shoemakerted@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> William Black wrote:
>
>
>>In fact 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail' was made by two highly
qualified
>>medievalists, one of whom has a couple of rather serious books in
print.
>
>
> Oh no. You mean that people really smacked their heads with religious
> books? ;)
No, but people flagellated themselves. It's an absurdist
version of that.
> I'm only having fun here -- yes, there were many valid details in Holy
> Grail, but at the same time it was so absurd.
Right. But the Pythons surely were being more like
symbolist painters, ur surrealists. The movie itself
is more like "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" -
if nothing else, it shows how ridiculous some
of the more persistent myths were. It takes Le Morte d'Arthur
completely apart.
It may be a funny movie, but its central point
is deadly serious. In the companion disc
on the DVD, I beleive they said they worked for
five years on the script.
> Just don't tell me that
> The Emperor's New Groove was made by a precolumbian expert.
>
Disney material is *overtly* commercialized, anthropomorphic
and usually pretty content free.
> Seriously -- thank you for your thoughtful responses.
>
> Ted Shoemaker
>
--
Les Cargill
|
