Originally Posted by FredFriendly
What an insult, comparing this absolute dreck to one of the finest comedy troupes ever. Nothing in the first seven minutes of this show (which was all I could stand before I had to turn it off) even remotely reminded of me of anything Monty Python, which I have watched since it first aired in 1969. Nor did it remind me of Ichigo Mashimaro, which is one of my favorites. I'd say more, but I've wasted enough of my time on this garbage.
Why such strong feelings? When the world "insult" appears, clearly more is involved than just reason. But you do make me question my own taste. So I will be watching even more closely as the series progresses.
In fact, I did rewatch the first seven minutes closely, and continue to see lots of amusing stuff in a style of humour I regard as subtle and deep, for all the broadness involved. Then I rewatched some Monty Python sketches. The settings are different. The direct relation to society and politics is different. But the style
of humour seems similar to me: set up a situation in which certain things are expectable, then completely trash the expectations with absurdity, blaring forth human folly and weakness in a way that lets us sympathize rather than condemn. This show has its nasty elements, but perhaps nasty doesn't bother me as much as it does others?
Anyway, thanks for being provocative (or provoked?).
By the way, one of my favorite Monty Python sketches is The Architect Sketch
, where (as you know) an architect played by John Cleese appears in front of a board to pitch his design for a new apartment building.