5/10
It has potential, you can almost feel it
20 January 2020
I watched this movie twice - first about 15 years ago, second just yesterday. As much as I enjoyed most of Monty Python and post-Monty Python individual work by all members of the team, two major disappointments including this one. Second was Graham Chapman' Yellowbeard.

It is interesting, that Yellowbeard is disappointing in similar way - despite all the good actors and potentially good ideas behind the script, these movies never quite work. They almost do, they carry you from scene to scene with desire to see what happens next, but either nothing really interesting happens, or something wacky, undercooked and utterly unbelievable. So you vacillate, either to be bored to death or to get drunk or worse.

Unlike Graham Chapman movie, this one is not as chaotic and actors are working pretty much on the same level. Still, some scenes come across as childishly silly, while some others are unfunny as crude representations of rather sad reality. Each and every scene runs a little too long and overstays its welcome. I started with few giggles in the first half, and the last half was a bit of a torture to finish.

Much good stuff is getting wasted in rather shallow spoofing - fascinating historical material with Hy-Brasil, Norse mythology, customs and practices of the era, all of it does not quite reach the highs of Holy Grail. Wonderful idea about gods being children is presented in utterly underwhelming way too. It seems that most of the script and editing need just a little twist, slightly different angle to make it shine and perhaps editing needs to be a little more aggressive to cut out the overindulgent bits.

But alas.

As it is, It is neither good reconstruction of history, nor solid comedy - again, Monty Python' Holy Grail reaches unbelievable highs in both.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed