The Last Duel

The basic motif to admire this film is the image of Dariusz Wolski. Earth colors, falls and early springs, winter and tones of browns and gray.

The second is the acting and the most impressive work seems be by Jodie Comer.

Not the last - the force of gifts and precision of Ridley Scott to propose a beautiful exploration of contemporary problems.

It is an impressive film for themes and for dialogues , for confrontations and fight scenes and for the wake up of truths. A Medieval story very modern in its fundamental traits. A chain of confirmations about actors talent, an admirable construction of the motives, reactions and answers of characters.

Short, a great film and proof of a provocative art of unique director.

Legendary acting and scenario... It may just seem a little boring to some people. But that doesn't mean the movie is bad. The plot of the film is very well processed. In addition, the film reflects its time very well. I think it deserves 8 points. I did not give 2 stars. This is because of the last duel that gave the film its title. The last duel didn't go as I expected. I wouldn't expect professional soldiers to fight with many mistakes. And I think the last duel should have lasted longer. Anyway, despite everything, it was a movie that I loved very much. Have a good time. Don't forget to watch this movie in a calm state. This increases the pleasure you will get.

France, late-14th century. Jean de Carrouges and Jacques Le Gris were friends but a series of disagreements has soured their relationship. These animosities are stoked to deadly feud when de Carrouges's wife, Marguerite, accuses Le Gris of raping her. When all other avenues of justice are exhausted, de Carrouges takes the only option left to him: a duel to the death.

Great drama, directed by Ridley Scott and written by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Ridley Scott's first film as a director was "The Duellists" (1977). Set during the Napoleonic era, two French army officers engage in a series of duels over a period of 15 years over a matter of honour. From the basic description I saw of The Last Duel I expected this to be a rehash of that so set my expectations accordingly.

Turns out The Last Duel is very different to The Duellists and thankfully so (not that The Duellists was bad - in fact it's a great film - but because a remake of it would be fairly boring). It starts conventionally enough: over a span of 16 years we see de Carrouges's view of the sequence of events. As this sets the scene for the remainder of the movie the de Carrouges part is mildly interesting but not overly engaging. At this point the film seemed like just another feud-leading-to-climactic-fight-scene.

What happens next elevates the film above that. We now see the events of the last 16 years from Le Gris's perspective. De Carrouges no longer looks like the saintly hero and Le Gris could be the one we're supposed to root for. The film is now looking like a Rashomon-type movie, i.e. Different perspectives, which one is correct?

However, it is the final part, Marguerite's view, that elevates the film to greatness. While Le Gris's view made the film intriguing it ends with any ambiguity to the course of events extinguished. This is where Scott, Damon and Affleck missed a trick - by making it clear what the truth is so soon they remove the mystery from the plot.

In the long run it doesn't matter too much as it is soon clear that the main theme is not of a feud, honour satisfied or how different people can have different perspectives of the same event but one of injustice. Marguerite's part is incredibly powerful and engaging and makes for compelling viewing.

This is all rounded off with a brutally realistic fight scene at the end. I can't think of a film that has shown medieval fighting depicted so accurately or graphically.

Ultimately a very well made, intelligent, highly original film with multiple layers and themes. Production values are excellent: every detail seems exactly like it would have been in the 14th century. All this makes for an incredibly realistic, historically accurate film.

Performances are spot on: Matt Damon (as de Carrouges), Adam Driver (as Le Gris) and Jodie Comer (as Marguerite) are excellent in the lead roles. Ben Affleck is almost unrecognisable as Count Pierre d'Alençon and puts in a solid performance. (His appearance was a bit distracting though: he kept reminding me of Will Ferrell's character in Zoolander!).

Also interesting to see Alex Lawther (of "The End of the ... World" fame) as King Charles VI. He provides some of the lighter moments of the film as he often seems to find deadly serious, life-and-death moments quite amusing. King Charles VI was only 16-18 years old at the time so I thought this was to show that he was really just a boy, out of his depth. Turns out this wasn't just there for levity but was a realistic portrayal of King Charles VI's character as he was known to have suffered from mental illness and psychosis. Yet another example of the historical accuracy involved.

It's 14th century France. Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Jacques Le Gris (Adam Driver) are comrades-in-arms and best of friends. They are given a new lord in Count Pierre d'Alençon (Ben Affleck). While Jacques becomes the Count's favorite, Jean falls further and further out of favor. It doesn't help that Jean has married Marguerite de Carrouges (Jodie Comer) which leads to complications.

This is directed by Ridley Scott. The structure divides the movie into three chapters. Each chapter takes the point of view from Jean, Jacques, and finally Marguerite. This is good but the Rashomon structure does lead to the feeling of repetition. Then there are the two scenes devoted to the central issue. The one depicting Jacques' point of view needs to be more on his side. After all, this is a case of his says, she says. The two sections leave the question as a degree rather than a decision. There is no question to the basic case. That may be deliberate but it does not increase the tension. The intensity needs to be higher although I do like the actual duel. There is a reality in the brutal repeated battering.

Seen the film at a screening at the Venice Film Festival.

Even if there is no way of telling that what The Last Duel portrays is entirely how the events took place, or as authentic as it seems to be in depicting middle ages, one thing is certain: it belongs to Ridley Scott's better works, and proves that the 84-year-old filmmaker is still able to deliver memorable films.

The dramatization takes on a three act narrative frame that resembles partly that of Kurosawa's masterpiece Rashomon: three chapters narrate the events, each from the point of view of one of the three protagonists, the two duellists and Marguerite.

The film clearly seeks a historical authenticity, and seems to succeed at achieving it. The almost word-by-word, blow-by-blow adherence to the accounts of the duel seem to confirm such an achievement, and is in a way reminiscent of Scott's debut film The Duellists, known for its methodical reconstruction.

The true essence of this film's stance is the idea that through the study of history more can be learnt about the contemporary world, the past as a mirror of the present.

The Last Duel is, in the end, a film that deals with the present by showing the past, and does so in an exquisite and entertaining fashion.

(extract from my review on comeandreview)