--- title: "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" year: 1975 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail" fi1m_id: "monty-python-and-the-holy-grail" imdb_id: "tt0071853" tmdb_id: 762 wikidata_id: "Q25043" fi1m_score: 87 critics_score: 80 critics_reviews: 14 published: "2026-09-15" updated: "2026-09-18T08:38:33.962862+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) Directed by Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones · 1h 31m · MPA PG · Adventure, Comedy, Fantasy ## Identity Monty Python and the Holy Grail - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** monty-python-and-the-holy-grail - **IMDb ID:** tt0071853 - **TMDB ID:** 762 - **Wikidata ID:** Q25043 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071853/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/762, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q25043 **Fi1m score: 87** · Critics 80 from 14 reviews *In a sentence:* King Arthur has coconuts instead of horses and still expects a little respect > Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam’s Arthurian comedy is persistently funny and more carefully made than its horse substitutes suggest. A few sketches outstay their welcome, but the cast’s straight faces make the nonsense worth taking seriously. ## Synopsis King Arthur (Graham Chapman) and the knights around him inhabit a medieval adventure where questions of bravery, belief and authority keep becoming arguments. John Cleese plays Sir Launcelot, Michael Palin plays Sir Galahad and Eric Idle plays Sir Robin, while Terry Jones appears as Sir Bedevere and Terry Gilliam as Patsy. The cast also double as guards, peasants and other figures in Arthur’s path. Horses give way to coconut shells, a witch trial turns justice into a public spectacle, and animation interrupts the live action. Jones and Gilliam direct this comic treatment of the Arthurian legends. ## Review *Monty Python and the Holy Grail* is a richly funny attack on the seriousness of Arthurian adventure, with a few sketches that should have stopped sooner. Directors Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam understand that a king who expects respect is useful company for comedians determined not to give him any. Their film finds room for jokes about bravery, religious belief and the business of making a medieval film at all. It also gives Graham Chapman the sensible task of playing King Arthur as though there might still be some dignity in the job. Chapman is the reason the silliness does not become exhausting. His earnest Arthur gives the others someone solid to work against, and the performance keeps asking us to recognise a king even when the film will not supply a horse. We laughed at the coconut shells because the pretence is so bare and the royal seriousness remains intact. The joke would be thinner if Chapman seemed pleased with it; by not advertising the comedy, he lets an absurd piece of business become ordinary transport. Terry Bedford’s cinematography gives the landscapes a scale that would suit an adventure played straight. Roy Forge Smith’s production design keeps the medieval surroundings credible even when the means of getting about are plainly ridiculous. The visual care matters because the coconut shells are funnier against a convincing setting. Making every image look foolish would leave the performers with less to do, and the countryside is allowed to remain impressive without being made into another gag. The witch trial shows how well the group can organise its foolishness. With Connie Booth as the accused and Jones as Sir Bedevere, the scene makes a public display of people treating bad reasoning as a sufficient reason to punish someone. We found it funny and unpleasant for the same reason: the certainty of the people conducting it. The satire works because the scene lets their reasoning expose them, rather than pausing to offer a sensible explanation of why they are wrong. John Hackney’s editing is especially important in a film assembled from loosely connected set pieces. The pauses and abrupt changes are part of the comedy, and much of the pleasure comes from being denied the continuation a scene appears to promise. Gilliam’s animation extends that freedom, allowing another kind of visual nonsense to interrupt the actors. These interruptions are funny in their own right, though we sometimes wished the live-action sketches had been cut with the same impatience. Not every exchange deserves the time it gets, and some of the talkier passages make the next interruption feel overdue. Jones and Gilliam occasionally seem too fond of a joke to notice that it has already worked. John Cleese’s Black Knight makes stubbornness amusing, but the gruesome fighting asks for an appetite for repetition that we do not always share. At 91 minutes, the film can afford these irritations without becoming a chore. The film gets further with Chapman’s affronted dignity than many adventure spoofs get with a succession of familiar scenes and altered names. He gives the jokes someone to inconvenience, which keeps them funny even when the story barely advances. A taste for disconnected sketches helps, and a tolerance for arguments that have long since lost their original subject helps more. Watch it with someone who will let the cast finish the lines. *Fi1m score 87, published 15 September 2026.