I typically don’t gravitate toward comedies, and as someone who struggles to find humor in most jokes, I often find myself unmoved by what others consider funny. “Classic” British comedy, despite my own heritage, has always been something I've avoided. While many people laugh out loud, I tend to find comfort in shows like ‘Monty Python’ and 80s sitcoms – a testament to how little humor I genuinely experience. Naturally, approaching this widely acclaimed classic filled me with apprehension. The film seemed designed to confirm my suspicions: it features two ‘Monty Python’ actors, Cleese and Palin, teaming up again, along with a seductive female character who uses her charm to get what she wants, and a clash of British and American accents. Yet, surprisingly, I really enjoyed *A Fish Called Wanda*! The story involves a gangster, an animal lover, and two American con artists planning a jewel heist, which the titular Wanda attempts to sabotage. In my view, comedy thrives when it’s well-written; the visual elements are simply a result of the script and the actors' performances. Discovering that Cleese himself wrote this hilarious screenplay – especially given the success of ‘Fawlty Towers’ – was reassuring. He is undeniably funny, and here’s why. *A Fish Called Wanda* isn’t just a series of random scenes where characters react to achieve comedic effect, which is common in modern comedies; instead, it repeats scenes, exaggerating the absurdity each time. Wanda repeatedly tries to seduce George's barrister to get information. It seems simple enough, but the approach proves surprisingly effective. Cleese cleverly continues this subplot throughout the film, focusing primarily on the dynamic between Wanda and Archie. The humor arises from the surrounding characters who amplify the situation. For example, Archie unexpectedly encounters his wife while Wanda is hiding, after a bizarre prelude. Her locket falls out (a crucial plot point!), his wife finds it and, instead of reacting with anger at his possible infidelity, she assumes it’s a gift and wears it. This doesn't even mention Wanda’s “brother,” who bursts into the room pretending to be an agent investigating KGB operatives, or Archie’s daughter constantly appearing in the background. My description barely does it justice; each time Wanda and Archie are together, the situation escalates further. It was genuinely gripping comedy, and I found myself laughing uncontrollably. When situational comedies are crafted with such care, they can be surprisingly revitalizing. However, these moments of awkward hilarity wouldn’t work without the detailed character development woven into the screenplay. Each character has a unique trait and comedic style. Archie is generally clumsy, Wanda relies on her charm, Otto objects to the word “stupid,” and Ken struggles with an intermittent stutter. These are just some of the details that bring these characters to life and make the comedy feel so natural. Crichton’s final directorial effort prioritized Cleese's writing above all else, eschewing flashy camerawork or editing techniques. As a result, it can occasionally feel somewhat rough around the edges. The shifts between Wanda’s schemes and Ken’s task of eliminating a witness (by killing her dogs instead of her!) sometimes felt abrupt and disjointed. Fortunately, the strong performances maintained momentum throughout. While Cleese, Curtis, and Palin were all excellent, Kline's over-the-top screaming and shouting truly elevated the comedy. The homophobic slurs are now outdated and detract from his character, particularly since he repeats them frequently; however, I consider this a personal failing rather than an inherent flaw in the film. It’s the well-defined characters that matter most. These small players in the British comedic landscape swim around creating laughter wherever they go. With its fantastic performances, engaging story, and exceptional writing, *Wanda* is a film I won't soon forget. Modern comedy simply can’t replicate this level of excellence.

Source on TMDB