Michael Palin did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Window Washer / Harry / Fish No. 5 / Mr Pycroft / Dad / Narrator No. 1 /
Chaplain / Carter / Spadger / Regimental Sergeant Major /
Pakenham-Walsh / Man in Rear End / Female TV Presenter / Mr Marvin Hendy
/ Governor / Leaf Son and Debbie Katzenberg in The Meaning of Life.
The Meaning of Life, essentially Monty Python's own History of the World Part I, is a series of vignettes supposedly about the title. I would say with this one, although there are laughs to be found, I would the success rate of jokes is fairly low, not to the point of being a terrible comedy however it is a considerable step down from their previous effort, Life of Brian. I honestly probably wouldn't even recommend the film, just rather simply watch the cut clips of the bits that work.
Well I will say it again Michael Palin is easily my favorite Python as a performer, and in general his ability in the sketch comedy also alludes to why he was also the best actor of the group in general. This as the other member typically worked within a more exact type, John Cleese as the pompous fool or genius, Eric Idle as a at least slightly daffy excitable fellow, Graham Chapman as the relative straight man, and then the director Terrys as some kind of grotesque sort. Palin's characters tend to be a bit more of just that, even in the microcosm we see of them here. This as he plays about 18 different roles, and in each Palin manages to bring a bit more than just a quick comedic bit. This as he offers the blind naivety of a dopey school boy for a moment, the excessive propriety of a tv hostess, though not say particularly proper things, even the different kind of propriety of an American wife, the low key smugness of a hospital director, the smugness of an overly proper British soldier, or the strange randomness of a man in a tiger suit at the opposite end of that soldier. In each Palin captures a bit different in his presence as these different roles, this making him typically a little bit amusing even when some of the bits he's featured in aren't all that amusing overall. There's just something about his range of voices and expression, that can garner a little chuckle. What I'm really here to discuss are his sort of central sketches, which actually Palin gets very few of, perhaps one of the issues with the film, in fact he only has two where he is the focus. The first being the film's big Oliver!esque musical number about a poor father describing to his brood of children why he needed to have so many, explaining that "Every Sperm is Sacred". Palin's performance here being an enjoyable sort of twist on the modest means father befitting an Oliver Twist novel, with an aw shucks expression and a world weary voice. This though with all the heart he can must in his eyes and of course his voice as he sings to all about his fundamental beliefs. Palin belting it out with a hilarious passion, and again that heart, even as he sends off all his kids for scientific experimentation. His other scene is as a drill sergeant. This where Palin again fashions a different personality of a wild eyes befitting the profession, and lips with mind of their own as he barks out orders like a proper English screw. This finding the comedy as Palin brings this ridiculous intensity even as the sergeant is extremely accommodating to all his soldiers who feel they could do something better than routine drills. Palin being great as he maintains that same stature no matter what happens. Both these bits are great, and for my money the best bits in the film, or at least two that wholly worked for me. Is it coincidence that they both star Palin? I'm going to say probably not, as both feature his delightful talents, as a comic performer that grants the particular type of investment in his performances that sell the comedy all the more.
35 comments:
Pretty sure that's a record for most roles for one performance reviewed here.
Louis: Your Top 15 Michael Palin acting moments?
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Louis: Your thoughts on 'Every Sperm Is Sacred' as a song. And thoughts on the Protestant viewpoint.
Could you possibly review Ian McDiarmid next.
His delivery of "Hey...I didn't eat the mousse!" might just tip this performance into a 4.5 for me.
Louis: Your Top 16 - 20 Michael Palin acting moments?
Louis: Your ratings and thoughts on Garry Marshall & Julie Hagerty in Lost in America?
Louis: Could you give your thoughts on John Cleese in A Fish Called Wanda? I know he's a 4, but I don't think you've given thoughts on his performance anywhere.
Tahmeed: he gave his thoughts on his review of Steve Buscemi in Fargo: http://actoroscar.blogspot.com/2014/03/alternate-best-supporting-actor-1996_15.html?m=0
Cleese - 4(He's not quite up there with Kline and Palin when it comes to the level of hilarity, but he's still pretty funny as well particularly in his apology to Kline or when he distracts him at the end of the film).
Louis: could you see a modern day version of Scarecrow set in France with Matthias Schoenaerts and Omar Sy in the Hackman and Pacino roles? I know that might lose a bit of the stature contrast that made that original pairing quite memorable but I feel like Sy’s cheery bright optimism breaking down into catatonic despair could be pretty powerful.
Louis, in terms of talent, what would be the top 5 ensembles ever assembled for War films.
Anonymous: A Bridge Too Far would be #1.
Luke: I saw Fanny and Alexander.
Bryan: Your thoughts on it and ratings for the cast. I hope you loved Malmsjo.
Did you see the 3 or 5 hour version.
Luke: The five-hour version.
I thought Fanny och Alexander as a whole was very good. Great production design and costumes. Bergman handled several tones in the film quite well, as he did allow some moments of comedy to fit in naturally. The fantasy scenes were remarkable as well. A great achievement.
