Eric Idle slams 'ungrateful' Monty Python co-stars
The 82-year-old comic wrote stage show Spamalot, which is based on his 1975 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and he thinks the rest of the comedy troupe - whose surviving members are John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, and Michael Palin - should be more "grateful" for the money they receive from the production.
Asked if the other Pythons receive royalty payments, he told The Guardian newspaper: "They got more f***ing money than they've ever been grateful for. They got f***ing millions and they're miserable and horrible and bitchy about it.
"I spent 20 years working for Python and then two years on the O2 show. They were there for two weeks.
"I'm not really motivated by money, to be honest. Anyway, the producers get all the f***ing money and divide it up according to the contract.
"Someone sued us for years, saying I was paying the Pythons money from my back pocket. And I said: why would I risk going to an American jail to give John Cleese more money?"
Idle admitted there was a "lot of arguing and fights" between the Monty Python stars but he thinks that was good for their work.
He said: "Some things in Python were very enjoyable and some were not. Holy Grail was cold and miserable. Sometimes that makes it funny. One of the worst things you can have in comedy is enough money.
"Python was quite a lot of arguing and fights and good work is often like that. The best thing about showbiz is when it's over. I think if you're enjoying yourself, then you're not acting or giving, you're just having a good time. Well, that's not funny."
Eric Idle has blasted his Monty Python co-stars for being "miserable and horrible and bitchy" about royalty payments.
The 82-year-old comic wrote stage show Spamalot, which is based on his 1975 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and he thinks the rest of the comedy troupe - whose surviving members are John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, and Michael Palin - should be more "grateful" for the money they receive from the production.
Asked if the other Pythons receive royalty payments, he told The Guardian newspaper: "They got more f***ing money than they've ever been grateful for. They got f***ing millions and they're miserable and horrible and bitchy about it.
"I spent 20 years working for Python and then two years on the O2 show. They were there for two weeks.
"I'm not really motivated by money, to be honest. Anyway, the producers get all the f***ing money and divide it up according to the contract.
"Someone sued us for years, saying I was paying the Pythons money from my back pocket. And I said: why would I risk going to an American jail to give John Cleese more money?"
Idle admitted there was a "lot of arguing and fights" between the Monty Python stars but he thinks that was good for their work.
He said: "Some things in Python were very enjoyable and some were not. Holy Grail was cold and miserable. Sometimes that makes it funny. One of the worst things you can have in comedy is enough money.
"Python was quite a lot of arguing and fights and good work is often like that. The best thing about showbiz is when it's over. I think if you're enjoying yourself, then you're not acting or giving, you're just having a good time. Well, that's not funny."
Eric Idle has blasted his Monty Python co-stars for being "miserable and horrible and bitchy" about royalty payments.
The 82-year-old comic wrote stage show Spamalot, which is based on his 1975 movie Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and he thinks the rest of the comedy troupe - whose surviving members are John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, and Michael Palin - should be more "grateful" for the money they receive from the production.
Asked if the other Pythons receive royalty payments, he told The Guardian newspaper: "They got more f***ing money than they've ever been grateful for. They got f***ing millions and they're miserable and horrible and bitchy about it.
"I spent 20 years working for Python and then two years on the O2 show. They were there for two weeks.
"I'm not really motivated by money, to be honest. Anyway, the producers get all the f***ing money and divide it up according to the contract.
"Someone sued us for years, saying I was paying the Pythons money from my back pocket. And I said: why would I risk going to an American jail to give John Cleese more money?"
Idle admitted there was a "lot of arguing and fights" between the Monty Python stars but he thinks that was good for their work.
He said: "Some things in Python were very enjoyable and some were not. Holy Grail was cold and miserable. Sometimes that makes it funny. One of the worst things you can have in comedy is enough money.
"Python was quite a lot of arguing and fights and good work is often like that. The best thing about showbiz is when it's over. I think if you're enjoying yourself, then you're not acting or giving, you're just having a good time. Well, that's not funny."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
3 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Annabelle doll handler dies whilst on tour with cursed toy that inspired The Conjuring films
Dan Rivera, the handler of the real-life Annabelle doll that inspired The Conjuring character, has died while on tour with the cursed toy. Paranormal investigator Rivera was the primary caretaker of the Annabelle doll, a possessed Raggedy Ann doll that was housed in the now closed Occult Museum of Ed Warren and his wife Lorraine Warren located in the back of their house in Monroe, Connecticut. Rivera was on a tour of the US, titled Devils on the Run Tour, hosted by Ghostly Images of Gettysburg and the New England Society for Psychic Research (NESPR) - which was founded by the late Warrens - when he unexpectedly passed away at the age of 54. No cause of death has yet been released. A post on the New England Society For Psychic Research official Facebook page read: "It's with deep sadness that Tony, Wade, and I share the sudden passing of our close friend and partner, Dan Rivera. We are heartbroken and still processing this loss. "Dan truly believed in sharing his experiences and educating people on the paranormal. His kindness and passion touched everyone who knew him. Thank you for your support and kind thoughts during this difficult time." Despite Dan's death, the doll will continue to tour on the remaining dates. The haunted Raggedy Ann doll - which is based on the character featured in a series of books by American writer Johnny Gruelle - is connected to paranormal events in the 1970s. It had come into the possession of Donna, a 28-year-old student nurse, from Hartford, Connecticut, who reported the doll behaving strangely and would move around her apartment on its own. A psychic medium informed Donna and her roommate that the doll was inhabited by the spirit of a deceased six-year-old, but after it began exhibiting malicious behaviour they contacted the Warrens who pronounced it was demonically possessed and took it away to store in a glass case in their occult museum. The Warrens claimed the doll could give "psychic slashes" to people she didn't like, drawing blood as if she had used a knife. The Conjuring Universe movies, which are based on the real-life paranormal investigations of the Warrens, made Annabelle a horror icon, albeit with a different design due to copyright issues with the Raggedy Ann doll. The demon doll is the main protagonist in Annabelle (2014), Annabelle: Creation (2017) and Annabelle Comes Home (2019), whilst also appearing in The Conjuring (2013), The Conjuring 2 (2016), Michael Chaves' The Curse of La Llorona (2019) and The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (2020). The Conjuring: Last Rites, the final movie in the current Conjuring Universe, will hit cinemas this September.
