not to ridicule Christ himself, not even to ridicule Christianity - the point is to convey the point that throughout history, people have followed power unquestioningly (not just religion) - it is ridiculing the people that follow religion blindly, not the ideals or the personalities within the religion
cheesyhtfc 3 months ago
@cheesyhtfc Agreed, if Cleese & Palin had said that here no problem, but they didn't, they were squirming & lying about it all thru this debate instead of being honest
kcirdrab 3 months ago
@kcirdrab That is exactly what John says. It's Muggeridge that twists it to say that the film is ridiculing faith/trying to convert people. John isn't saying that; he's saying that the film is ridiculing people who do not critically analyse the faith that they so blindly follow. It's the others who are clearly not listening to John's response and are just repeating what they think, irrespective of what John is saying. Ironically, that is exactly the behaviour that the film ridicules...
cheesyhtfc 2 months ago in playlist brian
geez. it's like talking to a wall. or your parents. and why are these geezers obsessed with 14 year olds?
actigene2 3 months ago
@actigene2 The film got a rating for people 14 and above (AA) so 14 year olds are the youngest people to see it
carladraw 3 months ago
whoa, gaydar alert on the bish. So that's what happens when you use religion to repress and sublimate it.
stilicho2 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Brilliant upload!
As a Christian myself, I can say that these two religious men do in fact seem quite closed minded themselves, and are clearly making themselves the "bad guys" in this debate.
Shame on them, grumpy old men.
Also, gotta love Cleese's unstoppable wit.
jallen9343 3 months ago
Comment removed
jallen9343 3 months ago
In the future? Well 32 years later, I guess that's me :P I love monty python, they're brilliant, the life of brian is brilliant, priests need to shut up and get over this satire!
SerasXHarkonnen 4 months ago