Didn't Michael Palin (or one of the other Pythons) comment on this an interview somewhere? He said he had trouble taking
Excalibur
seriously because it was exactly the sort of film the Pythons had parodied just a few years previously.

i agree. i liked the movie, but some of the visuals were so similar, i also looked it up to see if this came out before holy grail.

The Holy Hand Grenade would have put that creep Mordred in his place.
My people skills are fine. It's my tolerance of morons that needs work.

Excalibur is a good movie. I soiled my armor, it was so good!

I wonder why
Same story.

I do like the film, but yeah, if you look at it from that perspective, it's like "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" played straight!
I. Drink. Your. Milkshake! [slurp!] I DRINK IT UP! - Daniel Plainview - There Will Be Blood

I don't see how seeing one makes the slightest difference for the other.

i did expect a black knight appearance.

Go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

I don't see how any big fans of Monty Python and the Holly Grail could take Excalibur seriously. And like the OP I had to check the release dates of both films because I had visions of the members of Monty Python seeing Excalibur and falling around laughing and then going on to make Holly Grail. But that's not what happened.
King Arthur: I am your king.
Woman: Well, I didn't vote for you.
King Arthur: You don't vote for kings.
Woman: Well how'd you become king then?
[Angelic music plays ]
King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your king.
Dennis: [interrupting] Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

It really hit me in the scene where Perceval (?) is crossing the wintry landscape and finds the skeleton in armor. It was probably meant to be a powerful scene, but I couldn't help thinking, "And this must be where they were forced to eat Robin's minstrels, and there was great rejoicing. (Yay hay!)"
http://redkincaid.com

Plus, they get to use actual horses instead of using coconuts!
I. Drink. Your. Milkshake! [slurp!] I DRINK IT UP! - Daniel Plainview - There Will Be Blood

I think Boorman actually tries to avoid some of the conventions Monty Python so gleefully mocked, especially a more realistic depiction of combat and of living conditions.
It is not our abilities that show who we truly areit is our choices

Monty Python And The Holy Grail - Released 9 April 1975 (London)
Excalibur - Released 10 April 1981 (USA)
Who's That Little Old Man?

The others were studying to become doctors or solicitors!

I think that Excalibur owes quite a lot to
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
, and comparisons are obvious. It's not about the comedy though
Monty Python and the Holy Grail was a landmark film for more-realistic depiction of mediaeval times. Before that film, everyone was wearing unstained white clothing and floating above the mud.
Remember that Terry Jones has a Ph.D. in mediaeval studies. He knows his stuff.
flaps

No, I just think you have a damn poor taste in films. It's not supposed to be an epic, but a fantasy. Admittedly it might have been nice to see a few more battle scenes and bodies, but the film looks incredible as is. Having said that, I do wish there had been a big final battle scene at the end, but money was probably running low.

When Arthur first clims the siege tower, I was thinking of Monty Python, too.
Country + Christian = Contrition?
I blame autocorrect.
You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas.

It came out
six years after
"Monty Python and the Holy Grail."
I was thinking of "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" often while watching this.
Country + RAP = CRAP
Country + ROCK = CROCK