MovieChat Forums > Laugh-In (1967) Discussion > Laugh-In Vs. Monty Python? Which do you ...

Laugh-In Vs. Monty Python? Which do you like better?


Note: I've only seen the 25th Anniversary special of Laugh-In.

So far, I prefer Monty Python, but I REALLY want to see more Laugh-In episodes.

reply

I thought Laugh in was funny at the time, but Monty Python holds up better over time.

reply

I agree that "Monty Python's Flying Circus" holds better with time, compared to "Laugh-In."

To illustrate, MPFC has been shown in reruns since episodes stopped airing on PBS in the mid-70's. It's been on the Comedy Central network, and also on A&E.

"Laugh-In"...I don't see much value for that show in reruns! It hasn't been shown on syndication, has it?

reply

LAUGH-IN was a child of the '60's, and as such, is considered dated today. But it was a riot in it's time!

reply

Yeah I don't find Laugh In funny in the slightest.

reply

Laugh-in was rerun here in the UK possibly late '70s early '80s, I remember it being funny mainly because of the catchphrases.- the German guy going "mmm, verrrry interesting..." and "here comes the judge!" I have a DVD boxset now, and its not really laugh out loud funny by todays standards, oviously a lot of the skits relating to current affairs have no relavence now, but there are still some pretty good bits.eg.

The cocktail party

man: hey, how'd you like to come back to my place?
woman: ok, as long as you don't try anything fresh
man: no,nothing fresh,just the same old thing..

and it must have been seriously high profile at the time judging by the guest stars they got hold of.

whereas Python remains funny because it just is. the comedy is not really tied to a particular time, "spam,spam,spam,spam" is just as ludicrous now as it was then, as is the whole "spanish inquisition" thing, and returning to a pet shop and the owner refusing to believe the parrot he sold you is in fact dead.

reply

"Laugh-In"...I don't see much value for that show in reruns! It hasn't been shown on syndication, has it?


Nick at Nite aired it for a few years in the 80s. That's where I first saw it since I was born the year Laugh-In premiered and didn't see it first run. If I had seen it first run I wouldn't have understood or even remembered it.

(knock,knock,knock) Penny (knock,knock,knock) Penny (knock,knock,knock) Penny

reply

There are some similarities. My parents used to let me watch Laugh In when I was just a little girl, barely old enough to be in school. Mind you, most jokes were over my head. Now as an adult, I wish to watch the shows to understand them. The 25th anniversary is just a sample of the madness.

Of course, if you watched clips of the actual show they'd be SO dated (Vietnam, the outfits, the "lingo"). Makes me feel old that we, well the young adults, actually talked that way in real life...not good for a six year old.

But comparing British comedy to American comedy coming from two totally different cultures and attitudes is like oranges to apples. I suspect if you throw in "Benny Hill" you'd be even more confused. Monty Python basically had more of a story line in the sketches that tied one into the other whereas most Laugh In sketches could stand by itself alone without tying it to the next.

Anyway, to answer your question it depends on my mood. I prefer Laugh In when I want to remember growing up in the 1960s when I had no worries but first grade homework. To remember the music and the style of clothes (I still love those bright colored outfits...if only they made them in my size now!). To know what it was like when there was a very real war on the other side of the world and a human being walked on the moon for the very first time.

But I think Monty Python is better, it's not as dated and there are no real political overtones that anchors them to a specific era. They often made use of classical music and historical facts dates and places even if it was satire. Most of the story lines were very safe-no one died, there was no violence, and if it was political it was toward The Royal Family.

English readers on this forum might think otherwise.

reply

But comparing British comedy to American comedy coming from two totally different cultures and attitudes is like oranges to apples. I suspect if you throw in "Benny Hill" you'd be even more confused. Monty Python basically had more of a story line in the sketches that tied one into the other whereas most Laugh In sketches could stand by itself alone without tying it to the next.


^^^This.

Seriously - not even oranges and apples. British and American humor differ in ways that are hard to describe. We find many of the same things funny but then there are quirks in the language or mannerisms that we just don't get from each other. Add to the mix that most posters on this forum are either too young to have seen R&MLI when it was originally on, or were children when it first aired, and memories of the show aren't that clear.

I do love watching the "Britcoms" that are shown on PBS but admit I sometimes don't get why the audience is laughing. When I was 16, I went to England for the first time with a high school group, and one of the items on our itinerary was a play at the National Theatre called The Country Wife. I swear, the British audience laughed in all the places we (a large group of American teenagers) didn't, and we laughed in places where the rest of the audience was totally silent.

Laugh-In, like The smothers brothers, was filled with contemporary commentary, but it was wrapped up in silliness, sight gags, and one-liners. Even to compare it to other American comedy/variety shows wouldn't do it any justice. Laugh-In stands alone.

neat . . . sweet . . . petite

reply

monty python.

reply

[deleted]

some parts of python are very silly but some hold up very well and are still very clever, laugh-in was all silly and very dated looking.

reply