Sky News AU
6 hours ago
- Sky News AU
'I had no idea.' American expat confused by everyday Australian expression, causing an embarrassing conversation
An American expat in Australia has gone viral after her misunderstanding of the popular phrase 'first in, best dressed.' In a two-minute video posted to TikTok, Maura Sheahan, who goes by the username @mauradorable, revealed how she had interpreted the phrase literally, and planned to show up to a restaurant in her best dress. 'So, I call up the restaurant trying to make this reservation,' she recounted to her followers. "We don't actually do reservations - we just do first in, best dressed." "I'm like, what do you mean first in, best dressed?" Maura said. "Like, am I going to show up in there and [the restaurant staff will] be like, 'Oh, that is an ugly outfit. You're in the back by the kitchen. Send this girl to sit by the trash cans where no one else can see her.' That's what I'm thinking." She went onto to say that at her work she had recounted the saying, and she was mortified to reveal that the saying was Australian for 'first come, first served' The TikTok video drew over 280,000 views and hundreds of comments – many laughing at the hilarious misinterpretation of the common expression. Many Aussies replied saying they were stunned to hear that 'first in, best dressed' was a uniquely Australian turn of phrase. "I never knew that saying was only heard in Australia," read the most liked comment, which had received over 2200 likes. Another Australian added that they "genuinely thought this was a common saying". One Aussie even conceded that Maura's response made sense if you'd never heard the saying before. "[W]hen you think about the expression you made a very logical conclusion," they wrote. According to podcast Aussie English, the term comes from Old English, which was coined for a family that shared clothes. An Australian teacher wrote that they had made the "mistake" of telling their international students 'First in, best dressed" before taking them out on an excursion.
The Age
8 hours ago
- The Age
A powerful, razor-sharp culinary and coming-of-age memoir
MEMOIR Hunger Like a Thirst Besha Rodell Hardie Grant, $35 There is a lot to learn from this book. Besha Rodell has led a pretty fractured life. As a child in the 1980s, she lived in a tumbledown house in Melbourne's Brunswick with her father, a historian and former minister, and her American mother, the daughter of a Hollywood scriptwriter. Her mother started having affairs and her father moved into another house, sharing with the man who was to become Besha's stepfather. Before long, Besha's life was divided between the USA and Australia. Within the states, she was a nomad, circulating around North Carolina, Los Angeles, Atlanta, New York, Colorado and other places. She found jobs in restaurant kitchens and began working obscene hours with curious colleagues. The restaurant industry hardly leaves time for its practitioners to eat. Part of this razor-sharp memoir campaigns for change in the destructive habits of a trade whose virtues Rodell fully appreciates. Yet, many cafes eat their staff. Rodell shares her story with brio, and it is a dizzying sequence of events. She has so many unforgettable experiences that she can hardly remember them all. She and her partner, Ryan, and before long their child, Felix, sail close to the wind financially. Eventually, Rodell found her way into reviewing restaurants and, for many years, this has been her stock-in-trade; at present, she's the chief restaurant critic for The Age. As she starts to unpack the intricacies and demands of writing about food with integrity, Hunger Like a Thirst becomes a sorbet in a culture that is so spiced with hype that it has no flavour of its own. Rodell has worked against the tide in a world where influencers and other minor celebrities are cajoled into providing all the flattery any business could want. If you have posted even lukewarm reviews of restaurants, you may know what it is like to be contacted by the establishment and offered inducements to change your tune. Whom can you trust? She has her roots in an earlier time, when reviewing was a form of genuine engagement, not mindless barracking. She inherited excellent rules from a gentleman called Craig Claiborne who became the food critic of The New York Times in 1957. Claiborne was a pioneer in several ways, not least in establishing a food section of the paper that dealt with more than domestic housekeeping. His rules could well be adapted to reviewing anything, from books to cruises. They advocate a standard of consistency and objectivity. Weekly reviews should be done by the same person. The reviewer will dine anonymously. The reviewer will visit the restaurant at least three times, eat widely from the menu and order some dishes more than once. Absolutely no freebies of any kind.
