Ridley Scott offers his own Rashomon with the star-studded period piece The Last Duel
Matt Damon, Adam Driver, and Jodie Comer headline this historical drama with a modern outrage
Film Reviews ridley scott
The muted blue tint of the imagery should be a dead giveaway. If not, look to the specks of dirt on the lens or listen for the grunts and clang of swordplay. All betray that Ridley Scott, director of Gladiator, Kingdom Of Heaven, and Robin Hood, has returned to the crumbling castles and muddy battlefields of a distantly bygone Europe. Yet The Last Duel, his latest lavish act of time travel, is archaic only in garb and speech (the latter mildly bungled through a collection of wavering accents). The setting may be the 14th century, but this is very much a historical drama of modern concerns. Damningly, it suggests that yesterday’s injustices remain very much today’s.
Working from Eric Jager’s novel of the same name, Scott tackles a matter of enduring international fascination: the last judicial duel sanctioned in France, circa 1386. That year, Norman knight Jean de Carrouges challenged his one-time friend, the squire Jacques Le Gris, to trial by combat. Carrouges’ wife, Marguerite, had accused Le Gris of rape the previous January. Le Gris flatly denied the allegations. The battle to the death between the men drew an enormous audience of Parisian aristocrats and commoners, and it continues to be recounted and reenacted centuries later. Part of what’s kept the incident alive in the public imagination is the question of guilt, still a subject of historical debate. Who was telling the truth, and who was lying?
For a while, The Last Duel seems to entertain such uncertainty. It also takes care to lay out how the conflict between the men extended beyond the accusations. Introduced fighting side by side, Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Le Gris (Adam Driver) are fast friends whose bond is tested and ultimately broken by a series of disputes involving contested property, an expected captaincy, and the favor of the count Pierre d’Alençon (Ben Affleck), cousin of the king. Is social standing the subtext of their falling-out? Carrouges is revealed to be a litigious hothead whose habit of suing fellow noblemen damages his leadership prospects. Meanwhile, the cocksure, womanizing Le Gris proves more adept and strategic in his public manner.
Damon and Affleck, whose script for Good Will Hunting won them an Oscar nearly 25 years ago, co-wrote The Last Duel with indie filmmaker Nicole Holofcener (Enough Said). The three novelly divided writing duties by character, and their story into three competing, overlapping narratives: “The truth according to” Carrouges, Le Gris, and, finally, Marguerite. This is, of course, a variation on that most beloved, influential ode to subjectivity, Rashomon, in which the great Akira Kurosawa spun a samurai story of contradictory accounts. The Last Duel doesn’t so much shift the basic facts of its plot as subtly alter their context and meaning. Each of the three chapters depicts events only discussed in the others, and repeated scenes play much differently depending on whose perspective is dominant.
Performance is key to this approach, and the film offers its principal cast the chance to essentially trifurcate their characters—to play them based on how they see themselves and how others see them. That range is most obvious with Damon, who projects a kind of aggrieved nobility in the first chapter (told, naturally, from Carrouges’ point of view), only to become embarrassingly impotent and finally coldly distant as the lens of perspective changes. Driver’s charisma fluctuates throughout to reveal the way predatory behavior gets delusionally twisted into something more romantic through self-image, while Comer plays a mere object of attraction until the moment that she passes out of the male gaze and into the spotlight of the narrative. (Only Affleck creates a consistent persona—a haughty and perpetually amused rake that counts among the actor’s funniest performances in years.)
It takes a while to realize that The Last Duel is not using its, well, dueling perspectives to reinforce the neutrality of the historical record. Instead, it’s offering something like a critique of the way the history books have pushed a skeptical he-said, she-said framework on this story. Jager’s research cast doubt on the doubt historians have sown regarding the guilt or innocence of certain parties. The movie, in turn, refuses to revel in ambiguity, instead offering an eventual, clear-cut presentation of events—most notably, and disturbingly, through two dramatizations of a horrible encounter, different not in what happens but in how as remembered by the characters. Rashomon was about the essential unknowability of the truth. The Last Duel is about how treating the truth as always unknowable can be a trick to skirt accountability.
