That line in the closing moments of the 2011 comedy-drama concisely sums up my own personal disappointment towards, Holy Flying Circus. A film that takes an irreverent and satirical look at the controversy and furor that followed the theatrical release of what would at the time be one of the most contentious talked about, and to some extent divisive movies to have come out of the late seventies. Written by comedy writer and producer Tony Roche best known for his work on the HBO comedy series, Veep and the BBC television series, The Thick of It as well as the big screen spin spin-off, In the Loop. It becomes glaringly apparent that any attempt to take a more earnest examination of the outcry that came from varying quarters including the general public, the media, and religious institutions is dashed.
After all, this is Monty Python we're talking about here and we can't get into the spirit of what Python was, and what they and the film were all about without examining it through a surreal, off-the-wall, and ironical lense. To this end and no doubt as a means to pay homage to the comedic format and their unique style. The set up for the film has its lead actors portraying several other characters as well as each of the individual members of the team, as well as Rufus Jones who plays Terry Jones also playing Michael Palin's wife. A not so subtle nod to the fact that Jones would often dress in drag to play some of the female characters in the show, as did the others. Well not so subtle for any self-respecting Python aficionado at least.
The immediate problem however is other than the fact that by attempting to emulate the Pythons, and in some way cast a critical eye over what occurred. It undermines some of the more serious aspects of the brouhaha (each member of the team after all received death threats). Roche in attempting to mimic their style flounders in capturing the same essence of their comedic style and verve. It comes across more as the bastard son of the cult series as if it's attempting to be too much like its more talented father. That's not to say that it's not without the occasional sporadic moment of inspired, caustic wit and lunacy. But it makes one wonder if the Pythons shouldn't have become involved with the project, and worked alongside Roche and director Owen Harris as technical consultants.
In its favor its casting is fairly shrewd and on the nose with Steve Punt being an immediate no-brainer thanks to his uncanny resemblance to Eric Idle, who he manages to imitate rather accurately. As do the rest of the actors in their respective roles. That being said though they strike me as being somewhat exaggerated presumably for comedic effect. John Cleese and Terry Gilliam notably being the most prominent examples. In fact, Cleese as played by Darren Boyd is played almost as if the lanky comic was to some degree never really acting when he played Basil Fawlty. Always, having behaved in real life like he was Basil Fawlty playing John Cleese. Charles Edwards arguably for me offers the most authentic portrayal of, "The nicest man in the world", Michael Palin. He superbly encapsulates the laid-back, warmth, humility, and integrity of the man and becomes the undoubted heart of the film.
It's really in the final third of the movie that it really hits more of its stride, with both Cleese and Palin arguing and disagreeing over how to handle the now infamous debate with Malcolm Muggeridge, (Michael Cochrane), and the Bishop of Southwark, Mervyn Stockwood (Roy Marsden). An event that took place on BBC Two's Friday Night, Saturday Morning and would have well-known lyricist Tim Rice (Tom Price) playing host. It's a pretty meticulous albeit flawed attempt to dramatize what occurred. Cleese is erroneously depicted as being slightly more irritated at how he and his friend and colleague were patronized, as well as chided by both Muggeridge and Stockwood. Both of whom are, brought effectively to life by veteran actors Cochrane and Marsden. It also stoops to getting its final message across rather heavy-handedly by repeatedly spoon-feeding it to its audience.
However, the film is rather neatly wrapped up by committing the keenly ironic blasphemy of having renowned atheist Stephen Fry make a brief cameo as God. Although not before signing off with an astute observation on the ongoing trend of people taking offense which is laced with some light cynicism. It's a shot across the bow that is not necessarily made just at the religious and is more universal in its skewering. Ending the film on a self-deprecating note. It's just a shame the rest of this small screen effort couldn't be quite as well executed which is no doubt what theistic detractors against, Life of Brian would have wanted to have seen happen to its stars. Now that would have been blasphemy.
0 out of 1 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