Froling- 5
Malsmjo- 5 (Marco Perella should've taken notes)
Edwall- 4.5
Guve- 4.5
Wallgren- 4
Kulle- 4
Could somebody please tell me what's going on here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTD6ZXH7Xqc
Like why did anybody think that would be a good idea?
Michael: That looks so utterly batshit stupid that I need to see it immediately.
I know, right? It's by the same guys who did Cooties, which I enjoyed for much the same reason.
Michael
That. Looks. Glorious.
Bryan: Thoughts on Guve, Froling and Malmsjo.
Aidan & Lucas:
1. Fish and Chips - A Fish Called Wanda
2. REVENGE - A Fish Called Wanda
3. Dog #1 - A Fish Called Wanda
4. Dog #2 - A Fish Called Wanda
5. Dog #3 - A Fish Called Wanda
6. Way to the Crucifixion - Life of Brian
7. Turning against Beria - Death of Stalin
8. Pontius Pilate 1 - Life of Brian
9. Meeting Otto - A Fish Called Wanda
10. The return of his wife - Life of Brian
11. Which Airport - A Fish Called Wanda
12. Every sperm is Sacred - The Meaning of Life
13. Jack Comes home - Brazil
14. Pontius Pilate 2 - Life of Brian
15. Wanda talks to Ken - A Fish Called Wanda
16. Otto inquires with Ken - A Fish Called Wanda
17. Agreeable Drill Sergeant - The Meaning of Life
18. Sad about a Pig - A Private Function
19. It's alright now - Time Bandits
20. "Fond" farewell - Death of Stalin
Luke:
Cleese - 3(Some fine pompous routines from him here, from the soldier to the professor with a rather unorthodox subject matter however very orthodox manner. I suppose a bit of an alternative in his performance as Death, where I suppose he certainly brought a kind of menace I suppose. Didn't love his bits here though, though overall it's fine expected Cleese.)
Idle - 3(Some fine daffy eccentric routines from him here, from the soldier missing the leg, to the Protestant lady. Others less effective I'll say, particularly their intergalactic song, that just didn't work for me. Still some fine bits though not great bits.)
Chapman - 3.5(The funniest none Palin bits I thought came from him, from doing his final lounge lizard routine with the right bit of bluster and sleaze of sorts, to the oh so pleasant English way of trying to shoo off Death initially. The highlight being his prudish routine as the protestant and his manner of going off on his beliefs.)
Gilliam & Jones - 2.5(Again both I found largely doing the grotesque routines of one kind of another, don't love either of any of their routines here. I suppose something more should've been in Mr. Creosote, however I didn't in the end even get grossed out because the bit went on for way too long in my view.)
The actual song, I don't quite love, though overall the sequence though is very creative and comical though in the sheer audacity of the full scale Oliver style number, that unsurprisingly cost them their budget. Again my lack of love is in part that I do think it perhaps gets to beating a dead horse a bit by the end, however it does fine some creative ways in the variation the exact same theme, and lyrics. The intro is by the far the best part.
The protestant scene I actually say gave me initially the wrong idea about the film, since it is also a hilarious bit of sort of straight faced hypocrisy during a critique. It gave me the wrong idea as early on the film rather hit its marks, then the rest I found it to be slowly diminishing returns.
Bryan:
Hagerty - (I will say that I have somewhat turned on her in general, in that she pretty much does very similar shtick no matter what the film is. Having said that, it works for some material better than others. Here is an example of here working in her passive sort of manner of comedy contrasts well again the neurosis of Brooks, particularly as it finally falls out in a bit of her own neurosis in the Casino scene. Otherwise she does succeed in some funny moment of sort of outlining the concerns around Brooks's mania, until her moment of coming up with a "plan", which is a well delivered moment of sort of breaking her typical state.)
Marshall - (The best scene of the film is Brooks trying anything to do the impossible, get his money back from a casino. Marshall is great as his comedic partner for the scene, in portraying an initial good humor, but also confusion at Brooks's various marketing ideas. Marshall's great though in his straight man replies each time like his expatriation that people come to casinos for gambling. I love the slightly humoring tone that he gives the whole time he is trying to ease the blow just as he represents a sheer disbelief in the man, until Brooks's final ridiculous Christmas idea, where Marshall delivery of his final line "we're finished talking" is that of sheer perfection)
Calvin:
I could definitely see it. I'd also love it if they'd produce that Scarecrow sequel that has been written apparently, I'm sure Hackman wouldn't do it (though you never know it is one of his favorite roles), but maybe get Duvall or Dern for replacement, as I bet Pacino would be game for it.
Anonymous:
Regardless of the end result
The Godfather
The Longest Day
A Bridge Too Far
The Greatest Story Ever Told
Gosford Park
Bryan: Could you also give thoughts on Nicol Williamson in Excalibur. Didn't get them last time.
Michael: Well then...that was certainly...a thing...