There are limitations to the film’s structure. Damon, Affleck, and Holofcener save Marguerite’s perspective for last, in part so it can function like a damning rejoinder to the chapters before it—the woman’s side of the story, finally presented after two hours of the men’s blinkered sides. Yet that choice leaves Comer a little dramatically adrift: While Damon and Driver are gifted complicated (if ultimately unsympathetic) characters, she’s strategically denied much dimension until the home stretch—and by then, the film is focused almost entirely on her bravery as a victim stuck in a system stacked against her. The movie struggles as much as Carrouges and Le Gris do to really see Marguerite, at least outside the context of her ordeal.
Still, there’s a power to this film’s blunt era-crossing outrage. The Last Duel resists reducing the immortal, historical events it restages to some vision of the primitive past, to be easily scoffed at like the barbaric practices of Gladiator’s colosseum. Watching Marguerite pushed through a gauntlet of skeptical questioning, her resistance waved off as the “customary protest” of a lady (the “no” means “yes” of the 1300s), it’s impossible not to think of Christine Blasey Ford and countless other women faced with the threat of immolation, literal or otherwise, for coming forward.
Scott, of course, eventually delivers the eponymous duel, and it’s as tense as it is grimly violent, with stakes far greater than which of these flawed men will emerge with his head and ego intact. But by that point, the possibility of a rousing climax, let alone a happy ending, has long since passed, like the people swallowed by history and its distorting ambiguities.
167 Comments
Favorite Ridley Scott film?I’m partial to give Blade Runner the obvious pick but the Martian may be a sleeper as well.
I really like Blade Runner, but I also think Alien is an even better movie than people think it is, and people seem to think it’s pretty good.
The Martian might be my pick as the most purely entertaining of Scott’s post-Gladiator films. But it’s got to be Alien or Blade Runner.If there’s a sleeper, it’s Kingdom of Heaven: Director’s Cut.
I was rather impressed with Kingdom of Heaven. Scott does a good job of illustrating what the Crusades were really about. We can draw a direct line from that point to now and see how those events had a direct effect on what were still dealing with in the Middle East.
Blade Runner is significantly more influential than it is good.
Curse you and your blasphemy, sir. I challenge you… to a duel.
Hogwash, hogwash good sir!
yeah blade runner is a great exercise in set design, costumes, casting and, like, individual scenes…but as a whole it’s a mess.i’ve always liked it but i don’t think it’s a great movie, in any incarnation.
Blade Runner is a glorified music video. Looks great, but essentially empty. Same with Legend.
It would be Kingdom of Heaven for me. I need to watch the director’s cut. Such a good movie.
Gladiator would be it for me.
It’s between Alien and the director’s cut of Kingdom of Heaven
The director’s cut of Kingdom of Heaven is so underrated. Great pick.
My personal favorite is Legend. So bizarre, yet so freaking cool.
If nothing else (and there’s a lot to like about Legend IMO), the movie looks like a painting come to life.
I remember reading a piece about it, like, 15 years ago. The critic wrote something along the lines of “After Legend failed with critics and audiences alike, Scott stopped making cinema. He kept on making movies though.” I felt like agreeing with that one.
I liked Legend quite a bit when I was a kid. Funky movie.
If not for Tim Curry alone! 🙂
Alien overall.
Gladiator for best action/Hollywood movie.
Bladerunner for nostalgic favorite.
Since you said favourite, for me it’s a three-way tie between Alien, Thelma & Louise and A Good Year.
Hmm. I’m quite fond of Kingdom of Heaven – The Director’s Cut. I’m not sure I’d say it’s my favorite, though. I like a bunch of his films for different reasons.
Alien and Gladiator equallyAlien is just such a great edge-or-your-seat space horror but also an intimate look at a small crew dealing with a crisis out in deep space.Gladiator is a purely epic film that doesn’t become self-indulgent or wear out its welcome.
Please never let Scott do that Gladiator sequel that comes up every now and then…
I just never got emotionally invested in Gladiator the way the audience is obviously supposed to. It was a cool movie but I feel like its best picture Oscar was more a nod to its technical proficience and box office.
Kingdom of Heaven director’s cut
Prometheus!!!!Juse kidding, its Alien.
Oh Juse! You do have us on!
I have a soft spot for the director’s cut of Kingdom of Heaven, Alien, and Black Hawk Down.
I remember liking 1492 quite a lot when I was a kid, but I can’t take that movie seriously anymore (it would have been interesting as a work of pure fiction, rather than something about Columbus…). Those visuals though (Moxica’s horse on the beach, the first step of Columbus on the sand, the very last shot of the movie…) !
