IMDb RATING
5.8/10
1.9K
YOUR RATING
An animated, factually incorrect biography of Graham Arthur Chapman, one of the founding members of the comedy group Monty Python.An animated, factually incorrect biography of Graham Arthur Chapman, one of the founding members of the comedy group Monty Python.An animated, factually incorrect biography of Graham Arthur Chapman, one of the founding members of the comedy group Monty Python.
- Directors
- Writers
- Stars
Graham Chapman
- Graham Chapman
- (voice)
- …
John Cleese
- John Cleese
- (voice)
- …
Terry Jones
- Terry Jones
- (voice)
- …
Michael Palin
- Michael Palin
- (voice)
- …
Terry Gilliam
- Interview Don #2
- (voice)
- …
Carol Cleveland
- Masseuse
- (voice)
- …
Philip Bulcock
- David Sherlock
- (voice)
Stephen Fry
- Oscar Wilde
- (voice)
Lloyd Kaufman
- Uncle Lloyd
- (voice)
Cameron Diaz
- Seigmund Freud
- (voice)
Ronnie Corbett
- Thompson
- (archive footage)
- (uncredited)
David Frost
- Self
- (archive footage)
- (uncredited)
- Directors
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Well I have to say that I was rather disappointed with this film. It comes across as disjointed and of varying levels of quality. It certainly never reaches anything like the standards of entertainment of the old Monty Python stuff. Mind you I suppose it is clear that it doesn't set out to or pretend to do that. It is, after all, a film based on Graham Chapman's autobiography.
I did read this book many years ago – in part because I and some friends met the man himself back in 1974, and we spent a rather drunken evening together in the bar at the Kingshouse in Glencoe. This episode even gets a mention in the book (page 218), although not in the film; so I have some first hand knowledge of what he was like.
Essentially I reckon the book is an honest and accurate insight into Chapman's life (despite the title), and the film comes across as a project based on the book. The film does some things reasonably well, but mostly it looks like the producers simply farmed out sections of the book to several different groups of students (or maybe recent graduates) of media studies or animation, and then stuck them together using odd snippets of Chapman's own reading of the book.
I watched the film on DVD and found the "additional material" to be considerably more watchable than the film itself, particularly some old 8mm film and the "behind the scenes" stuff on the way the animation scenes were produced!
I did read this book many years ago – in part because I and some friends met the man himself back in 1974, and we spent a rather drunken evening together in the bar at the Kingshouse in Glencoe. This episode even gets a mention in the book (page 218), although not in the film; so I have some first hand knowledge of what he was like.
Essentially I reckon the book is an honest and accurate insight into Chapman's life (despite the title), and the film comes across as a project based on the book. The film does some things reasonably well, but mostly it looks like the producers simply farmed out sections of the book to several different groups of students (or maybe recent graduates) of media studies or animation, and then stuck them together using odd snippets of Chapman's own reading of the book.
I watched the film on DVD and found the "additional material" to be considerably more watchable than the film itself, particularly some old 8mm film and the "behind the scenes" stuff on the way the animation scenes were produced!
Having just read the book days before watching the film i felt it was a fun and entertaining interpretation of Graham Chapman's zany autobiography. The animations were good (even if I liked some more than others) and even gave a better visual context to some of the parts in the book that i got a little lost on. The voice acting was enjoyable but the "Cameron Diaz as Freud" part ran a little long in my opinion. All in all I thought it was a pretty enjoyable and interesting endeavor.
I'm a big Monty Python fan but I haven't yet read A Liar's Autobiography (Volume VI).
I was very disappointed with the film as it lacks any of the Monty Python charm. It feels more like a Spike Milligan book, but lacking that crucial, undefinable charm which draws you into a madman's world. It only made me wistful to watch some actual Monty Python. However there is somewhat of a spooky feel in that the film is narrated by Graham Chapman himself, who became an ex parrot in 1989.