* ## What the critics say Most critics like it a great deal: twelve of the fourteen reviews are positive and none is negative. The praise gathers around the set pieces, with the coconut shells standing in for horses, the Knights Who Say Ni, the French taunters and the killer rabbit named again and again. Critics admire how thoroughly the film sends up Arthurian legend, chivalry and costume pictures, and several single out Gilliam’s animations and Graham Chapman’s earnest, put-upon Arthur. The reservations are about shape. Several reviews call it a string of sketches rather than a story, and the ending divides opinion: Radio Times finds it a let-down and Paste thinks the nonsense thins out late, while Consequence thinks it lands well. The two mixed notices, from Variety and the Los Angeles Times, find it more amusing than hilarious, with talky patches and fight scenes some will find gruesome. The Times and the Los Angeles Times both think Life of Brian is the funnier film. ## Straight answers **Is Monty Python and the Holy Grail worth watching?** *Monty Python and the Holy Grail* is worth watching for anyone with a taste for disconnected sketches and straight-faced nonsense, and we scored it 87. Graham Chapman's earnest Arthur keeps the silliness from wearing thin, though a few talky passages run on after the joke has landed. Watch it with someone who will let the cast finish their lines. **How long is Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and what is it rated?** *Monty Python and the Holy Grail* runs 1h 31m and is rated PG by the MPA in the US. It is an adventure and comedy film. **Where can I watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail in the US?** *Monty Python and the Holy Grail* is streaming on Amazon Prime Video, Peacock, The Roku Channel and Pluto TV in the US, and it is also available to rent from Amazon Prime Video from $1.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service. **How violent or frightening is Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and is it suitable for children?** *Monty Python and the Holy Grail* carries a 15 certificate in the UK and a PG in the US, and its violence is comic rather than distressing. The Black Knight fight is gruesome and repetitive, with blood played for laughs, and the witch trial is funny and unpleasant at once. Older children used to slapstick will be fine; the squeamish may look away once or twice. **How does Monty Python and the Holy Grail compare to The Princess Bride?** *Monty Python and the Holy Grail* is the sharper and stranger of the two, while [*The Princess Bride*](https://film.one/film/the-princess-bride) is the warmer and more coherent. Both enjoy puncturing heroic self-importance, but the Python film is a run of loosely connected sketches with a king to inconvenience, and Reiner's is a proper storybook adventure that takes its characters seriously. Choose the Grail for jokes, the Bride for company. **What should I watch after Monty Python and the Holy Grail?** After *Monty Python and the Holy Grail*, try [*The Princess Bride*](https://film.one/film/the-princess-bride) (1987, Fi1m 86): A warmer storybook adventure, with similar affection for puncturing heroic self-importance. Then [*Daisies*](https://film.one/film/daisies) (1966, Fi1m 85): For the appetite for destruction, abrupt interruptions and jokes that refuse good behaviour. ### Reviews we read (14) - **Time Out**, Tom Huddleston (5/5): One of the most original, hilarious and visually striking comedies ever made. Its unnecessary gorgeousness and goofy, slapstick laughs stand out. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail) - **Slant Magazine**, Arthur Ryel-Lindsey (90/100, inferred): The critic praises the film's brilliant satire of medieval legends and lifestyles combined with strong comic timing and irreverent humor. They highlight its youthful charm, energy, and the troupe's freedom in creating an accessible, singular work despite its amateurish production qualities. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail/) - **The New York Times**, Vincent Canby (90/100, inferred): The film is a marvelously lunatic endeavor that sends up the King Arthur legend, courtly love, bravery, costume movies and movie violence. It features nonstop gags, some inspired, with Graham Chapman as an earnest but doomed Arthur. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/1975/04/28/archives/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail.html) - **Empire**, Rob Fraser (85/100, inferred): Feature films bring out the best in the Pythons, resulting in a focused comedy packed with killer lines, sight gags and absurdity that qualifies as a medieval-on-your-ass laff-riot. Highlights singled out include the homicidal bunny, the wedding guest massacre and the use of coconut shells for horses. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/monty-python-holy-grail-review/) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (85/100, inferred): The critic praises the film's anarchic daring and subversive elements of anticlimax, noting its bridgehead into international stardom. Gilliam’s animations are singled out as timelessly brilliant. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/oct/15/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-review-rerelease) - **Radio Times**, David Parkinson (4/5): A wonderfully inventive comedy that brilliantly debunks the Dark Ages and legends of chivalry. Highlights include the witch trial and Holy Hand Grenade sequence, though the ending disappoints. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-5jbwyd/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail/) - **The Times**, Kevin Maher (★★★★☆): The film offers moments of brilliance in its loosely related set pieces and early religious irreverence, though the Pythons later peaked with Life of Brian. The Knights Who Say “Ni!” and Trojan Rabbit gags are highlighted as highlights. