Upon the mere mention of the film Monty Python and the Holy Grail, several lines or images may come to mind. Whether you remember the Knights Who say Ni, the horrifically silly battle with the Black Knight, or the clapping of coconuts to simulate horses, two aspects of the movie consistently remains present: the normalization of the abnormal and the "abnormalization" of the normal. The rest of this post will contain SPOILERS, so do not read this if you don't want to be spoiled on the ending of the film.
Before tackling the way the Holy Grail presents itself as being purposefully unhinged from reality, I must analyze the aspects it shares with Aristotle's idea of the comedy. The plot is rather simple: Arthur, King of the Britains, gathers together the Knights of the Round Table to search for the legendary Holy Grail on a mission from God himself. Despite the timeless charm of the story of a quest for greatness, the film flips the story on its head by focussing more on comedy than characters and making the quest amusingly unfortunate.
Almost none of the main characters of the film fit the role of Aristotle's idea of the lowly-yet-witty hero. King Arthur comes across as an over-pompous leader trying to solidify his role in the story, while also trying to maintain a sane disposition in an insane world. He proudly debates with peasants about his own right to rule Britain in the face of more feasible, modern forms of government an recruits Sir Bedevere the Wise for proving that witches must weigh the same as ducks. He initially seeks to gather a group of knights to go to Camelot, but claims that the idea is "too silly" after a song-and-dance number within Camelot. Arthur acts as the story's straight man and gives definition to the story. In this manner and many others, the Holy Grail sets up a binary between the grounded quest for the Grail and the insanity of the world of Arthurian England. As to the story involving a rise in the protagonist's fortune, I'd like to discuss that as I discuss the ending.
Whereas most story-driven comedies rely on character chemistry for humor, the Holy Grail rightly relies on the skit-like challenges spread throughout the knight's quest and its own satirical take on the traditional film narrative. The scene that best represents how the film generally represents absurdity, in my opinion, is the witch scene. When the scene begins with a village attempting to claim that a costumed woman is a witch, the skit is grounded to something relatable in a nod to the Salem witch trials, which is further emphasized by Sir Bedevere's attempt to seek logic in the situation. However, Bedevere's claims, which include that witches must float in water and that they are made out of wood quickly drag the scene back into the absurd. Bedevere's final conclusion that witches must weigh the same as ducks provides some solace to the situation, as the woman has essentially been acquitted of witchcraft. Yet, in the final scene where they weight the woman and duck, the peasants claim that the woman is a witch before the scale equalizes, showing the hopelessness of logic in the world of the Holy Grail. This exchange parallels the relationship between absurdity in reality in the film; any attempt to drive the story in a reasonable direction are swiftly thwarted by either the shattering of the 4th wall or the natural absurdity of the Middle Ages. The ending however, is what truly makes it distinct from other comedies.
The Grail is found at last, but in a castle controlled by the French soldiers from earlier in the film. A numerous amount of soldiers appear from the horizon out of nowhere ready to fight for Arthur, presumably in a grand, final battle to conclude his quest. However, before the battle can even start, a modern day police car drives in front of the moving soldiers, who then take Arthur into an armored van and drive away the rest of the soldiers, who cower in fear despite outnumbering the police. The reason for Arthur's arrest: the slaughter of a historian attempting to narrate the quest early in the film. As the historian's wife points out Arthur as the man who killed her husband and the rest of the knights are arrested, a police officer approaches the cameraman, shuts off the camera, and ends the film. In complete contrast with Aristotle's comedy, the Holy Grail ends in complete and utter failure for the main protagonists in a twist completely out of left field. This failure, however, is not completely unprecedented. Arthur and his knights are extremely unsuccessful in each of their battles, running away from the French, the white rabbit, and the Black Beast of Aaaarrrggh, so the twist isn't in complete opposition to the story.
Overall, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, is not only a satire of the fantasy film genre, but of logic and reality itself. The frailty of both concepts in the film open up the boundaries to the jokes that can be made and give the film its unique identity. The zaniness of many of the films scenes are emphasized by cheap effects, a unique visual style, and an overall sense of confusion that keeps the audience unaware of what will happen next, but able and willing to laugh. These elements not only make the film funny, but also memorable. The images of a tall imposing figured stopped in his tracks by the word "it", a stubborn knight who calls a draw after losing all of his limbs, or something as simple as coconut halves to imitate the sound of horse hooves will always be linked back to this film. All in all, Monty Python and the Holy Grail shows how comedy should altogether be a formless concept defined by those who weld it - comedy has no formula.
No comments:
Post a Comment