Par l'épée

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 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.

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!

I too Fence, and I teach Historical rapier fighting as well. No, the film was not representative of Olympic sport-fencing, now or then, but it was never promoted as, or intended to be a "How to Fence" movie. If that's what you're looking for, go read DiGrassi. The film itself is a great story, it moves quickly, and has plenty of little quirks to make you say "Oh..." It was never 'predictable,' and the plot developed at a satisfying pace. Go to Blockbuster, rent it, decide for yourself. Then, go check eBay... =-)

Normally, I like Leonard Maltin and can sympathise with his reviews but he seems to have watched a different film here entirely. It is not really a revenge story, "by-the-numbers" or otherwise. There is a man with a mission here but cheap vengeance isn't his goal. The leads do an excellent job of portraying antagonistic personalities coming slowly to the boil in the claustrophobic world of the fencing salon as the characters evolve. And they do evolve.

As for Errol Flynn doing it better, that is a fatuous comment in the extreme. Apart from his swordfight on the beach with Basil Rathbone in "Captain Blood", his fencing always looked very stagy to me. The last fight in "By the Sword", by contrast, is the single most vicious fencing combat I've ever seen. It is the only time I have ever had the impression that the combatants actually intend to kill one another. A brilliantly choreographed sequence.