The film is mostly animated using multiple styles of animation. Fans of Terry Gilliam animation will be disappointed to see a lack of this style though. There are a number of very crude jokes and references in this film, again lacking the charm to make them truly funny.
The film is somewhat reminiscent of the film Yellow Submarine (1968) and perhaps a sober state of mind is not recommended when watching this film. I highly recommend the Spike Milligan novels as well as any of the Monty Python films or shows.
I was very disappointed with the film as it lacks any of the Monty Python charm. It feels more like a Spike Milligan book, but lacking that crucial, undefinable charm which draws you into a madman's world. It only made me wistful to watch some actual Monty Python. However there is somewhat of a spooky feel in that the film is narrated by Graham Chapman himself, who became an ex parrot in 1989.
The film is mostly animated using multiple styles of animation. Fans of Terry Gilliam animation will be disappointed to see a lack of this style though. There are a number of very crude jokes and references in this film, again lacking the charm to make them truly funny.
The film is somewhat reminiscent of the film Yellow Submarine (1968) and perhaps a sober state of mind is not recommended when watching this film. I highly recommend the Spike Milligan novels as well as any of the Monty Python films or shows.
Was this film put together by several committees? What a disappointing 'tribute' to a great talent! The animation styles were all over the place. Nothing cohesive. It was as if multiple committees of individuals, who never met, had decided to produce different parts of the film without consulting each other. It looks like multiple animation 'artists' were trying to show off their styles of animation without respect to the purpose of the film. What a visual mess! Such a disappointing 'tribute'(?!) to one of the greatest talents in British comedy. It is a disappointing example of 'style over content' A thoroughly disappointing film :-(
This is a very naughty movie. Many times I said to myself, "Did I just see what I thought I just saw? No, it couldn't be." It celebrates anuses, penises, anal sex, 69, promiscuity, alcoholism and death. The animation is very cleverly done to give you the subjective impression of seeing the world from inside Graham Chapman's head. Everything just sort of flows, the way ideas flow.
There is one big catchy musical number with words that summarises the cheeky raunchiness:
Sit on my face and tell me that you love me
I'll sit on your face and tell you I love you too
I love to hear you oralize
When I'm between your thighs
You blow me away
Sit on my face and let my lips embrace you
I'll sit on your face and then I'll love you truly
Life can be fine if we both sixty nine
If we sit on our faces in all sorts of places
And play till we're blown away
There is one big catchy musical number with words that summarises the cheeky raunchiness:
Sit on my face and tell me that you love me
I'll sit on your face and tell you I love you too
I love to hear you oralize
When I'm between your thighs
You blow me away
Sit on my face and let my lips embrace you
I'll sit on your face and then I'll love you truly
Life can be fine if we both sixty nine
If we sit on our faces in all sorts of places
And play till we're blown away
Did you know
- TriviaThe audio under the opening credits is from a sketch Chapman regularly used to perform, where he asked a live audience at the start of the show to give him "thirty seconds of abuse", as this saved time later on. For this movie, specially recorded abuse was added from John Cleese, Sir Michael Palin, Terry Jones (shouting Medieval curse words), Terry Gilliam, Carol Cleveland, and David Sherlock, Chapman's former partner. One of the investors in this movie can also be heard shouting "I want my f**king money back!"
- GoofsSigmund Freud's name is misspelled as "Seigmund Freud" in the opening title sequence and closing credits.
- ConnectionsFeatured in De wereld draait door: Episode #8.126 (2013)
- Soundtracks633 Squadron
Written by Ron Goodwin
(P) EMI Partnership Ltd
Performed by Central Band of the Royal Air Force (as The Central Band of the RAF) with Principle Director of Music Wing Commander H. B. Hingley MBE
Produced by Roberto Danova
Supplied by kind permission of PLAZA Records Ltd
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Autobiographie d'un menteur
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $5,102
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $5,102
- Nov 4, 2012
- Gross worldwide
- $63,469
- Runtime
- 1h 25m(85 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content