A Fish Called Wanda

wow! Third time watching it and still think its a wonderful comedy with a magnificent Kline

An english comedy with an american touch and an exceptional cast. Contains some must-see hilarious classic cinema scenes.

Funny, engaging and well made. It does carry that Monty Python signature of sophisticated silliness, but not in a way where it feels like the artists aren’t pushing themselves. I don’t think it’s Cleese’s best work by any means, but I still like we got his take on a simple, irreverent crowdpleaser. Great acting by everyone involved, I wouldn’t be surprised if Jamie Lee Curtis got her role in _True Lies_ based on this. Filmmaking is quite good, maybe it could’ve used some trimming or stronger visual work, but I like that it stylistically embraces how English it is.

7.5/10

Jamie Lee Curtis really does have all the brain cells in this movie. Queen.

Also: Michael Palin is an absolute gem, we’re so lucky to have him.

When a quartet of conniving bank robbers pulls the perfect crime, the only variables left to chance are each other. This crooked crew has barely finished counting their profits before the backstabs and double-crosses begin, and amidst all that chaos, a depressed court barrister, a wicked old widow and a beloved pet angelfish are also sucked into the vacuum.

John Cleese is credited as both co-writer and co-director, and though he freely admits he did little of either, his fingerprints are nevertheless all over the film. _Wanda_ is quintessentially funny in the classic _Monty Python_ style, with boundless energy and a silly, black sense of humor that holds nothing sacred. With Cleese playing a relatively straight role and Michael Palin rendered all but mute by a speech impediment (a supporting part which he still makes wickedly funny), it falls to Kevin Kline and Jamie Lee Curtis to provide the bulk of the laughs. They both deliver in spades, upping their game to impress the past masters, but it’s Kline’s ridiculously idiosyncratic, deeply insecure hitman that most stands out. He’s so desperate, so innately weird, that it’s impossible to turn away, or even quit snickering.

This was way, way funnier than I’d remembered. A few bits fall on the wrong side of the silliness spectrum, and the ending feels overthought, but that’s a small price to pay. A great example that, even in the late ‘80s, the Python vein of humor was still very much alive and well.

Disparate British humor about a history of a robbery.

good well paced movie overall. first half wasnt the funniest but it gets better later. 1 or 2 laugh out loud jokes included.

The dumbing down aspect of the Otto character is the worst part about this movie. Otherwise a solid comedic action with some great characters and actors.

Guess I was the only one who didn't like this movie. Slow and disjointed cinematography and story telling, none of the characters are likable, none of the jokes are funny. With a 2024 lens some bits are especially cringey.

After realising that I hated them all I guessed that [spoiler]Jamie Lee Curtis and John Cleese would end up "winning" in the end[/spoiler]. Jamie Lee Curtis' character was manipulative, did some sexual assaults and evil. John Cleese was an idiot (seriously!? this esteemed lawyer couldn't figure out the woman was who was a key witness in the case he was working on, was only trying to figure out where the hidden loot was?) and he was cheating on his wife, (who was admittedly quite horrid too).

The point where I was about to turn it off was the scene where Otto is putting chips up Ken's nose. I was so bored I decided to google if this film was actually even highly rated, and the first result revealed that someone died laughing at this chip scene. I mean, I know modern humour has evolved a lot but damn, it wasn't even mildly funny. He just puts chips up the guy's nose. That's the whole joke.

It feels like humour for children, but at the same time the film is quite sexually explicit and has lots of swearing, so it's not for children.