Avaliações de usuários

In a Russian resort town on the Black Sea coast, Laevsky (Andrew Scott) arrives with another man's wife Nadya (Fiona Glascott). Her husband died and Laevsky is keeping it a secret. He grows unstable and desperate to leave for St. Petersburg by himself. Von Koren (Tobias Menzies) is a zoologist taken with the new theory of evolution. He looks down on Laevsky. Laevsky deteriorates and in a fit of rage, he challenges Von Koren. Von Koren surprises everyone by accepting the drunken challenge to a duel.

With the natural lights, long takes, and natural exteriors, this has the uncommon feel of a staged reality. Scott and Glascott are great. Scott is playing this character for all he's worth. The story meanders with wild characterization from Scott until a very tense duel in the end. It would help to set up Laevsky and Nadya's relationship more. The story has no driving force and it relies on the character study.

I am a huge Chekhov fan. I became one during Scene Study class with the legendary acting teacher Stella Adler, who was the only American teacher who actually studied with the creator of "the method"--Stanislavski.

I was watching a couple of wonderful actors find their way through a scene from Chekhov's play UNCLE VANYA when I had a kind of epiphany. I saw at last Chekhov's humanity, his breathtakingly beautiful, comic and pathetic view of the human struggle: full of irreconcilable differences, unrequited love and sad loveliness.

In the meanwhile, I have seen many productions of his plays both on stage and in the cinema. Sadly Chekhov is often done wrong. His plays tend to read more darkly on the page than they ought to be played. Remember, he insisted they were comedies despite tragic elements including suicide.

This beautiful version of THE DUEL is easily one of the finest interpretations of Chekhov's work that I have ever seen. I imagine all of ten or twenty people even know it exists! What a shame! Because it deserves an audience.

Although it is based on a long story (or novella)and not one of Chekhov's wonderful plays, it contains all the elements that touch me so deeply. I was delighted from the opening sequences to the final shot. The actors, one and all, were marvelous and the photography just spectacular.

It is mature and rich, full of humor, sadness, drama, sex, love and redemption. Please track it down and check it out. I just watched it for the third time.

The "strong" man may be merely rigid, the "weak" man may be merely too self-aware, given to pressing his sore spots and picking at his scabs. In a moment of great crisis which man will be broken and which will stand, trembling perhaps, but stand up to his mortality.

As with all of Chekhov's works, time moves slowly here, the better to catch the subtle turns of tone and shading of character in his people.

Andrew Scott is unforgettable as Laevsky, but don't get me started. The entire ensemble works so well, so enjoyably. And when that happens it means the invisible, unheard hero of the piece is the director. His name is Dover Kashashvili. Jim Smith

Another classic masterpiece by the producer of James Ivory's jewels: "The Remains of The Day" and "Howards End". Smart entertainment, slow and delicate, exquisite and precise acting, spectacular and riveting Fiona Glascott, lazy ambiance to be cherished as one would sip a fine glass of vintage old port, watching the sun set on a peaceful landscape by the sea...

I cannot wait to see it travel through the world on the Festival Circuit, especially those places where old Russia means something. Of course the Title reveals much of the story, but Anton Chekhov's fans will not complain, on the contrary since the adaptation is so true. The Festival Film for 2011. Bruno Chatelin Filmfestivals.com

I really liked this film adaptation. The director and actors managed to convey the main nerve and internal tension. And let there be some inaccuracies (mostly conveying features of that time) - the film is excellent. Chekhov, it seems to me, is very difficult to film. And despite the fact that my favorite film adaptation of Chekhov's Duel is the film "Bad Good Man" 1973 (if you can find it with subtitles in your language, be sure to look!), I'm happy.

I just felt bored and disconnected while watching this film. I also considered that although Andrew Scott is not a bad actor but definitely a mis-cast for the main character, as he looked so down-and-out like a bum or a homeless guy in this film, over-my-dead-body any woman would pay attention to him, albeit in love with him. The guy he played should have felt lucky enough that he could stay with a adulterous woman who still loved him and liked to live with him under the same roof. If I were her, living with a guy so spiritless, depressed and felt trapped, I might have flirted with more men to cheer up the days.

But the strongest feeling when watching this movie was how boring the life in that special era or period of time. There is nothing so special and worth paying attention to for the characters, the romances, the life styles of everybody. I even wonder this novelette written by Chekov should be treated as a classic literature, because it's so bored and so purposeless, not worth of further produced into a movie.

A very good film to someone else but not to me.