In Theory: Could ‘Life of Brian’ be made today?

Monty Python star Terry Jones, who directed and played four roles in the controversial 1979 movie “Life of Brian,” has said the film probably couldn’t be made today because of a resurgence in religious belief.

In an interview with British newspaper The Guardian, Jones said, “I never thought it would be as controversial as it turned out.... At the time, religion seemed to be on the back burner and it felt like kicking a dead donkey. It has come back with a vengeance, and we’d think twice about making it now.” He cited the extremism surrounding Salman Rushdie’s “The Satanic Verses” as a reason for not wanting to make the movie these days.

The film, set in biblical times about the life of a man called Brian who is mistaken for the Messiah, caused outrage when released, with religious groups accusing it of blasphemy. It was banned by 39 councils across the United Kingdom and was protested when shown in New York. Although in one scene Jesus is shown in the distance giving the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the actor are those from the Bible; the comedy comes from the misunderstandings of the listening crowd. Jones and the other members of the Monty Python team contend that their aim was to satirize the practices of modern religion and its followers, not Jesus or God, as seen in the famous “Follow the shoe!” “No, the gourd” scene.

Thirty-two years after its release, could “Life of Brian” be made today? Or has religion “come back with a vengeance” to the point where such a film would be banned outright?

Personally, I think the movie “Life of Brian” could be released today. There might be a big hullabaloo, but I think such a fuss would also blow over, and the added publicity might even be good for getting more people into the movie.

I’m old enough to remember when the phrase “banned in Boston” actually helped to sell whatever was banned.

While I take my faith seriously, I am not afraid to laugh at certain parts of it. Confession: I have tried stand-up comedy, and I didn’t get into the ordained ministry until after age 60. So I’ve lived in the “evil” world, and, frankly, I like parts of that so-called “evil” world.

I’m in good company; didn’t Jesus associate with tax collectors and prostitutes?

Anyway, some things are just too darn funny not to laugh at, ribald or not, religious or not. I never saw the picture in question, but not because I didn’t want to. What I was told about it sounded hilarious to me. And now I wish I had seen it.

On a more serious note, maybe we let ourselves get too offended too soon. To be truly religious is to love one’s neighbor as oneself, and to treat one’s neighbor as one treats oneself. To get up in arms about something that makes fun of a piece of doctrine is, in my opinion, misplaced ire. Save your indignation for what truly matters: how the poor, the disadvantaged, the powerless, the homeless are treated.

The Hebrew prophet Micah had it right when he asked the question, “What does the Lord require of you?” The answer (Micah 6:8) is “to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.” Nothing there about yelling, “Blasphemy!” when somebody else has a little bit different take on what you believe.

The Rev. Skip
Lindeman

La Cañada
Congregational Church

La Cañada Flintridge

Could “Life of Brian” be made today? I believe so. It would still be controversial, but often that’s what draws a ticket-buying crowd. Remember “The Last Temptation of Christ”? Certainly it would be safer than making a satirical movie about historic leaders of other faiths. At least Christians aren’t known for blowing up infidels or beheading them for blasphemy.

I appreciate the Monty Python approach to comedy. But there’s often a fine line between humorous satire and outright blasphemy. In my mind, “Life of Brian” occasionally crosses that line with both content and language.

Still, when we can no longer laugh at ourselves it proves two things: We have lost touch with the world around us, and we have forgotten just how humble and fallible we really are before God.

There’s certainly food for thought for the insightful Christian in the movie. It accurately satires our frequent misunderstanding of scripture, the way we argue over trivialities, denominationalism and how we seek signs and profound spiritual meaning in everyday small occurrences like losing a sandal — or was it a shoe? And come on — you have to laugh at “Blessed are the cheesemakers!” I can almost see that scene being played out in the back rows of a modern-day stadium crusade or the parking lot of a church — cursing included.

A final thought about satire. It’s funny when we satirize ourselves, but it’s often perceived as offensive if a critic does it. Christians should receive satire as an insight into the hearts of the satirists and take our lumps if it strikes a true chord. “Blessed are the meek.” Or was that “the Greeks”?

