ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,4/10
1,8 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAn elderly man named Max comes to the famous fencing coach Villar and asks to take him on as a coach. But the coach does not like his weapon technique, and he only takes Max as a cleaner.An elderly man named Max comes to the famous fencing coach Villar and asks to take him on as a coach. But the coach does not like his weapon technique, and he only takes Max as a cleaner.An elderly man named Max comes to the famous fencing coach Villar and asks to take him on as a coach. But the coach does not like his weapon technique, and he only takes Max as a cleaner.
Avis en vedette
I thought this movie was very good for several reasons. The first was that the plot was woven very well around a sport that does not receive much attention, fencing. I know very little about fencing but this was a good introduction. It is almost an artform, and the aura of the training school added another dimension. Having novices being taught fencing allowed the viewer to pick up on the basics.
Secondly was the casting. Eric Roberts in my opinion is one of the best actors going around and pairing him up with F. Murray Abraham, you really can't go wrong acting wise. The supporting cast was merely there to add to the plot and to help develop some atmosphere.
Without giving too much away, this is a movie about revenge that chips away at the start through flashbacks but builds to an inevitable but pulsing showdown. Eric Roberts plays the part of an egotistical past fencing champion and present training supremo. F Murray Abraham is a man with a hidden past, linked to fencing that you feel must come out sooner or later.
The action scenes involving fencing were admirable and while people take acting for granted, for both the afore mentioned actors to handle foils as they did would indicate they had some previous understanding of the sport.
I don't think I am giving too much away by saying F. Murray Abrahams character Max, in addition to attempting to break in as a fencing instructor is also taking cautious steps in trying to establish relationship ties after being incarcerated for a very long period.
All in all a very pleasing time filler, that also exhibited the hustle and bustle of the city it was filmed in, despite most of the action taking place inside the training school for aspiring fencers.
Secondly was the casting. Eric Roberts in my opinion is one of the best actors going around and pairing him up with F. Murray Abraham, you really can't go wrong acting wise. The supporting cast was merely there to add to the plot and to help develop some atmosphere.
Without giving too much away, this is a movie about revenge that chips away at the start through flashbacks but builds to an inevitable but pulsing showdown. Eric Roberts plays the part of an egotistical past fencing champion and present training supremo. F Murray Abraham is a man with a hidden past, linked to fencing that you feel must come out sooner or later.
The action scenes involving fencing were admirable and while people take acting for granted, for both the afore mentioned actors to handle foils as they did would indicate they had some previous understanding of the sport.
I don't think I am giving too much away by saying F. Murray Abrahams character Max, in addition to attempting to break in as a fencing instructor is also taking cautious steps in trying to establish relationship ties after being incarcerated for a very long period.
All in all a very pleasing time filler, that also exhibited the hustle and bustle of the city it was filmed in, despite most of the action taking place inside the training school for aspiring fencers.
There is exactly one group of people who will watch this film more than once: fencers. And even we wince. So much of this story is anathema to *everything* fencers hold dear: honor, romance and SAFETY!
No maestro worth the name would encourage any kind of deliberate roughness such as is exhibited in BtS.
Neither would anyone imagine a choreographed dance routine with pirouettes. THE HORROR!
But beneath the ugly scum of detail, there *is* a story...who is Suba (excellently underplayed by F. Murray Abraham), and why does he come to the Maestro's studio? Why does he think he can teach fencing? Oh, and we get to see the lovely Mia Sara in a tight fencing uniform, a small bonus.
It's not the best film, no. It's far from the worst. Do not expect to see real Olympic style fencing; for that, go to the next competition nearest you!
No maestro worth the name would encourage any kind of deliberate roughness such as is exhibited in BtS.
Neither would anyone imagine a choreographed dance routine with pirouettes. THE HORROR!
But beneath the ugly scum of detail, there *is* a story...who is Suba (excellently underplayed by F. Murray Abraham), and why does he come to the Maestro's studio? Why does he think he can teach fencing? Oh, and we get to see the lovely Mia Sara in a tight fencing uniform, a small bonus.
It's not the best film, no. It's far from the worst. Do not expect to see real Olympic style fencing; for that, go to the next competition nearest you!
There is not blood in this movie. The title of my comment has to do with the fact that, were it not for the blood, any contemporary Olympic style fencer could beat the tar out of a 16th or 17th Century duellist. The skills of a contemporary fencer are unmatchable; but the will to kill is something you cannot pick up in a fencing salle.
This difference plays a role in the story, as characters come to grips with their personal traumas and inner demons. The original movie One-Sheet is informative for the Spartan purity of its text:
.......By The Sword......
Live by it ..... Die by it .....
