Idle < Cleese < Palin < Chapman < Jones < Gilliam
Palin > Cleese > Kline > Idle
The rest are garbagio
Rimmer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone else
Palin > Cleese > Chapman > Idle > Jones > Gillam
Gillam should be ranked independently though
Can we all agree that Palin was the only good one?
>>70705166
He was the most consistenly good. Cleese and Chapman were also solid.
Chapman and Palin have always been my favorites.
But desu:
Palin=Chapman=Cleese>Idle>Jones>>>Gilliam
>>70705145
True Gilliam should be taken independently.
>>70705221
Chapman wasn't any good at all. I don't see why people keep mentioning him. Is it because he's dead?
>>70705294
No.
He just had a good presence. All in all one if the best.
>>70705294
No, no, no, no....
well yes.
>>70705294
Heironicallyplayed the 'straight guy' against Cleese being an absolute madman - the chemistry and interplay between them was great.
I always found funny how with a six man cast they had
>two tall skinny men
>two normal height skinny men
>two fat short men
They could have been able to do the same roles with a cast of 3.
Gilliam>Jones>Chapman>Palin>Cleese>Idle
Gilliam showed his creativeness in his movies outside the group
Jones wrote Labyrinth
Chapman died before he could make anything bad
Palin is a total bro, watch his travel show
Cleese is funny, just not as funny as he thinks he is
Idle is a shill who cashes in on being in on something big
>>70705394
Anyone could have played his role.
>>70705519
There was no chemistry. Anyone could have done it. No offense meant against the man's memory but he was utterly forgettable and exercised no discernible talent.
>>70705294
He was the best actor and arguably the best writer. Fuck off.
>>70705294
I don't think anyone could have played Brian as well as him.
A lot of their bits wouldn't work unless there was an outside perspective for the viewer to sympathize with. Chapman played him better than anyone else.
It's also funny how their 'straight' man was the homo.
>>70705623
Anyone could have done it. I'm also not convinced he was gay as everyone keeps claiming he was, but that's another topic for another time.
>>70705583
Why did he play the lead in the two plot driven movies? He just had a presence for the straight man no one else had.
>>70705675
Inculcation, man. He was there and people liked him. That doesn't mean he was a talented actor or contributed anything. Anyone could have done his part, nothing against the man but he was completely replaceable by literally anyone else walking the planet.
>>70705641
He was publicly gay for decades. Being gay in the 70s wasn't a career boost like it is now.
You could say he played the straight man because he wasn't as good at being funny, but I think he played the straight man better than the other 5.
>>70705841
Listen I didn't want to get into this, but Graham Chapman is on-record as having several long-term relationships with women, and also sexual politics in the 70s were a lot looser than they are now even though you've implied that they're more stringent now, which isn't at all true and is something only a millenial would claim. Faux persecution is part of the millenial complex... Graham Chapman was not "gay". There's abundant evidence proving it.
He also wasn't worth anything in the Monty Python troupe and could have been replaced by anybody. Douglas Adams could have played his role.
>>70706212
Like a lot of gay men, he was somewhat bisexual but he did prefer men. Maybe it was because he was during the pre AIDS, post pro gay stuff that he did it.
He also collabarated with Cleese the most. Most of the writing was Cleese and Chapman, or Palin and Jones.
>>70703594
Palin>>>>>everyone else can go suck a dick
>>70706336
>Like a lot of gay men, he was somewhat bisexual
wtf