I'm really not sure what to think of it right now...I mean, just paraphrasing the premise that a young, probably psychopathic girl will defend her family from Neo Nazi Kevin James...
It's left me perturbed - and perhaps concerned - but intrigued nonetheless.
Luke: I'll be brief, just to avoid spoilers.
Guve - (I thought he was fine as the film was going along, though not overly impressive. Then came his "meaty" scene, and I thought he really delivered on capturing how he felt on everything that came beforehand.)
Froling - (Has one of the best acted scenes in the film with Malsmjom, as she shows why she'd be attracted to him at first. Aside from that, she is great at being a loving mother to the titular duo.)
Malsmjom - (Probably the best stepdad performance ever captured on film? I need to let this one settle in my mind.)
Williamson - (This is the only performance I've seen from him, but I'm VERY eager to see more now. He puts that great voice of his to great use, but he also uses his physical presence to grant Merlin a whole lot of gravitas. Past that, he also great timing that gives the film a lot of its comedic energy. Most of my favorite moments in the film include him.)
Bryan: Unlike Guinness and McKellen, I think one advantage Williamson has over them is that you feel his presence from the first frame to the last even when he's off screen.
Honestly, I'm having a tough time deciding between Hauer and Malmsjo for my supporting win.
Luke: I didn't actually give my thoughts on Williamson either, but they're more or less the same as Bryan's; He is my favourite part of the film without question, as he honestly made Merlin far more interesting and entertaining than he might've been otherwise. Williamson has that great voice, of course, and fulfills that strange balance of knowing humour, but with the right presence and wisdom when necessary.
For myself he stands at a solid 4.5, and like I mentioned before, I would absolutely back a review of his performance.
Luke: Hauer of course has one of the best acted moments in film period, while Malsjom does make a lot out of one of the most cliched characters (the abusive stepdad) in the book...so that’s understandable.
Oh, and if we're comparing him to Guinness and McKellen, there all the same rough level for me personally. I would argue that the presence of Obi Wan and Gandalf is still felt when they depart, mainly by how they affect the film's protagonists. On a technical level, McKellen's performance is the most earnest, whereas Guinness' brings the most wisdom, and Williamson brings the most humour. There all different tones and there all played with the same degree of skill.
Louis: the whole idea of that Scarecrow sequel is amazing, one can dream I suppose. Apparently Pacino and Hackman didn't get along on set (though I may be misremembering).
Also what are your thoughts on The Grandmaster's cinematography? It's the one Wong Kar Wai film I don't think I'll ever revisit due to its tepid pace and lack of depth but I do think it ranks among his best looking films.
Louis: In the Best Director post, you described your reasons for giving your 2003 Win to Peter Weir came as a result of the “subjectivity/objectivity” philosophy. Do you apply the same idea when you give thoughts on/rank screenplays or something else?
Is anyone planning on seeing The Eddy? The first two episodes are directed by Damien Chazelle. I've heard many mixed opinions about it online, though.
I might give it a shot since Chazelle is currently in my good books.
Louis: also who would you have picked for Hiddleston’s role in Only Lovers Left Alive? Because honestly on rewatch I think he’s perfect, and not having the ‘grunge’ factor I think actually makes the portrayal more memorable since it sort of puts a unique spin on the type of ‘ageing rocker’ type.
Calvin:
Yeah Hackman and Pacino didn't get along evidently due to their contrasting acting styles. So reunion may be even harder, however again I would accept a Duvall or Dern as replacement just to see at the very least Pacino return to Lionel.
The Grandmaster is indeed gorgeous, though Wong Kar Wai, I think probably falls into that category as a pusher of cinematographers, but nonetheless a particularly inspired nod as well. I agree though it is a shame the rest of the film couldn't follow through on its look. This as the opening scene alone, where Le Sourd's lighting makes rain amplify rather than obscure a scene is just astonishing alone in terms of the achievement. That along with, as expected with Wong Kar Wai, immaculate composition of the shots, that makes every shot look befitting the best Martial Arts artwork one has seen. The action scenes are not all there is, though as the gorgeous golden hued interiors work is stunning as well. I think the vision of a martial arts film is something incredible, it is a shame Wong Kar Wai didn't have anything interesting to say other than in the visual however.
Well having just watched The Hunger, I would've loved to have seen Bowie return to the vampire genre, and I think he would've perfect for the role, as well as an ideal scene partner for Swinton. I'll say though I don't dislike Hiddleston's performance in the least, as earlier noted, it is just the "tired of the world" dialogue I think he most struggled with, and someone with more of that "grunge" factor would've been ideal.
Bryan:
I'd say it is a little more skewed towards the subjectivity into account, though on close calls I try to look at sort of the "challenge" of the intention of the screenplay. For example, The Right Stuff vs A Christmas Story, I love both as written, but I do think Kaufman's challenge was greater in terms of creating a cohesive narrative, with all the history, characters and different tones needed for the piece.
Post a Comment