The folks who pule and whine about the "safety" issues in this film are as confoundingly ignorant of the definition of "metaphor" as are the historical purists who insist on mewling about the Russian roulette sequence in "Deer Hunter." This is not a documentary, so it simply beggars the imagination why anyone would be so ruthlessly misguided as to hold it up to documentary standards of factual accuracy.
This movie is a classic morality tale -- and a nicely crafted one at that -- told within the strictures of a fencing salle. Abrams and Roberts give fine performances, while Mia Sara, Chris Rydell, Elaine Kagan and others provide good support. The movie, for all of its obvious mythological framework, offers some nice insights into the reality of fencing. For example, when was the last time you saw an Errol Flynn movie devote so much attention to the *footwork* of sword play? (And for you non-fencers out there, here is a clue: fencing is *ALL* in the footwork; the sword is just there to let the other person know that they lost the bout.) At the level of world-class competition, the differences between life/death and win/lose engagements blur; personal trauma can blur them even more. It is only in confronting our demons that the distinctions return to us, and the genuinely meaningful things in life can be regained. That is why this film is a morality tale.
Filmatically, the cinematography bears some attention: so many subtle hues of brown that pop out rather than disappear under the surface. Bill Conti's score, particularly as it emphasizes classical guitar, is a joy all by itself. The images of stair-cases and the allegory of Jacob's Ladder appear throughout.
This difference plays a role in the story, as characters come to grips with their personal traumas and inner demons. The original movie One-Sheet is informative for the Spartan purity of its text:
.......By The Sword......
Live by it ..... Die by it .....
The folks who pule and whine about the "safety" issues in this film are as confoundingly ignorant of the definition of "metaphor" as are the historical purists who insist on mewling about the Russian roulette sequence in "Deer Hunter." This is not a documentary, so it simply beggars the imagination why anyone would be so ruthlessly misguided as to hold it up to documentary standards of factual accuracy.
This movie is a classic morality tale -- and a nicely crafted one at that -- told within the strictures of a fencing salle. Abrams and Roberts give fine performances, while Mia Sara, Chris Rydell, Elaine Kagan and others provide good support. The movie, for all of its obvious mythological framework, offers some nice insights into the reality of fencing. For example, when was the last time you saw an Errol Flynn movie devote so much attention to the *footwork* of sword play? (And for you non-fencers out there, here is a clue: fencing is *ALL* in the footwork; the sword is just there to let the other person know that they lost the bout.) At the level of world-class competition, the differences between life/death and win/lose engagements blur; personal trauma can blur them even more. It is only in confronting our demons that the distinctions return to us, and the genuinely meaningful things in life can be regained. That is why this film is a morality tale.
Filmatically, the cinematography bears some attention: so many subtle hues of brown that pop out rather than disappear under the surface. Bill Conti's score, particularly as it emphasizes classical guitar, is a joy all by itself. The images of stair-cases and the allegory of Jacob's Ladder appear throughout.
10tekky-2
This movie fascinated me from the very beginning. It revolves around the sport of fencing, but the plot has little to do with fencing and more to do with crime & punishment, retribution and forgiveness, and the meaning of success. Eric Roberts plays a skilled but haughty owner of a fencing school, just like his dear old (deceased) dad. F. Murray Abraham is the mystery man, who is apparently making a new start in a new town and who applies to be a fencing teacher at the school. Although Roberts quickly discerns that Abraham is not "up to snuff" for a teacher and hires him as a janitor, Roberts fails to recognize the inevitable result of years away from a sport that requires daily attention. Over the course of the film, Roberts & Abraham flesh out their characters nicely as the viewer discovers who Abraham really is while watching Roberts' character discover himself and finally learn a lesson that was stunted by tragedy in his boyhood. Like any movie about a sport, I'm sure there were fencing "flaws," but it was believable enough to me to make watching it intriguing (and sometimes tiring!). There's quite a lot of action for this movie that only has 3 sets, too! Get a bag of popcorn and settle in for a good flick.
Okay, so some scenes in this film might make a fencer cringe, but for the average viewer there is good entertainment to be had here. The central characters do the job required to keep the action going, although Eric Roberts character is somewhat of a cardboard cutout. The script allows for little character development for his fencing master portrayal, and I suspect he has simply done exactly what the director asked. The fencing scenes are decent action,with some interesting swordplay in foreground while mental fencing goes on between the characters. The plot is fairly simple, and some of the developments in the plot do seem to a little unsubstantiated. But this is not a film to make you cry or think deeply. It is good, simple, entertainment. Watch with an open mind, and enjoy a bit of fun.
Le saviez-vous
- Citations
Fencing Student: You never taught me that!
Alexander Villard: You can't teach surprise.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is By the Sword?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 6 220 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 4 078 $ US
- 26 sept. 1993
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 6 220 $ US
- Durée
- 1h 31m(91 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant