Jabberwocky (1977)

Cowardly and dim-witted peasant Dennis Cooper (a likeable performance by Michael Palin) stumbles his blundering way into a situation in which he has to slay a ferocious monster that has been terrorizing a rundown medieval kingdom. Director/co-writer Terry Gilliam not only presents a grim, grungy, and rancidly unromantic evocation of the Middle Ages, but also delivers gobs of hideous gore, provides a wickedly funny satirical commentary on the evils of commerce and the dismal failure of bureaucracy (the local merchants want the beast to continue to live because they make more money off all of the people seeking refuge in the city!), and further spices things up with a deliciously twisted sense of pitch-black humor. Moreover, this film acquires considerable sardonic bite from the crafty way it savagely mocks standard notions about heroism and chivalry. The spirited acting by the enthusiastic cast rates as another substantial asset, with especially praiseworthy contributions from Max Wall as inept buffoon King Bruno the Questionable, Warren Mitchell as crude merchant Mr. Fishfinger, Deborah Fallender as a lovely, but hopelessly naïve princess, Jerold Wells as desperate beggar Wat Dabney, John Le Mesurier as the sharp-tongued Chamberlain Pesselewe, and Bernard Bresslaw as a hot-tempered landlord. Terry Jones makes a brief appearance as an ill-fated poacher while ubiquitous British bit player Fred Wood can be glimpsed as a bandit with a bushy beard. A delightfully subversive treat.

Signalling the film directorial debut of Terry Gilliam, it is somewhat fair to say that he did go on to much better things since. This said, 'Jabberwocky' is not a film to be avoided, it is not for all tastes and is wildly uneven but to me there were enough good things to be a better film than reputed.It is easy to see why 'Jabberwocky' is remembered fondly, while most in question still acknowledge that it has faults, while it is every bit as easy to see why people may have a mixed view or dislike it. Despite how it was advertised, 'Jabberwocky' is not a Monty Python film and has very little in common with Monty Python, other than the involvement of Michael and Terry Jones (in a small cameo) and that the sets are reminiscent of the ones in 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail'.'Jabberwocky' is by no means perfect. The story often is in serious need of a tightening up and trimming pacing-wise and is told in a way that's messy (with some lack of cohesiveness) and meandering. The humour is wildly variable, with too much of it being too silly and in poor taste (the character of Griselda leaves a bad taste in the mouth). Gilliam's film directing experience shows in some lethargic pacing, lagging comic timing and lack of visual and stylistic care.Production values are mostly not great, with the low budget coming through loud and clear. Not in the costumes and sets, they're pretty stunning in fact while also being successful in showing that the medieval age was less than glamorous in many ways. The titular monster actually doesn't look too bad considering and credit is due in making it look like the illustrations of John Tenniel. Less good are the slapdash editing, shoddy and unfocused photography (apart from the odd handsome and atmospheric part), dim lighting and the sense of being under-rehearsed.However, the soundtrack is great with inspired use of two of Mussorgsky's best known works "Night on Bare Mountain" and "The Great Gate of Kiev", amongst others. There are moments in the script that are genuinely funny and witty with a perceptive touch, some of the gags are amusing and some parts are wonderfully dark and brutal.The conclusion is fun and perceptive, while the atmosphere of the Medieval era is brilliantly evoked. The production design, occasional parts of the photography and the Jabberwocky design are surprisingly good.Meanwhile the cast do a good job with what they have, making the most of their characters. Max Wall is particularly uproarious and Michael Palin is an appealing hero. Bernard Bresslaw and Harry H. Corbett do well too. Terry Jones overdoes it somewhat in his cameo and Annette Badland is all shock value and not much else.In conclusion, very uneven, very chaotic but not without its fun moments. 6/10 Bethany Cox

I had no idea for the longest time that this was not a Monty Python effort. I thought it was the next movie following Holy Grail. It was different but to my mind that was a good thing. I didn't want Holy Grail - The Sequel.I really like the sets and the costumes. I don't know if they were all authentic or not, but the coracle, the round boat made from skins stretched over a wooden frame is very authentic. I loved the cap the trapper wore which was made from a pelt - stretched and dried into form.I really like the dreary skies and decrepit buildings - the dirt and filth seen everywhere; the poverty and the desperation of the beggars. I don't think life was a piece of cake then - I'm really surprised that we made it where we are today.I loved the silliness and the sly wit heard and seen throughout the movie. I laugh my guts out when the loud mouthed obnoxious herald gets beheaded for his continuous interruption of the king.This is a great movie, every bit as good as the other Monty Python flicks, just different.

Anyone condoning this film is being really generous. Say what you want about who is in it or who did or how accurately it captures the middle ages. But at the end of the day the film is excruciatingly boring and entirely unmemorable. I saw the movie once and could not describe a single scene from the movie a week after viewing it. I can't imagine a more definitive way of recognizing a bad movie. It would be one thing if it evoked anything within me. I love Python and I know this isn't Python so this is not even a comparison. Forget who directed it or who's in it. Take it on its own merit and it becomes clear that it has none.