The Back Room

[archimage_a]

New name, which the harpies of Tip It won't allow me to use:

الخليفة القوس بركه أ

Translates as:

Caliph Arch Mage A

 

New Theme Song:

[Leiana]

XD I still haven't seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail. I do own it, but I am not really one for british comedy. Or any sort of comedy. The only two comedians I know/like are Jeff Dunham ( Peanut: "Jeff-fa-fa. Dun Hamm. Dot Com!" I like Achmed and Walter the best) and Jeff Foxworthy ("If your family tree forks in the wrong direction, you might be a red neck.")

[Nexaduro]

Oh god, Dunham is good but he has only ever had ONE routine. The other guy, that would be the one with the stage name 'Larry the Cable Guy' or something right? Bit portly, always wears that one hat? He's just weird. I suppose he's not bad, he seems like he would be cool to meet, but I don't find him at all amusing.

 

When was the last time you watched Monty Python Lynx? Not 'The Holy Grail,' that's not that great, but their actual television show? I saw it a lot as a child, hated it, and I started watching it again a few years back and loved it. It's really about being old enough to understand the humor, you should give it a second chance.

[Resistance]

How old are you Nex? I thought you said you were fourteen?

[Nexaduro]

Yes, yes, I suppose that would make me 'still a child,' but aren't we all? :P

 

Different people mature at different speeds and in different ways. I assume everyone laughs at Monty Python someday, regardless, but some people I know probably won't until their twenties. Jocks and such, who are kinda conditioned towards low-brow stuff in America.

[Resistance]

What are you on about, I was wondering how you watched it when you were younger.

[Nexaduro]

Oh. That's what you meant.

 

Wait, what do you mean? Monty Python is quite an old show and I watched it when I was three. Is there some sort of paradox in that that I've missed?

[Resistance]

It ended 1974, you would have to be 34 to watch it.

[Alg]

It ended 1974, you would have to be 34 to watch it.

I think there's a BBC channel in the US that still shows episodes.

[Nexaduro]

Oh, of course. Don't you folks have reruns?

 

It would be a crying shame if the younger generations of Brits weren't exposed to such genius.

[Resistance]

Its a bit stupid IMHO.

[Nexaduro]

Of course it's stupid, all comedy is. Except sarcasm, which is just... not so much of an artform as an art, if that makes sense.

 

The point was that it was intentionally absurd and scattered, wasn't pandering, and made you think.

[Resistance]

Monty Python seems to be over rated, I don't know why. At some times it can be extremely funny but at the most its rather unfunny, I'd say in one episode I'd get only three or four laughs.

The fact that its old seems to excuse the fact that its low humour.

 

At times however it can be very funny.

[Resistance]

Wrong thread.

[archimage_a]

Well...Monty Python is a lot of throwing stuff at a wall and seeing what sticks.

Compared to modern comedy, which is trotting out tried and tested formulars.

 

 

For example, modern humour would never develop anything like the Cheese Shop, or think of having King Arthur's quest end when a police wagon arrived and arrested him.

 

Compare that to something like Family Guy.

Someone pulls out a baseball bat and whacks someone.

 

Its funny on a very basic level, but it happens near enough in every show, if not every scene.

 

 

 

It is/was quite a distinguishing feature between British and American Ideology:

Compare, for instance, Rambo and James Bond.

Rambo goes into the place under a thinly veiled excuse to blow stuff up (Read:plot) is revealed, and proceeds to blow stuff up, relentlessly.

Bond goes into a place, there are a few action scenes, but not that many, there is a plot and at the end of it a romance scene.

 

Now, years on, the two ideologies have crystalises, with supporters on both sides of of the Atlantic.

This leads to things like the the Pirates of the Carribean Trilogy, where you have one film that has a mix of the two, then a film that is 95% plot exposition with little or no violence, followed by a film that is a thinly veiled exuse to blow stuff up.

[Jehosaphat]

Well...Monty Python is a lot of throwing stuff at a wall and seeing what sticks.

Compared to modern comedy, which is trotting out tried and tested formulars.

 

 

For example, modern humour would never develop anything like the Cheese Shop, or think of having King Arthur's quest end when a police wagon arrived and arrested him.

 

Compare that to something like Family Guy.

Someone pulls out a baseball bat and whacks someone.

 

Its funny on a very basic level, but it happens near enough in every show, if not every scene.

 

 

 

It is/was quite a distinguishing feature between British and American Ideology:

Compare, for instance, Rambo and James Bond.

Rambo goes into the place under a thinly veiled excuse to blow stuff up (Read:plot) is revealed, and proceeds to blow stuff up, relentlessly.

Bond goes into a place, there are a few action scenes, but not that many, there is a plot and at the end of it a romance scene.

 

Now, years on, the two ideologies have crystalises, with supporters on both sides of of the Atlantic.

This leads to things like the the Pirates of the Carribean Trilogy, where you have one film that has a mix of the two, then a film that is 95% plot exposition with little or no violence, followed by a film that is a thinly veiled exuse to blow stuff up.

America: We only develop the thinly veiled excuse for explosions so that we can sell it to other countries.

[Leiana]

Nex, I've never seen anything Monty Python. So Thbbbbbbbbbbbttttttttttttt!

[archimage_a]

America: We only develop the thinly veiled excuse for explosions so that we can sell it to other countries.

Oh what a give away! You saw it. You saw him didn't you.

Now we see the violence inherant in the system.

Come see the violence inherant in the system.

 

 

(Three meanings here:

1) Monty Python Reference, FTW

2) Violence in films

3) War in Iraq, using the second meaning of 'sell', meaning to hoodwink or otherwise lie about actions

)

[jasignhagj]

America: We only develop the thinly veiled excuse for explosions so that we can sell it to other countries.

Oh what a give away! You saw it. You saw him didn't you.

Now we see the violence inherant in the system.

Come see the violence inherant in the system.

 

 

(Three meanings here:

1) Monty Python Reference, FTW

2) Violence in films

3) War in Iraq, using the second meaning of 'sell', meaning to hoodwink or otherwise lie about actions

)

[archimage_a]

 

 

I declare this picture war, open.

[Jehosaphat]

America: We only develop the thinly veiled excuse for explosions so that we can sell it to other countries.

Oh what a give away! You saw it. You saw him didn't you.

Now we see the violence inherant in the system.

Come see the violence inherant in the system.

 

 

(Three meanings here:

1) Monty Python Reference, FTW

2) Violence in films

3) War in Iraq, using the second meaning of 'sell', meaning to hoodwink or otherwise lie about actions

)

Actually, I was referring solely to movies, not the Iraq War.

 

Also, from how I've heard it used, that definition of sell doesn't exactly mean hoodwink. It means something more along the lines of "to convince" - the connotations are different.

 

And I don't think that the Iraq War was another thinly veiled excuse to make things go boom.

[archimage_a]

You are right about 'sell' not inherantly meaning hoodwink...it just means to convince.

However:

If a thinly veiled exuse is sold to someone, then they have been hoodwinked.

So it all wraps up nicely.

 

 

 

And, combustion engines go boom every 1/2000th of a second. (assuming 120,000 RPM)

Iraq war was for Oil, supposedly.

Ergo, Iraq War was another thinly veiled excuse to make a lot of things go boom.

 

 

 

(Monty Python Humour works on so many levels)

[Jehosaphat]

You are right about 'sell' not inherantly meaning hoodwink...it just means to convince.

However:

If a thinly veiled exuse is sold to someone, then they have been hoodwinked.

So it all wraps up nicely.

 

 

 

And, combustion engines go boom every 1/2000th of a second. (assuming 120,000 RPM)

Iraq war was for Oil, supposedly.

Ergo, Iraq War was another thinly veiled excuse to make a lot of things go boom.

 

 

 

(Monty Python Humour works on so many levels)

Yes, but the purpose of combustion engines isn't specifically to make things go boom, it's to make things go boom so that we can go places in more reasonable amounts of time.

 

If we wanted to oil just to make things go boom, then we wouldn't use the oil in motors; instead, we'd probably just dump it all into fireworks.

[archimage_a]

 

 

Going boom is 1/4th of the point of the internal combustion engine's makeup.

Plus, you can put a gun on an internal combustion engine and make more things go boom...Or run a Bomb making machine and make things that excusively go boom.

 

 

Fireworks are not oil powered :thumbsup:

[The Observer]

Actually, if you dumped them all onto fireworks it would create quite a large fire.