The Duellists and The Last Duel
When it comes to great debut films, few match the grandeur of Ridley Scott’s The Duellists. It’s a film that does not get mentioned as much as his later work, which is a shame since it is one of his best. Both The Duellists and The Last Duel deal with the themes of honor, but they approach this concept in completely different ways. The Last Duel is brutal and unforgiving, it does a wonderful job showing the vicious clash of weapons on armor and flesh. The Duellists takes place during the Napoleonic war where dueling had a strict tradition. Two men stand opposite each other with their swords and exchange quick parries and jabs.
Their blades hover close, and each man sizes the other up, trying to see who will be the first to strike. When a man is injured or recovering, the other waits for him to be ready to fight again. There is a formality to the combat. In The Last Duel, the fights are savage and barbaric. Characters do not wait for the other to recover mid-fight, they launch an all-out assault until the other man is destroyed. It would be foolish to say which film has better combat scenes because they are both era-appropriate. The way these films deal with honor among men offers unique deconstructions. Neither film glamorizes these men and their petty squabbles.
In The Duellists, we have Lieutenant Armand d’Hubert, played with fantastic, restrained intensity by Keith Carradine. His years-long feud starts when he delivers a disagreeable message to a fellow Lieutenant, Gabriel Feraud, played with a seething menace by Harvey Keitel. Feraud nearly killed the mayor of Strasbourg’s nephew in a duel. Armand is duty-bound to deliver this message which places Feraud under house arrest. He does not respond well to this order and immediately challenges Armand to a duel. The battle is swift and ends with no clear winner. The film follows them throughout the Napoleonic war, a time in history that is not often shown in films.
The two men manage to drag out this feud for over a decade. A modern audience may be baffled as to why they keep fighting, but keep in mind they are bound to each other by two opposite forces: Feraud is trapped by his hatred and obsession with violence and Armand is trapped by his duty to abide by the laws of honor. Neither man is willing to give up the never-ending battle. It is a simple story on the surface, but what makes it brilliant is how subtle the film is with making a traditional epic feel intimate and personal. The world around these characters changes as the wheels of history turn. Feraud is a devout follower of Napoleon and considers Armand a traitor to the cause. Their constant clashing with each other fuels Feraud’s hatred, but that is the only thing that drives him. He is a tragic figure because he is unable to break this cycle of violence and obsession. By the end of the film, he is a man without meaning, isolated from the world. Much like his beloved Napoleon.
The Duellists came from a time in the 1970s when films with grand scope still had an emotional intimacy. Barry Lyndon is another great example of that approach where history is used as a backdrop for a character study. The Duellists is a film about the turmoil and futility of honor. Every fight could be your last and this fixation of justice and pride will eventually be your downfall. It is based on a story by the great Joseph Conrad called The Duel. You would think a tale as outlandish as this would be fictional, but it was inspired by two real French soldiers who fought a series of around thirty duels throughout Napoleon Bonaparte’s reign.
Armand is a good man at heart and finds peace within himself and eventually learns to not let honor control his life. In that inner solace, he finds his personal redemption. There are a few more aspects of the film I want to single out. The film looks stunning. Frank Tidy’s cinematography makes every shot feel like a magnificent baroque painting. The music by Howard Blake is also fantastic. The use of the oboe adds such a lush cinematic sound to every scene. This is one of those films you wish you could erase from your mind so you could see it again for the first time.
The Last Duel is a contrasting beast. I’ve been hit-and-miss on Ridley Scott’s last few films before this. His attempts at making Alien prequels I found dreadful and completely unnecessary, but The Martian was fantastic. So, I was intrigued to see how he would tackle this story. It turned out to be an outstanding film. I was sad to see it bomb at the box office, but to be honest, I’m not surprised. It is a very dark film and not easy to advertise. It also came out around many big more audience-friendly blockbusters. It faced an uphill battle, and it did not get the attention from crowds that it deserved.