Pastor Jon Barta

Valley Baptist Church

Burbank

I don’t think “Life of Brian” would be banned today, but it wouldn’t be a good financial investment to make that film. Conservatives would, indeed, probably boycott and protest it, and liberals would stay away in droves because (how to say this delicately?) it’s stupid.

Maybe I should make an I-statement there: I would stay away in droves because the Monty Python school of humor was just never funny to me — not even back then, when I wanted to find it funny so I could run with the cool kids.

I could (and did) watch the entire “Life of Brian” film without cracking a smile. And that’s not from a humorless place of religious zealotry; it’s from not finding over-the-top slapstick, stereotyping (and often racist) spoofs very funny. Just as with Mel Brooks’ films and the Pink Panther series, I find myself on the outside looking in to Monty Python, wondering what everyone finds so hysterical.

That said, “Life of Brian” has some truth to it. As our question articulates, the film doesn’t make fun of Jesus, but of his followers. Like “The Gods Must Be Crazy,” released five years later — the one about the back-country tribe that finds a Coke bottle tossed from an airplane and worships it as a religious artifact — “Life of Brian” pokes fun at our human tendency to read profound meaning into mundane coincidences. It plays with the arbitrariness of what becomes foam-at-the-mouth doctrine, and who we make into our latest savior. Spot on, as the British say.

Maybe I would, in fact, be a little more tender about having such a film released today. In 1975, Christianity was still holding its own in America; it was big and strong enough to take a little ribbing. But these days, when everyone and everything in our culture disdains religion in general and Christianity in particular, releasing such a satirical film would just be kicking a faith when it’s down.

The Rev. Amy Pringle

St. George’s
Episcopal Church

La Cañada

I wouldn’t doubt that such a movie could be made today, but in 1979 it was unbelievable, and that’s why it caused such a maelstrom. The movie was banned, slammed and damned as blasphemous, and rightly so, with a proviso. The “Life of Brian” parallels the life of Christ, and so the connection was not missed by the Christian community but went over the head of pagan society.

Funny? Yes and no. If one can get past profanity, gratuitous nudity and constant shots at Christianity, then yes, there is some humor, and the humor is pointed.

I graduated from high school the year it was released, but can’t remember if it was then, or shortly after, that I saw it. I was either about to take the leap or had just become a follower and it rattled my intellect. Virtually every stab at faith imaginable appeared in the script, from people mishearing the words of Christ (thus challenging the reliability of the Bible) to Jesus’ conception (not divine, but rather a tryst between Mary and some Roman centurion). And what of Christ’s miracles? Stupid and superstitious people only assigned supernatural status to natural phenomena, according to Brian.

The movie takes liberties with biblical facts, as wise men didn’t actually show up on Christmas, but the confusion about the nature of myrrh was humorous and still confuses some today.

What bothers me most is the underlying message of this comedy. First, the protagonist tells his crowd of disciples, “You don’t need to follow anybody!” How wrong that is. If Christ is not to be followed, then the Gospel is pointless. If people are just fine without a savior, then he needn’t have come.

The movie concludes with all the reappearing characters crucified on crosses, singing, “Life is quite absurd, and death’s the final word, you must always face the curtain with a bow. Forget about your sin, give the audience a grin, enjoy it, it’s your last chance anyhow.”

Folks, your sin is why Jesus came. Death is not the end, and “God cannot be mocked” (Galatians 6:7). How funny is hell, anyhow?

The Rev. Bryan Griem

Montrose Community
Church

Montrose

The silly mockery of everything that is Monty Python was a bit of that era’s envelope-pushing satire. “The Simpsons,” “Borat” and “South Park” carry on skewering and ridiculing. Others take even more risks with their art. Kurt Westergaard says his cartoons sending up Islam will grace the cover of his forthcoming memoir, despite attempts on his life; and Pakistan’s Beygairat (Shameless) Brigade are rockers who take on their nation’s corruption and extremism.

I submit that “Life of Brian” would not be replicated today, not out of fear, but because its brand of humor wouldn’t find financing. Each era needs its own illuminating outrage.

