Monty Python and the Holy Grail

Filipe Manuel Neto 2/10/2023 8:55:31 PM 8.4

**One of the pinnacles of British humor.** This was my first contact with Monty Python, which I already knew famously, and I loved the movie. It is quite simply one of the high points of British humor. The film is easy enough to understand, parodying the Arthurian legends surrounding the quest for the Grail, but the story is just a pretext for successive jokes, each one better than the last. I don't know the group of comedians very well, but I do know a number of great British comedy actors here, starting with John Clease, Terry Jones, Graham Chapman, Terry Gilliam, Michael Palin and Eric Idle. They are very good individually, but priceless together. The film has several moments worth mentioning, starting perhaps with the witch trial, and then moving on to the fight with the black knight or the knights who say Ni. It's not a very long film, but it's really worth seeing every comic situation. The dialogues are full of hilarious moments. The ending, however, is a little less strong than expected, which does not take away from the film any of its merit. Technically, it's not a remarkable film. There is no concern here with historical accuracy or rigorous recreation of the Middle Ages, nor does the film ask for it. We have stage costumes and props, obviously fake but functional, and interesting sets, in castles and in some reasonably well chosen places. There are some special effects and visuals, but they aren't notable. Be that as it may, it's a comedy that remains fresh despite the decades that have passed since its debut.

drystyx 4/3/2023 4:46:07 PM 8.4

Seriously, you could die laughing from this film. I remember the first time I watched this film, back in antenna days on the educational UHF station that was all fuzz, and even then I thought I would die laughing. The story of King Arthur always did beg for such a satire. The bits are almost all memorable. I durst not mention even one, because I would be tempted to mention a hundred more scenes and a thousand more lines. This is very slapstick. I never thought I would laugh at cruelty, but when it is obviously so overdone that it can't be taken seriously, like a man having his arms and legs cut off and still thinking he's invincible, especially when the delivery is so perfect, I can't stop laughing. There are some people who don't like this film, but those people are wipers of other people's bottoms.

CinemaSerf 3/6/2024 1:54:44 PM 8.4

Fortunately for me this was a rather short visit to the surreal land of Monty Python, and though it does have it's moments, I was really quite unimpressed by their Arthurian antics. We start with Graham Chapman's King Arthur gadding about England tying to recruit some suitably worthy individuals to sit at his round table. Task complete, he gets a sign from God that they must undertake the most holy of quests - and find the Cup of Christ. It now falls to the other three - Cleese, Idle and Gilliam - to dress up in suits of armour and seek the grail amongst the innuendo-ridden kingdom. Along the way they encounter the Black Knight, a castle full of sex-starved maidens, some monks - indeed just about everyone you might expect from mediaeval society before a really annoying denouement with the "Knights of Ni" - all they want is a little garden, or two... All but fifty years on, it's probably not really fair to look at this with 2024 eyes, but this was my first time of seeing it and I was really left thinking - why didn't the police get involved earlier? It's not that the jokes don't work, well not all of them, anyway - it's that they so labour the punchline. It's as if someone took a thirty minute sketch show and decided to pad it out for an extra hour. Less could certainly have been more. There are a few fun cameos - Carol Cleveland's "Zoot" and Connie Booth's witch stand out, but otherwise I felt a bit like I was the victim of some very dated hype. I didn't hate it, but really - what was all the fuss about?