There was also a vocal, social media minority who were aghast at the concept of two men, Affleck and Damon, being involved in writing a film dealing with the rape of a woman. I get where that mentality comes from. It ties into this current perspective that everyone should stay in their lane and only create art that shares the creator’s background. Sometimes these attempts to be progressive can blind us. For many years, the arts were dominated by those whose work did not reflect their life experiences. We should all support representation and give opportunities to people who can tell their stories, but I still think you can write about pretty much any kind of character if you're respectful. There are universal human truths that many can relate to no matter who they are and where they come from. Infuse the story with your distinct voice rather than pretending you completely understand your character’s lives.
Talk to people from that world to make sure you're representing them properly. Collaboration can also be a fantastic way to balance perspectives. Writing a character whose life story is different from your own is a wonderful way to stand back from yourself and learn empathy and understanding. If someone with a bad case of White Knight Syndrome tries to shut you down, claiming they are speaking on behalf of the oppressed, ignore them. They will find something else to be outraged about in a few minutes. I've written about gay characters, trans, black, etc. Sometimes I’ve missed the mark and made mistakes, but I learn and better myself. You're not always going to knock it out of the park. It takes a while to understand what you did wrong and how to steer back on course.
I think Damon and Affleck did a great job co-writing the script with Nicole Holofcener. I don’t know which aspects of the script she had the most involvement with, but her voice is woven into the fabric of the film alongside the others. She is an excellent writer and director. I highly recommend her films Please Give, Enough Said and Lovely & Amazing. I do not blame people for avoiding Last Duel when it was in theaters. It is a harrowing and difficult film to watch at times.
It takes place in Medieval France across three chapters, each one telling the story from that character’s perspective. Damon plays Jean De Carrouges, a knight who challenges his former friend, squire Jacques De Gris to a judicial duel after Jean’s wife Marguerite accuses Jacques of raping her. In each chapter, we see different scenes told from the main characters’ points of view. Certain scenes are shown multiple times, but with extra context added to explain how Jean and Jacques see themselves. In Jean’s chapter, he is an honest and caring husband who loves his wife and cares deeply for her. He is slighted and exploited by Jacques and the Count Pierre d’Alencon, played with delightful debauchery by Ben Affleck. It took me a bit to get used to Affleck in the role since it’s so different from how he has been before, but he is fantastic.
The always great Adam Driver plays Jacques. His thirst for power and glory and willingness to cozy up to Pierre makes him a formidable antagonist. In his eyes, his assault on Marguerite was far less vicious. What makes this chapter-based format especially interesting is how it gives each character a chance to show the world from their distorted lens. Jacques seems to be aware that his assault on Marguerite was not consensual, but he downplays her reaction to justify himself. When we get to her chapter, the film shows the truth of what happened. Here there is no ambiguity, it’s the tale told from a character who has been the background of the two men’s quest for glory and honor. Jodie Comer does a brilliant job as Marguerite. We see how dedicated and capable she is, especially when she is defending herself to those who don’t believe her.
This is where the film could have stumbled. When a story resonates with today’s audience, there is a tendency to shoehorn in a modern mindset on the actions of the characters. The film could have easily made her an audience surrogate, someone written purely to exist as a walking social statement rather than her own person. Thankfully, the film avoids doing this. The way she is treated by the men in the film is harsh and often brutal, but that is the way society was. When we get to her side of the story, we finally see who Jean is. He is not a gallant hero fighting for the woman he loves; he is a callous oaf who only cares about restoring his former glory and proving his worth. The film sidelines Marguerite on purpose for the first two chapters to show how Jean and Jacques are entirely focused on their petty vanity and volatile honor. Jean is not evil; he is a product of his time.
My only real issue with the film is Jean’s change from his chapter to hers. I get the idea that we are the heroes of our own stories, but he completely alters his personality when the film shifts to her chapter. Jacques’ actions have a few alterations and context in each chapter, but he still comes across as the same person. Jean’s shift from kind to cruel felt too abrupt. I think the film could have been more powerful if his metamorphosis was more gradual and subtle, luring us in with his warm persona then showing glimpses of his inner brute. This build-up could have made the final confrontation and reveal of his true nature more impactful without taking away from Marguerite’s trauma. In The Duellists, there is a clear vision of redemption and a path forward in life for Armand. In The Last Duel, there is no atonement for Jean, only the normalization of savagery and barbarism. A potent point and a fantastic film that deserved a better box office return.
Drinking game idea: take a shot every time you read the word “duel” in this article.
