Monty Python and the Holy Grail plays on tropes and conventions that audiences are already familiar with but then scraps them. This is seen in the narrative itself; like when instead of having an ending with a resolution, the main character gets arrested and the film cuts quite literally with a ‘cop-out ending’, or the fact that there are no end credits. This narrative subversion keeps the film fresh for audiences regardless of it being made in the 70s. What makes it fresh exactly? Other films just don’t take these narrative risks, because it is mainly considered to be lazy/bad filmmaking. Regardless of the reasoning behind the ‘cop-out ending’, it works for serves the purpose of making audiences laugh at things that they don’t expect because even when people are aware of the satirised aspects of the film, not having a proper ending is not something that you expect any successful film to be guilty of. There are also fourth wall breaks that occur throughout the film in various ways but they all refer to the fact that it is a low-budget film. Working with the source material that the film is based on (the Arthurian story) the postmodern metacommentary downplays the usually over-the-top characters within these stories, Loescher (2020), and creates a story that almost feels wrong to watch, due to the dissimilarity between the two.