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/film/article/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-review-classic-nz05t780g) - **Los Angeles Times**, Kevin Thomas (50/100, inferred): The inspired lunacy of the Pythons' take on King Arthur is more often amusing than hilarious, with dry and talky passages. Its glorious Scottish locales and the troupe's erudition in medieval history stand out, though 'Life of Brian' remains funnier. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2001-jun-15-ca-10596-story.html) - **Variety**, Variety Staff (50/100, inferred): The British comedy group sends up Arthurian legend in whimsical fashion, with Graham Chapman effective as King Arthur. The story is an excuse for set pieces, some amusing and others overdone, including gruesome fight scenes that will get laughs from some and make others squirm. [Read](https://variety.com/1974/film/reviews/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-1200423426/) - **Consequence**, Blake Goble & Dominick Suzanne-Mayer (90/100, inferred): The roundtable calls the film one of Python’s finest and most accessible works, praising its infinite quotability, meta silliness, and status as a foundational comedy that influenced later works while highlighting the perfect ending. [Read](https://consequence.net/2015/05/tis-a-silly-film-monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-at-40/) - **Digital Spy**, Stella Papamichael (90/100, inferred): The film is a triumph of silliness over British pomposity and a comedy masterpiece. The critic singles out the coconut shells used in place of horses and the irreverent satire of religious fanaticism for praise. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/re-viewed/a673453/re-viewed-monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-remains-a-comedy-classic-40-years-later/) - **/Film**, William Bibbiani (90/100, inferred): The critic ranks Holy Grail as the troupe's best and most successful film, praising its intelligent, subversive deconstruction of Arthurian legends and British national identity alongside its clever cinematic gags and fourth-wall breaks. They highlight its enduring quotability and how it works wonderfully as a complete film. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/1380040/monty-python-movies-ranked/) - **Eye for Film**, Amber Wilkinson (75/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a funny and surprisingly fresh silly romp through medieval legends, praising its loose sketch structure, standout hilarious scenes like the French knights and Knights who say 'Ni', and Gilliam's fabulously surreal animation. [Read](https://eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-film-review-by-amber-wilkinson) - **Paste**, Sean Fennell (75/100, inferred): The critic celebrates the film's enduring quotability and absurd humor as a shared cultural language passed between generations, while acknowledging that the nonsense thins out toward the end. [Read](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/monty-python/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail-50th-anniversary-legacy-retrospective-knights-of-the-round-table) ## Details - **Director:** Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones - **Director:** Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones - **Writer:** Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones, Michael Palin, Thomas Malory - **Cinematography:** Terry Bedford - **Editor:** John Hackney - **Production design:** Roy Forge Smith - **Costume design:** Hazel Pethig - **Producer:** Mark Forstater, Michael White - **Cast:** Graham Chapman as King Arthur / Voice of God / Middle Head / Hiccoughing Guard; John Cleese as Second Swallow-Savvy Guard / The Black Knight / Peasant 3 / Sir Launcelot the Brave / Taunting French Guard / Tim the Enchanter; Eric Idle as Dead Collector / Peasant 1 / Sir Robin the Not-Quite-So-Brave-as-Sir Launcelot / First Swamp Castle Guard / Concorde / Roger the Shrubber / Brother Maynard; Terry Gilliam as Patsy / Green Knight / Old Man from Scene 24 (Bridgekeeper) / Sir Bors / Animator / Gorilla Hand; Terry Jones as Dennis's Mother / Sir Bedevere / Left Head / Prince Herbert / Voice of Cartoon Scribe; Michael Palin as First Swallow-Savvy Guard / Dennis / Peasant 2 / Right Head / Sir Galahad the Pure / Narrator / King of Swamp Castle / Brother Maynard's Brother / Leader of The Knights Who Say NI!; Connie Booth as The Witch; Carol Cleveland as Zoot / Dingo - **Runtime:** 1h 31m - **Certificate (MPA):** PG - **Release (the US):** 18 July 1975 - **Genres:** Adventure, Comedy, Fantasy - **Budget:** $400,000 - **Box office:** $6 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b52A3sKz-I ## Where to watch in the US - Amazon Prime Video: streaming - Peacock: streaming, hd - The Roku Channel: free, hd - Peacock: free, hd - Pluto TV: free - Amazon Prime Video: add-on - The Roku Channel: add-on, hd - Amazon Prime Video: rent $1.99, sd - Amazon Prime Video: buy $7.99, sd *Checked 2026-09-15.* Also available in: AT, AU, BE, CA, ES, FR, GB, IT, MX, NL, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## If you liked this - *The Court Jester* (1955): Another medieval comedy that makes elaborate nonsense depend on exact comic timing. - *The Princess Bride* (1987), Fi1m 86: A warmer storybook adventure, with similar affection for puncturing heroic self-importance. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-princess-bride.md) - *Daisies* (1966), Fi1m 85: For the appetite for destruction, abrupt interruptions and jokes that refuse good behaviour. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/daisies.md) - *A Town Called Panic* (2009): Stop-motion chaos with the same conviction that absurd behaviour needs no apology. - *Jabberwocky* (1977): Kings, servants and fools find fresh reasons to regret one another’s company. --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail