"Not serious" as in "it didn't really happen, I'm just mocking (or making fun, or satirizing)." Or, not really a mom who got all bent out of shape because a box of diapers had a picture of a black baby.
We're coming from the same place.
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
"Not serious" as in "it didn't really happen, I'm just mocking (or making fun, or satirizing)." Or, not really a mom who got all bent out of shape because a box of diapers had a picture of a black baby.
We're coming from the same place.
My husband is trying to convince me that Life of Brian is better than Holy Grail. Thoughts?
(Other than the obvious fact that he's wrong?)
Life of Brian does have better songs. But how can you compete with "Fetchez la vache?"
You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!
Life of Brian has a stronger narrative, and ending. That's about the only thing I'd put it down for winning.
It definitely has a better ending.
Life of Brian has UFOs. Holy Grail has cows being flung out of trebuchets.
Tough call.
The satire in Life of Brian was sharper and more focused. Also, Graham Chapman was sober, and turned in his best performance.
It pains me to say this, but Tom Scola is also wrong.
I can see the argument that Life of Brian is more relevant, in that crazy religious people who misinterpret Jesus' teachings are still around, versus those who are questing for the Holy Grail.
Maybe the question for me isn't "better", but "funnier."