This page was created on May 1, 2004
This page was last updated on January 4, 2005

Well, apparently the cheesemakers -- or the peacemakers, or whomever keeps media fodder from going sour -- have been doing their jobs well: I have pored over the news, magazines, internet forums, etc., for some sign of religious outrage or righteous indignation over the re-release of Life of Brian, and aside from a few allusions to its pointedly irreverent humor, I can find nothing.

And I am somewhat perplexed.

Like Mike, I half-expected that the Christian underground would be subverting the Pythons' own evil plot by boycotting, crying, shaking their fists, and raising a general ruckus over the strategically timed re-release of the very film that in 1979 supposedly threatened to rock the faith of the populace to its foundations. Especially since Gibson's The Passion of the Christ -- a solemn treatment of the topic -- is continuing to move audiences (in numerous ways) all around the world.

Despite the various quotes from Python members regarding the timing of the re-release (director Terry Jones reportedly admitted to a good deal of "opportunism" in the decision, and producer John Goldstone sees the film as an "antidote" to the severity of Gibson's Passion), there is apparently no religious outcry against the brazen juxtaposition of the atrocity of crucifixion on one hand, and a musical number performed by a host of crucifixees on the other.

And yet, as I search the annals of public opinion, I am confronted with the fact that very few people (beyond a handful of devoted fans) really seem to care about the re-release of Brian, and even fewer give their reservations about its content much weight. It's as if, after a quarter of a century, Monty Python has laughed the establishment out of existence -- or, perhaps, Pythonesque anti-establishment pique has taken the reins, and become the Establishment itself.

While in 1979 there was certainly a generation of those who rejected the establishment -- the formulaic, rational approach to order and progress -- the current generation has brought us into a new realm of questioning and rejecting the "norm." We are now so far into that realm that all the questioning and mocking and rejecting are the norm, and the rational, established approach is, well, anti-establishment.

So perhaps Mike and I have less reason to be surprised than we think. While there may still be (particularly in the Bible Belt) a few zealots who are willing to steal DVDs in order to protect the bumbling, undiscerning (and, perhaps, relatively humorless) masses from Life of Brian, it appears that, in general, society (and even the religious conservative) has come to see that Python may have been right about some things.

First: that there is plenty of fodder for satire in how we humans go about practicing religion (not to mention in the old Bible films of yore), and perhaps one way of moving past all of that is to identify it -- call it what it is, and then laugh it out of existence.

And second: that if things have come full-circle, and the Anti-establishment has grown up to be the Establishment, there may now be little in the way of taking anything seriously -- particularly a film made by a pioneering group of men who may have just laughed their way out of a job.

Thankfully, I was able to locate a copy of Life of Brian at my local video store -- undoubtedly just another benefit of living rather close to Canada. Still, I, like Jenn, am somewhat perplexed about the lack of controversy or interest surrounding the re-release. Allow me to propose alternate reasons.

Perhaps from the perspective of the Christian underground, Life of Brian is no threat to the momentum of The Passion. So, it doesn't require their attention -- case closed. When Life of Brian was originally released, however, there was no alternative message available for moviegoers, and perhaps that fueled the resultant furor. Now, though, Brian is being billed by its producers as an alternative to The Passion. Clearly, the tables are turned. I also agree with Mike that Brian is whimsical rather than preachy -- and with the point of reference which Passion provides, that is now more obvious than ever.

But the fact remains that there has been very little buzz about the re-release of Brian. The typical marketing blitz seems to be all but absent. Why? Because there was no marketing campaign in the first place, or because the press and exhibitors didn't bite? Consider: if you were a theater operator experiencing record attendance due to a box-office smash like The Passion, would you risk offending a revenue-generating fan by running a trailer for a movie that they might find offensive? Probably not. Let's face it, Jesus is a hot commodity right now.

For Brian's fans, it's also possible that there simply isn't enough to lure them to set aside their aging VHS or newly-minted DVD to visit the theater. As Jenn stated, Python is now a known quantity -- part of the system. And after all, Brian's message hasn't changed. With one copy of the movie already in the bag, there's got to be a special-edition DVD (with loads of extras) worth waiting for, and the theatrical re-release just doesn't offer anything new. It doesn't have a CGI Jabba, or guns replaced with walkie-talkies for our protection; maybe the Pythons should have considered replacing stoning with cloning to bring in the crowds.

In 2 Corinthians, the Apostle Paul speaks of Christianity as "the ministry of reconciliation."⁵ By this, he means that the central story of the faith is the reconciliation of Man to God through the blood of His Son, Jesus. Christianity, then, is the ministry of reconciliation because all who claim the name of Christ are ministers -- literally, servants in the Greek -- of God's specific conciliatory purpose.

Henry Miller
On the Sacred

The new always carries with it the sense of violation, of sacrilege. What is dead is sacred; what is new, that is different, is evil, dangerous, or subversive.¹

Frances Wright
On Sacrilege

How disposed are we to judge, in anger, those who call upon us to think, and encourage us to enquire! To question our prejudices seems nothing less than sacrilege; to break the chains of our ignorance, nothing short of impiety!²

Lenny Bruce
On Satire

Satire is tragedy plus time. You give it enough time, the public, the reviewers will allow you to satirize it. Which is rather ridiculous, when you think about it.³

William Hazlitt
On Comedy

Comedy naturally wears itself out -- destroys the very food on which it lives; and by constantly and successfully exposing the follies and weaknesses of mankind to ridicule, in the end leaves itself nothing worth laughing at.⁴

Chesterton
On Perception

It is a strange thing that many truly spiritual men... have actually spent some hours in speculating upon the precise location of the Garden of Eden. Most probably we are in Eden still. It is only our eyes that have changed.⁷