The research of the Holy Grail is just a pretext to a movie, in which the story after all is not so important.

Rating: 1/10 (7 February 2005)

I would prefer that Monty Python were included in this " best 250 " list because of their masterpieces, s.a. The Life of Brian, The Meaning of Life, And now something completely different, a.s.o. , than for this boring not-succeeded movie.
Just to take the concept of the enthusiastic main comment I red, you have to know how to use this kind of " silly " humor: here lays the distinction ( I add ) between real silliness and humor one! The Holy Grail belongs unfortunately to the first sphere. (and suggesting to watch Space Balls instead of it, as I read in another comment, is not a solution: it is pure silliness as well!)
Monty Python (so as Mel Brooks, who seems to have forgotten it ) knew very well how to make people laughing with surrealism, so they are not to blame for this forgivable and forgettable little sin.
What is to blame is that we should have forgotten it, and on the contrary I found with surprise that this bad film ( I won't add about it anything more than the many not-satisfied comments say ) is underlined and appreciated.
Of course I remain convinced about this thing: Monty Python knew how to make people laughing, and they surely ( in their own ) still know it: that's the reason why if they saw their movie now, I'm sure they would not laugh at all!