Naughtius Maximus, Biggus Dickus, and the Life of Brian

Monty Python’s Life of Brian follows the story of a young Jewish man, Brain Cohen, who is mistaken for the Messiah. The film is filled with hilarious bits that challenge religion, question politics, and poke fun at human nature, particularly the tendency to fixate on semantics.

Life of Brian opens with Brian and his mother listening to Jesus’ famed Beatitudes speech. In this case however, Brian and fellow listeners are too far out to hear properly, and misinterpretation leads to arguments and eventual conflict. Within the ten minutes after this, the viewer sees a stoning in which all stoners are women (a crime punishable by stoning), an ex-leopard begging for money and explaining how curing him from disease has posed more problems than it fixed, and a defenseless roman who defeated a gladiator in the Colosseum by running him into a heart attack. Obviously these moments are all great pieces of satire in and of themselves (hyperboles or counter-intuitive situational irony), but the heavy hitters come after.

One of the best moments in the movie is the scene in which The People’s Front of Judea are seen talking amongst each other. Trying to establish their rules, the group is constantly stopped by mindless and irrelevant additions to the statements. Shortly after, the group performs a hit on the Roman’s and runs into their biggest adversary, The Judean People’s Front. The difference between the two groups lies entirely in their titles, but it is enough to pit the two against each other and spoil the coo. Moments like these (there are plenty in the movie) remind the viewer to look past irrelevant, instigative details and see the bigger picture.

The largest underlying piece to the movie is the critique of religion. Brian becomes the Messiah by accident in minutes and cannot remove himself from that title for the entire movie. Despite telling them repeatedly he is not the Messiah and giving them evidence, his fanatic follower spin everything he says to support their belief that he is the one true prophet. Although hyperbolic in nature, this example hits close to home for many, which may be why the film was banned for a time. This satirical moment suggests viewers reevaluate their beliefs in religion and make sure they coincide with free and independent thought.