Talk:And Now for Something Completely Different

Reverted addition of the following text:

The Catchphrase is followed by a skit featuring 'A Man with a Tape recorder up his nose', with the Tape recorder playing the French National anthem. The Man with the tape recorder up his nose is then joined by his brother, who, incidentally, also has a tape recorder up his nose as well, subsequently play the French National Anthem solo and in stereo.

This only happened once, whereas the "and now for..." line was a stock catchphrase that turned up over and over. The man-with-a-tape-recorder-up-his-nose skit doesn't really merit inclusion in this article, especially in the introduction paragraph. —Etaoin 05:52, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This article is idiotic, lacking in focus, and poorly written. It is perfect and cannot be improved upon, a perfect tribute to Monty Python. --NoPetrol 03:54, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, it could list the sketches included. Anyone know which ones were in there? Fieari 07:11, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry. I've seen the film many times on Video on Demand. I'll list the sketches in order and add a spoiler template. --68.37.116.234 21:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

question

I'm not sure, but shouldn't the (Compare Generalissimo Franco is still dead.) be linked to this page?- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Live/Generalissimo_Francisco_Franco_is_still_dead

No. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxVolume (talk • contribs) 04:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Userbox

I think, Ergo: UserBox

This user's Hovercraft is full of Eels Is Yours?

Eh? Dfrg.msc User talk:Dfrg.msc 10:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

---

ha ha I like it. I actually rented the movie on friday and it was great. -- M (speak/spoken) 22:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The old woman at David's crotch

Based on the picture at Mary Whitehouse, I think it's her.

Is there any verification out there?

CaliforniaDave 09:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

Albeit not "controversial" - there are already six different redirects related to this article, including one with a page history. Ergo, I place this move request here to And Now for Something Completely Different as the correct capitalization (for instead of For). SkierRMH 06:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support per nom Number 57 11:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films), not controversial. Jogers (talk) 08:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support non-controversial. –Pomte 22:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

This article has been renamed from And Now For Something Completely Different to And Now for Something Completely Different as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 07:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Reference to Marshall Mcluhan?

Can someone out there confirm or deny the following: there is a scene with some figure in the background that looks like Marshall Mcluhan but the credits point out "no that is NOT Marshal Mcluhan in the background". Is the celebrity in question Marshall Mcluhan indeed?

Page move

The page move discussed above was incorrect. As this is British English, the f in For should be capitalized, just as it is seen on the dvd cover, in film posters, etc. This should never have been moved in the first place. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 00:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The editors above supported because of WP:CAPS; "for" is a preposition less than five letters. It belongs here. Erik (talk) 14:35, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason for ALL CAPS?

Is there any specific reason (that is not obvious to me) for the use of ALL CAPS (and also an additional space character before the exclamation mark) in the detailed descriptions of two sketches under "Sketches" section? One occurrence is at the end of the description of "Dead Parrot" sketch where it says: wanted to be... "A LUMBERJACK !", and the other in the description of "Vocational Guidance Counsellor" sketch where it says: dreams of being... "A LION TAMER !" --Wayfarer (talk) 23:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Believe/belie

"The film did not offer anything extra for British fans, except the opportunity to see the sketches in colour at a time when many viewers still had black and white sets, and indeed many were disappointed that the film seemed to believe its title."

I changed the word "believe" to "belie", correcting an obvious typo. However, the word "believe" was very quickly reinstated by some busybody whose username now escapes me. I find this very silly.

• • — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.71.90.57 (talk) 06:59, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Warning box since 2011, no one has fixed the relevant problems or no one cares about warning boxes. I believe my mosquito netting might deter warning mosquitoes unless they are in fact warning drones. Someone with wiki knowledge, please help by telling the fix needed here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.71.90.57 (talk) 06:58, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Reaction from American audiences

This section states that "when it was released on 22 August 1972, the film had little success at the box office and did not do well until a late 1974 re-release".

Yet according to this list, it was actually released in the USA in 1971, went to the top of the box office charts after its second week on release and spent three weeks there.

It also grossed over $8 million, which seems pretty successful for a film with an £80,000 budget.

Barry Wom (talk) 17:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Ignore the above. The list of box-office films is in error.

Barry Wom (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)