Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) – 3/5

It had its moments, but people elevating this film to sainthood are exaggerating

„Monty Python and the Holy Grail“ is a British comedy movie from 1975, so the 50th anniversary is getting closer and this one is in the English language from beginning to end, even if you will also find parts in French and Latin (because of the historic background) here and some Swedish in the opening of the film for whatever reason. I honestly did not get that at all and also did not find it funny, but just my taste and things got better as the film went on. But before I get to the story and comedy, let’s look at the basics first: This is a Monty Python production which means that you will find the familiar names and faces in here. Directors are the two Terrys: Gilliam and Jones. Gilliam is over 80 now and ones died a few years ago not too far away from 80. Jones is also acting in this film and same is true about all three writers we have here: Graham Chapman, John Cleese and Eric Idle. Chapman plays the central character, but sadly died a long time ago already while Cleese is still with us nicely into his 80s now and still working and Idle is also still alive and will turn 80 later this month. So he is the youngest from the bunch nonetheless. With Monty Python and especially their most known works, it is fairly common that the actors play more than just one character and makeup and costumes help them with it. Just look at Cleese, who is for me always the one with the greatest recognition value from the gang. I will not simply list all the characters he portrays in here, but you can check that out for yourself. I think that this one we have here is maybe the second-most famous film for Monty Python following their comedic elaboration on Jesus Christ. If I remember correctly, that is also not a particularly long film and same is true for this one here as it barely makes its way past the 1.5-hour mark. Usually, I say that it does if we include the closing credits, but there are none here and all of the credits are included at the beginning for storytelling purposes as this film ends abruptly when one character’s camera is destroyed in the end.

They used several of these gags linked to filmmaking directly which would not have fit otherwise if we look at how long ago the film took place, but the Monty Python folks just don’t care. They let it all out in their creativity. A random intermission break would be another example. I must say that I myself am probably not the very biggest Monty Python fan, but I still appreciate some of their content and they have also grown on me over the years for sure. I guess they are a great example in my case how humor can change as time goes by. It is also a good thing that they did not stretch the film to infinity in terms of the duration, but just kept it relatively short. This is not a historic epos or so. I guess today I am just in the mood for some brainstorming here about what stayed in the mind for me when it comes to this movie that many people still really adore as it safely has its place in the imdb top250 highest-rated films. It is even in the top150 still, but this could change soon. Barely hanging in there. Basically, this is separated in several chapters as it is often handled with films that have a historic background. There is focus pretty much on one specific character in every chapter in here and in a way the stories than belong together as they are not completely detached from each other. I liked it. It was easy to follow and not a complicated watch this way. One of my favorite parts was one specific inclusion of music here, namely when we have a singer who accompanies one of the protagonists and keeps singing about his leader’s achievements and deeds while said leader is rather weirded out by this and what he sings is also not completely on the praising side you could say. He basically calls him a coward, but wraps it nicely into words that sound heroic and important.

I really liked the girls in this film, even if there is not too many or at least not many with considerable screen time. The witch was nice and same is true for the one we see briefly stand behind one of the heroes. Or most dominantly, in another story, I really liked the many girls from the castle named Anthrax. I mean towards the end of this segment, the protagonist is pulled away from there from his buddies, but I can totally see why he would want to stay. It was funny when the female leader there mentions all these girls and their ages and how they are all so sorry and want to make it up to the man. There, Monty Python though also mocked itself a bit later on already when they mentioned options to keep this women-exploiting segment shorter. You could call it progressive from today’s perspective, but you could also call it too politically correct maybe and not a success from a really creative perspective, but as they indeed kept the segment before that included, it is all good. What I also found fairly entertaining was the scene towards the end with the bloodthirsty violent rabbit. Now that came out of nowhere and was fairly hilarious. Most people in the audience were also in shock, but not in a bad way. Yes, it is really bloody, but still the comedy dominates. Nice contrast here between super cute fluffy bunnies and what could be hidden underneath. It is not the only segment of violence where the blood is spraying in all directions. The earlier most memorable example was the main character (Arthur or Artus here in Germany) fighting a resilient knight in black armor when he wants to cross a bridge and needs the man to get out of the way. Recruitment is not a success, so they need to fight. Arthur prevails and the enemy loses his limbs. But it was still fairly funny as he kept talking and being resilient at a point where he should be long dead in fact. It was maybe not my favorite segment, but still stayed memorable, perhaps also because of my infatuation with dark knights and as you know from film history, I am not the only one there. I think it was Cleese in the armor by the way.

Oh yeah, I mentioned that there’s parts in French in here and this basically the case at the very beginning and end when our heroes come across a fairly foul-mouthed French soldier standing up there inside the castle and looking down on them. Literally really. This was fairly funny. I really liked the talk about the coconut origins and also about the coconut sounds there imitating the galloping sound of horses. This is also where the film got its title from here in my area, the German-speaking countries. Totally different title and nothing to do with the item mentioned in the original title, perhaps also because the film does not feel too much about said item. But I liked this creative change here as it was one of my favorite moments there and I mean by that the discussion they had with the French fella. Nicely done. In general, this is really a very common approach to comedy you find in Monty Python films all the time, lengthy discussions about fairly simple or even absurd subjects. I do not always like it, but here it was really up my alley. One moment when I liked it less was when the slaves or hard workers or what they were basically discussed with Arthur about his right to bark orders at them and they were turning this almost into a socially critical movie. It all depends on what you like. I know some in the audience of my screening found this funny too and some also liked the Swedish references at the very start. Some liked the word that consists of three letters that made people shiver when they heard it while I think it was okay too, but I myself preferred the moment when they brought the almost dead guy and he was supposed to be taken away in exchange for a little money, only problem is he was not dead yet. What they did there to fix the issue was in fact really shocking if we look fully at the facts, but the way it was presented, it felt totally hilarious. I could go on and on about all the comedic inclusions in here, but you get the message I am sure.

Before I get to the end of my review, I will just mention one more inclusion that I found funny, namely the one when the heroes meet the really old fella and have to answer his questions to be allowed to not only move on, but stay alive. It was not really the fact how he asked a different third question in this segment that entertained me well, but it really when Arthur turned the tables there and what happens when he asks the old man a question himself. So this film is really full of creativity and while I would not say it is a great film or one of the very best from its year, as you can see from my rating too, I am glad I could go and watch this on the big screen yesterday again and actually I turned this into a Monty double feature for me if you wanna call it that as I watched the more recent and more modern, but also more forgotten „The Full Monty“ right before „Monty Python and the Holy Grail“ on the occasion of a British film classic retrospective. I was also not surprised at all how packed the room was. This is considered a bit of a classic, definitely not only in Britain. I think the very biggest strength to this film and to Monty Python in general is that they are so unpredictable. You never know what happens next and coherent storylines is nothing you will get with them and I mean that in the most positive way imaginable. The ending is the best example. Now, who did see that coming? I mean not always everything works out completely, but enough does/did for me to hand out a positive recommendation here and it was one that was never really in doubt, except the first 10-15 minutes maybe, but then it all got better. So yeah, big screen or small screen, I recommend you to watch this film here. Thumbs-up.