Holy Grail content

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Brennan Hill, Nov 12, 2001.

  1. Brennan Hill

    Brennan Hill Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1998
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Please don't flame me for asking, or turn this into a censorship discussion [​IMG]. I haven't seen this movie in at least 10 years, and don't remember it very well. Could someone who has seen it recently be kind enough to give me a feeling for whether or not this movie is generally appropriate for children in terms of profanity, sex, violence, etc. I've got a 10-year old and was thinking of watching this with the whole family. I usually would watch it myself first to judge the content, but if someone has seen it recently they might be able to save me some time.
    Thanks,
    Brennan
    p.s. That's Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
     
  2. Ken Seeber

    Ken Seeber Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1999
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It may be a bit much for a 10-year-old. The profanity is fairly mild. The violence is so over-the-top that it's cartoonish, so that may not be that big of a deal to you. Remember the scene where the black knight is dismembered by King Arthur? ("Tis but a scratch!" "No it's not, your arm's off!")
    But then there's the whole Castle Anthrax sequence, with the chaste knight taking refuge with the naked women who are bathing each other. ("...and then the oral sex.")
    Come to think of it, when I was 10 I would have loved seeing this movie!
    [Edited last by Ken Seeber on November 12, 2001 at 05:20 PM]
     
  3. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,063
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I love this movie, and hope my son will enjoy it someday, but I won't let him see it when he's only 10.
    ------------------
    13-time NBA world champion Lakers: 1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001
     
  4. Coressel

    Coressel Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 26, 1999
    Messages:
    665
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I was 10 when this movie was first released in 1975. My older brother took me too see it back then.
    Just look at me now...
     
  5. Brennan Hill

    Brennan Hill Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1998
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  6. Scott Merryfield

    Scott Merryfield Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 1998
    Messages:
    12,398
    Likes Received:
    1,128
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Michigan
    Another scene you may not want your 10 year old to see:
    Who's that, then?
    I dunno. Must be a king.
    Why?
    He hasn't got shit all over him.

    I love this film, but it's a little too "mature" for a 10 year old. (IMO, of course)
    ------------------
    My DVD Collection
    AFI 100 Films to watch: 40 -> 1
    [Edited last by Scott Merryfield on November 13, 2001 at 09:37 AM]
     
  7. Richard Kim

    Richard Kim Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Even though it has a PG rating, if it were rated today, it would most likely be an R. The rating system has become alot more strict than it was in the past. Lots of gory scenes of people getting hacked to pieces, though I sure found them damn funny! [​IMG]
     
  8. GlennH

    GlennH Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1998
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Real Name:
    Glenn
    I don't think it would get an R rating today. The violence and gore, as mentioned above, is very over-the-top. But I think the Castle Anthrax scenes would merit a PG-13 for sure. Without that a PG.
     
  9. Richard Kim

    Richard Kim Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So it's better for kids to be exposed to people getting their throats slit, hacked and dismembered than a mild bit of sexual innuendo (with no nudity)? [​IMG]
    [Edited last by Richard Kim on November 13, 2001 at 10:52 AM]
     
  10. TimDoss

    TimDoss Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1999
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    To me, the violence is so unrealistically done that I don't
    have a problem with my son watching it with me... I do
    forward through the castle anthrax scene, but the rest of
    it I think is fine. He is 8 years old and loves to quote
    the bridge of death scene with me, and laughs hysterically
    at the killer rabbit. Only you, though, as a parent, can
    determine if there is anything that you are uncomfortable
    with your children seeing, and/or you are uncomfortable
    explaining. Remember, though, when you were young how much
    of your parental shield was gone when you were at school
    or at a friends house... there is nothing in the Holy Grail
    that they won't be subjected to somewhere else, and it may
    give you a good opportunity to let you explain some of the
    rights and wrongs or inappropiateness of it. That being
    said, I would definitely preview anything first before
    letting them watch it.
     
  11. Carlo Medina

    Carlo Medina Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 1997
    Messages:
    10,574
    Likes Received:
    741
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Personally, your opinions may vary, but I would consider this at least PG-13 material. If I had a 10 year old I might wait a few years before showing it to them. Of course the accents are such that if the child doesn't know what they're talking about (and at 10 I don't think I knew what oral sex meant) they might just miss the joke anyway.
    Regardless, I don't think any permanent damage would be done (like showing an 8 year old kid Faces of Death or something like that) by the Pythons.
     
  12. TimDoss

    TimDoss Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1999
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Richard: While I do agree that that is the mentality
    with many people, I disagree here... 10 years old is
    too young to be subjected to "oral sex". Modestly and
    thoughtfully done sex related scenes, as far as the
    parent is comfortable in explaining is one thing, but
    to get vulgar, explicit or just beyond their need of
    understanding is another. Similarly, the violence in
    Holy Grail is so cartoonish as to be funny, whereas the
    scenes in say Starship Troopers of the aftermath of the
    bug invasions is probably just more than a child needs
    to see.
     
  13. Jodee

    Jodee Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 1999
    Messages:
    1,044
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I saw this movie as a very young child (probably 8?) and it was always one of my favorite movies growing up.
    I turned out fine...
    Seriously, the more sexual jokes went right over my head until I was older. Kind of like Bugs Buny cartoons [​IMG]
    That oral sex line went right over my head and I thought nothing more of it until I was old enough to know what oral sex meant.
    [Edited last by Jodee on November 13, 2001 at 11:07 AM]
     
  14. TimDoss

    TimDoss Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1999
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oral sex is when you talk about it, right???
     
  15. Coressel

    Coressel Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 26, 1999
    Messages:
    665
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, but it's rude to talk with your mouth full...
    [​IMG]
     
  16. GlennH

    GlennH Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1998
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Real Name:
    Glenn
    Richard Kim wrote:
    quote: So it's better for kids to be exposed to people getting their throats slit, hacked and dismembered than a mild bit of sexual innuendo (with no nudity)? [​IMG][/quote]
    Uhh, no I didn't say that. I just said what ratings I think the movie would get from the MPAA today based on its content. I never said I agreed with it or would rate it the same.
    That said, I do think the violence in Holy Grail is not on the same realistic par with other films. I think even kids of 10 can probably discern the comedic nature of it in context.
    [Edited last by Glenn Heberle on November 13, 2001 at 02:31 PM]
     
  17. Jussi Tarvainen

    Jussi Tarvainen Second Unit

    Joined:
    May 10, 2001
    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Remember that the PG-13 rating didn't exist before Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom.
    (One movie that would never get an R-rating today is John Landis's Kentucky Fried Movie.)
     
  18. Geo Gabor

    Geo Gabor Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 1999
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Count me as another who thinks that this material is NOT appropriate for a 10-year-old. In fact, I'd argue that it's not appropriate for most adolescents. Most adolescents are still developing their sense of morality and don't have a firm basis with which to view the movie. I guess it depends on your views of what is moral and immoral and how you want to raise your kids.
     
  19. GlennH

    GlennH Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1998
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Real Name:
    Glenn
     
  20. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,063
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We all have different ideas of what's bad for our kids, which is what makes it so wonderful when things are released uncensored and WE get to decide.
    For me, I don't have a problem with references to oral sex. If my son is old enough to know what it is, he's old enough to hear about it. I do have a problem with the vulgarity (such as shit), but it's mostly with the gore. Blood spurting out of arms and legs is not something I want him seeing til he's older.
    ------------------
    13-time NBA world champion Lakers: 1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001
     

Share This Page