No comedic blasphemy will ever top for me the breathtakingly sacrilegious jokes my brother brought home from the seminary during that era’s sick-humor craze. He’s my much older brother, as I like to remind him, so I was a very young non-atheist then. His scandalous jibes exposed me to a free-thinking adult world. But they didn’t cause me to reject religion. And they certainly have not detracted from his nearly 50-years-and-counting of faithfully pastoring church flocks, wisecracking all the way.

I never miss “The Daily Show,” even as I disagree with some of Jon Stewart’s potshots, like recent ones at feminist lawyer Gloria Allred and peace activists Code Pink. I can and do complain, change channels, fume inside, or more, but I can’t, nor should I be able to, stop him.

Words and images on screens, pages or airwaves should be no threat to one’s beliefs; and if they are, well, so much for one’s beliefs. Of course “Life of Brian” wasn’t banned in the U.S. then, nor would it be today. Such censorship violates our 1st Amendment right to create and consume all manner of speech, including the crass and insulting.

Roberta Medford

Atheist

Montrose

I’d be delighted to know of a resurgence in religion. There are a lot of great faith communities in which people are experiencing grace, compassion, healing and transformation, and yet despite all this great stuff, there are still empty pews. I would be more inclined to identify a trend of increasing secularism, assisted in part by these off-putting, vengeance-oriented religious types.

Would some Christians chime in on a remake of “Life of Brian”? Probably. There certainly was an outcry over “Harry Potter,” though that didn’t get the movie banned. In general, I think Monty Python is hilarious, but I never made it very far into “Life of Brian.” It made me religiously squeamish — as squeamish as I felt watching that scene in “The Meaning of Life” where the huge fat guy explodes all over the restaurant. Monty Python’s shtick is to see how far they can go. I don’t have to go over the precipice with them.

Monty Python, while maybe a little ahead of its time, is not alone in pushing boundaries. But I am not aware of movies that have been banned outright in the U.S. If someone thinks a movie will make money, it will get made and shown in moneymaking venues. If someone has the cash to promote a certain point of view, a movie will get made and shown wherever people are ready to receive it. So, sure, “Life of Brian” could be made today.

Would it create an interesting public conversation? Probably not so much. It has become passé to poke crass fun at religion, and boringly reactive (not to mention counterproductive) to call for a ban. Why be shallow and uninspired when you could be sharing your deep and complex exploration of an authentic, vengeance-free spiritual awakening?

The Rev. Paige Eaves

Crescenta Valley

United Methodist
Church

Montrose

I don’t think religion has “come back with a vengeance,” and I believe that a “Life of Brian”-type movie could be made today. Would there be protests, claims of blasphemy and possible banning of the movie at certain theaters? Yes. Would it make headline news for several weeks on the cable and radio talk shows? Yes. Would the movie do well at the box office? Yes.

In fact, a Broadway musical that makes fun of religion in general, and a certain religion in particular, just won nine Tony awards, including best musical. Vogue called the show “the filthiest, most offensive, and — surprise — sweetest thing you’ll see on Broadway this year, and quite possibly the funniest musical ever.” That show is “The Book of Mormon.” It is vulgar and sacrilegious and one of the hottest tickets in New York. And it is profitable for the producers.

For members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Book of Mormon is a sacred book of scripture that testifies of Jesus Christ and his divinity. In a measured response to the opening of the show, the church said in its official statement, “The production may attempt to entertain audiences for an evening, but the Book of Mormon as a volume of scripture will change people’s lives forever by bringing them closer to Christ.” I suspect most church members, including myself, have not, and will not, spend much time worrying about the show.

Both “Life of Brian” and “The Book of Mormon” raise two important questions. First, how far can, or should, a producer go in making a movie or a musical that is a religious parody? That is, where should the line be drawn on what is appropriate and what is not? Second, how should religious people react when such a movie or musical is made, whether or not the line was crossed?

Unfortunately, I don’t have space here to answer those questions. Suffice it to say, producers should be sensitive when treading on religious beliefs held to be sacred by others, and religious individuals need to be measured in their response, which is not always the case.

Rick Callister

Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints

La Cañada