This rascal of a feature film is turning 50

David Lee

6-5-2025

Translation: Katherine Martin

This spring marks the 50th anniversary of the premiere of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. To this day, it’s one of the most bizarre films to ever make it to the silver screen. And that’s exactly why it’s still worth watching.

When I was a teenager, Monty Python’s Flying Circus would be screened on Swiss TV late at night – and I loved it. With sketches such as the Ministry of Silly Walks, the Lumberjack Song and the philosophy football match between Germany and Greece, the British comedy troupe kindled my love of absurdist humour.

I also thought the feature film Monty Python and the Holy Grail was okay, but, in my opinion, it wasn’t a patch on the Flying Circus. Granted, there were some funny scenes. The one with the Black Knight, for instance, has etched itself into my memory for the long haul. However, even as a teenager, I found many of the gags to be pretty lame – the knights pretending to ride horses and imitating the sound of hooves with coconuts being a prime example.

Before sitting down to rewatch the film to mark its 50th anniversary, I’m a little scared of being disappointed. Cult films often fall short of expectations if you’re not slap bang in the middle of the cult. And my sense of humour isn’t the same as it was back in the day. As a teenager, I thought a bad joke was better than no jokes at all. These days, I think the opposite.

Still funny

But my concerns prove to be unfounded. Monty Python and the Holy Grail is more entertaining than I expected. This might partly be down to the fact that it’s only about 90 minutes long, the typical runtime of films back in the day. Personally, I think that’s a sensible length for a feature film. Today, every script, no matter how thin, gets rolled out into two and a half hours. No wonder people are constantly fiddling with their phones during screenings.

The more important reason, however, is that the joke density is pretty high. To this day, I’m still impressed by the number of curious, surprising premises. The gags start as early as the opening credits, which have mock-Swedish subtitles. Very quickly, these subtitles go off script and start advertising holidays in Sweden. The credits are then interrupted with a note that the subtitlers have been sacked. Even so, the dodgy Swedish continues. At this point, there’s another note to inform the viewers that those responsible for sacking the subtitlers have been sacked. The film hasn’t even started yet, and the absurdity-o-meter is already veering into the red zone.

Almost too many jokes

And so it continues. The noble King Arthur gets embroiled in Marxist debates, and insulted instead of being permitted entry to castles: «I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries!» There’s also a scene in Camelot Castle, although Arthur and his knights opt not to go there on account of it being «a silly place». Can it get any weirder? Oh yes. A man from the 20th century – «a famous historian» – appears in the middle of the film to explain the story so far, before being killed by a knight riding past. This also prompts the 20th-century police to show up. Yet another of the film’s running gags is loudly declaring obviously alive characters dead out of convenience.

I still find all of this funny today. Even so, I still don’t see the film as a masterpiece. For long stretches, the humour is anything but subtle. It’s not just swords that are brandished around in the film – the jokes are waved in front of your nose too. More importantly, however, the number of jokes crammed into it is a weakness as well as a strength.

At its core, the film is a parody of the legend of King Arthur and probably corny medieval films too. The thing is, Monty Python and the Holy Grail is bursting with so much absurdity that you never feel like you’re watching a typical feature film at any point. The fourth wall isn’t broken – it’s never there in the first place. As a result, the Arthur satire falls flat. What remains is a random string of gags.

Making the most of the budget

However, the budget required to create a truly successful medieval feel to the film just wasn’t there. The minds behind Monty Python didn’t even manage to scrape 300,000 pounds together for the project. No film studios wanted to finance it, so the film was mainly backed by rock groups such as Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd, as well as record labels and co-producer Michael White.

Monty Python probably made the best of its modest budget. The film looks laughably badly produced at times, but this is leveraged for additional comedic effect. Many of the castles look the same...because they really are the same castle. But when a different castle actually appears, Arthur’s servant says, «It’s only a model».

The film ends as surreally as it begins. The police pitch up with sirens blaring, arrest Arthur and force the soldiers back, megaphones in hand. A police officer puts a hand in front of the camera. And that’s it. No credits.

It was probably the cheapest solution. It would’ve been far too expensive to actually stage a final battle. And yet, it’s also the funniest ending I can think of.

David Lee

Senior Editor

David.Lee@digitecgalaxus.ch

My interest in IT and writing landed me in tech journalism early on (2000). I want to know how we can use technology without being used. Outside of the office, I’m a keen musician who makes up for lacking talent with excessive enthusiasm.

These articles might also interest you