During the movie, Larry is running around the museum trying to understand what is going on and ends up having a conversation with a living historical landmark. The landmark was a giant Easter Island head, also known as a Moai. The heads were built between the years 1250 and 1500 by the Rapa Nui people. These giant landmarks were a display of eastern Polynesia art in the form of sculpture work and gave us an idea of their culture and how they pay respect to their dead ones. The stone blocks are carved into head-and-torso figures, and they average 13 feet tall and 14 tons, which goes to show us how much time and patience it took to complete one. The short and funny conversation which involved the Moai asking Larry for gum, left a memorable impression on the audience (since it’s an iconic scene) and it raised attention to curious viewers who may not have known what the sculpture was. 

Larry began to find his ways around the new life of the museum and more artwork began to come visible to the audience, with or without them knowing. The movie gives us many different cultural references with different forms of characters. For instance, some of the characters they introduced throughout the movie were; Indians, cowboys, and Romans. The Roman character was named Octavius and was a general in the Roman military during his time. The movie displayed the general in military uniform and his high ranking was shown throughout his well-polished and flashy armor. The headwear, “cape”, and gold-plated armor made it clear to us that he was someone of importance. The form of art to show rankings and importance in the military was exactly spot on as to how it was during the ancient Roman times. The movie was accurate to display Octavius in the uniform they had put him in and allowed the audience to get an understanding as to how military armor varied throughout the soldier’s rankings. The producer also relied on well-known stereotypes to display the personalities of each character, such as the Indianan being very respectful, the cowboy being wild and hostile, and the Roman soldier as humble yet cocky & arrogant due to his military ranking.

The movie continues to be very entertaining and appealing all the way until the end. The audience got a good laugh and interesting story to go along with the many references to art, historical artifacts and architecture. The producers also incorporated many important characters from some of the most influential and memorable times in history. They included Sacagawea, cavemen, civil war mannequins, and even paintings such as “the crying girl” by Roy Lichtenstein. These characters weren’t only a huge part of the movie but also took part in discreetly adding in educational scenes that relate to many of the things covered in this class. Even if you have absolutely no prior knowledge of historical artwork or sculptures, you can still easily enjoy the movie and understand what is going on throughout the whole thing. However, if you do have prior knowledge on these types of things, I feel as if it’s noticeable and clear to say that the movie did a very good job to include these concepts in the movie to make it more realistic. Without any of these forms of art, the movie wouldn’t have been as interesting and entertaining. The fact that it took place in a historic museum helps the producers be able to take many forms of art and cultural artifacts and turn them into something that everyone can find interest in. Historians would enjoy this movie very much due to the multiple displays of artwork that was shown throughout, and the accuracy of the artwork that the producers made sure to include. 

The Huns were nomadic people who traveled to Europe after leaving Central Asia, to threaten the Roman Empire. The Hun were a fearsome tribe of people. Old stories tell tales of the boys having their faces slashed with swords as infants, to teach them how to endure pain before they can receive nourishment. In the movie the Huns are wearing hats lined with fur and these headdresses are very similar, if not exactly like those you would see in old pictures/drawings of the Huns. They wear big, bulky armor covered in repeating patterns, and their clothing is heavy with fur lining the inside and out. Their clothing indicating that they can endure whatever they may face on their travels. A detail the movie missed to incorporate would be the scars that the male Huns would have across their faces. I would have liked for them to include this detail so that I could have a better visual aid as to what the scarring may have looked like. This movie portrays the Huns and their culture to all have been very aggressive, savage people. This stereotype may give off the wrong impression to those who don’t know anything about the culture because obviously not every person involved in this culture behaves in such a manner. Creating such stereotypes in a movie could be problematic but I also think they’re used to clarify who they’re trying to reference. The stereotypes weren’t used in a negative way throughout this film, I think they were just used to tell a story and make sure there is clarity between the different cultures.

Another exhibit the movie focuses on is the Roman Empire exhibit. The director decided to make the soldiers of the Roman Empire miniature figures. I think that portraying the soldiers as miniatures was a good way to be able to show just how many soldiers there really were involved with the Roman Empire. If the soldiers were created life-sized, there would be no room in the exhibit to portray how many men fought for Rome. Thousands of tiny men approach the night guard in an act to attack him. All of the men are dressed in red and silver clothing/armor. While all of the soldiers wear the same silver helmet, the Chief wears a silver and gold-trimmed headdress with red feathers coming out of the top of it. The Chiefs colors are the same as his soldiers, but his outfit differs to show that he is in a position of power. Their weaponry includes catapults that launch fireballs, shields with Roman artwork on the front of them and flaming bows and arrows. Their weaponry in the movie is simulating the weapons they’d use in the time of the Roman Empire. The characters speak in the manner they would as if they were from that time period and the Chief begins his attack by saying “The Roman Empire knows no boundaries”. This phrase sheds light on the context of how the Roman Empire was one of the most extensive and powerful empires in ancient history.

The director of this movie incorporated an immense amount of detail into each of his scenes and exhibits, making it very easy for the audience to identify the ancient context that is being portrayed. All of the clothing that the characters wear symbolize the period that they are from and show a lot about the individual cultures at hand. When all of the exhibits interact with each other, it is clear that they are only aware of what they know from their specific time frames. A lot of historical context was needed in order to create this film and after further research, all of the context that was used within the movie, their recreation of ancient history is pretty spot-on. I
think the overall outcome of this movie was positive. They didn’t try to use the stereotypes in a negative way and they helped to clear up confusion between the cultures mentioned. Considering this movie was created for a younger audience, the stereotypes help to not complicate the story too much and highlight the main aspects of the cultures. The effect that the stereotypes had on this movie was a positive effect and honestly made this movie enjoyable for me.

Life of Brian debuted in Britain in 1979. Pious audiences were so offended and outraged at the clever and blasphemous satire that it was banned in multiple countries for several decades. Where it was not outright banned it was given an X rating or heavily edited. Monty Python has a gift of creating satire based in truth backed by observable historical precedents and recurrence. In many cases the angrier a devotee the truer the commentary is. Fitting that a near parody of Christ’s life would be filmed on the same set in Monastir, Tunisia, where the series Jesus of Nazareth was filmed two years prior in 1977.

Brian Cohen is the namesake and protagonist of Life of Brian. Graham Chapman portrays the simple and average Brian who in the course of the movie is elevated to the status of a martyred messiah by zealous sheeple (people behaving like sheep following one blindly) in search of answers. He is even born at the same time as Jesus, which comedically results in the wise men mistaking baby Brian as the messiah, realize their mistake and take back their gifts. In the course of these events we are presented with commentary of empirical power and those who defy it.  Much of Brian’s life as we see it is parallel or the antithesis of Jesus, case and point instead of having a virgin mother, Brian was a child of rape. Brian’s mother (played by Terry Jones) is husbandless and seems to make her income by pleasuring Roman soldiers. Brian is told his father’s name was Naughtius Maximus, which makes his mother saying “he’s not the messiah, he’s a very naughty boy” even funnier. Even the idea of Deus Ex Machina is parodied by use of an alien ship rescuing Brian during one of his escapes. The phrase Deus Ex Machina is Latin for god of the machine. Conflict is resolved due to miraculous circumstance by way of divine intervention. “God” saving Brian by way of aliens makes for amusing commentary.

Multiple locations with similar architecture were used to create this world most of the film was filmed around The Ribat Monastir in Tunisia.This fortified monastery built in the year 796 was basically a coastal castle was filled with endless tunnels and passageways, providing a deep look at the traditional Arab architecture throughout the movie. We are shown the world of Judean architecture and culture with Roman infusions, in one case an almost excessive inclusion of marble statues decorating the square of the Monastir. A Romanesque veranda, white columns and all was constructed directly into the old stone walls to emphasize the idea of Roman occupation. Also there is a depiction of gladiatorial combat in the Amphitheatre in Tunis Tunisia. We get to see an armored Secutor gladiator chase after a nearly naked victim who ultimately outruns his armored foe till the Secutor has a heart attack. Kasbah of Sousse is a beautiful sandstone wall and tower which transport us to that biblical age. We get a taste of Roman mosaic flooring in the scene where the anti-Roman terrorist group Brian joins attempts to kidnap Pontius Pilate’s wife. The group digs up through the floor and pops out through the figure on the floors crotch.  

Speaking of the biblical age, above I referenced that the locations were the same used in the series Jesus of Nazareth. In addition, many of the props and costumes that were left behind were rehashed by the Pythons. The comedic specificity and authenticity used in the film were not immediately noticeable to the casual observer. A myriad of social, political, religious references are made, relating the past to the present. An example being the discussion among the People’s Front of Judea about the positive and negative influence of an invasive imperial entity. The naked body is a work of art and is used several times throughout the film. When Brian opens the window and accidentally exposes himself to a crowd of people you get a quick shot of Graham Chapman’s nakedness. Since the character was Jewish and Chapman was not, they used a rubber band to simulate the effect of a bris. Brian’s mother enters to see Judith (also naked and the reason Brian was naked), nice to see some equality from the Pythons. Full nudity in film needs to be more mainstream and artistically more accurate to reality. The Pythons were always ahead of there time. Especially when including the character Stan who wanted to be a woman named Loretta.

I really cannot begin to describe all the clever heresy which takes place in this brilliant film. It truly was a brand-new take on an ancient story in ancient locations. We got to explore the ideas of what a Roman occupied Arab society may have looked like. Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, Michael Palin, and the rest involved with Monty Python should be proud that they created such a clever and hysterical historical commentary on religion and politics among lands and architecture known for less than humorous struggles. We live in a tumultuous world in the same vein. We are transported to that monastery and we see the roman tapestries and we laugh and we forget our woes.  Watch this movie and I guarantee you will find a way to “Always look on the bright side of life”.