And I was so disappointed in GI Jane. The subject is kinda interesting to me, and I watched that movie when I thought mostly highly of Scott…but damn, the second unit director must have been on drugs, and Scott must have fallen asleep at the wheel. Cheesy, ugly, over-the-top pile of mess. Viggo Mortensen is the only reason I’d still watch it, his line deliveries make enduring the rest of the movie worth it.
Alien is the most influential and the movie that will open his obituary.
Blade Runner is the best.
I give Blade Runner a runner up because it’s a beautiful film that influenced the cyberpunk genre for decades to come. For me, the pacing kind of sets it back, not because it’s a futuristic detective noir but because the story gets a little muddled toward the end and Harrison Ford’s performance, let’s be honest, is ‘ok’ at best, were it not for Rutger Hauer’s stellar performance.That said, bonus points for Rutger Hauer’s iconic, improvised, final lines.Interesting Trivia: Scott and his effects team were so impressed with John Carpenter’s scale model of Manhattan used in Escape From New York that they repurposed it to make L.A. 2019.
overall favourite: blade runner final cut
sleeper: the duellistsother favs: kingdom of heaven directors cut, black hawk down, the martian, black rain
I don’t feel guilty at all saying Blade Runner. It’s a movie I love getting re-obsessed with every few years.(Alien’s great too)
I’m not sure I’d call it a favorite over Alien or Blade Runner (it certainly isn’t better), but I find G.I. Jane really entertaining and rewatchable. It’s a great “flipping channels on a Saturday afternoon” movie.
Gladiator. It’s not his best film, but it was such a magical experience in the theatre. The colosseum scenes still give me goose bumps after 20 years.
Fitting that no one mentioned Robin Hood. What a missed opportunity to make something great.
1973’s Hovis advert. End of discussion.
Blade Runner, Kingdom of Heaven (Director’s Cut), The Martian, Gladiator and Alien are all awesome.I’ve got a soft spot for The Counselor and American Gangster too.
I loved Alien
Alien will always hold this title for me.
Blade Runner is a freebie. Kingdom of Heaven Director’s Cut is remarkable. Black Hawk Down is good. Alien is excellent. I’ll always back Gladiator despite it being wildly historically inaccurate. It’s just got so much heart.
(imo), The Martian isn’t fit to breathe the same air as Blade Runner or Alien.
Really surprised that with all these films listed, nobody’s mentioned The Duellists yet. It’s unsatisfying, but intentionally so; and it’s stunningly beautiful. If you haven’t seen it, think of it as a sort of Barry Lyndon-lite…
The Duelists.
Guess I’m gonna be the odd man out and say Black Hawk Down. I’m not going to call it better than say, Alien, but for the type of story it’s telling it does an efficient job of setup and then moves straight through with brutal efficiency.
I think BHD gets forgotten a little because its target audience weren’t the sort of people who wax nostalgic over cinema twenty years later (and because there’s been a lot of immersive war and action films in the years since)… but I remember what a huge impact it had on my friends around that time. For years after, it was THE go-to favourite film for a lot of people I knew. It doesn’t attempt much, but it does deliver what it sets out to deliver.
The one that immediately came to mind for me is Black Hawk Down.
Legend.Seriously.
I’m not sure if it’s my favorite but I gently masturbate over my clothes every times i fall asleep watching Prometheus. That’s gotta count for something.
My top ones are Alien, Blade Runner, The Martian are Black Hawk Down. My wife would kill me for the exclusion of Gladiator which is like one of her all-time favourite movies but I just think it’s…merely good.
Honestly, Thelma & Louise might be overlooked on this list.
But for pure entertainment, I have to go with The Martian. It hits every beat effortlessly and does not cease to entertain upon rewatches.
Gladiator is flawed, but definitely in the upper echelon.
And of course, Black Rain.
I would waver between the Kingdom of Heaven director’s cut and The Duellists. You know though, there are some obvious clunkers in Scott’s catalog, but he’s made a lot of compelling, sometimes ground-breaking films.
cant possibly picK just one, needs divide by subject, theme
Blade Runner is not just my favorite Scott film by my favorite film, period. Damn near perfect. Alien is in second place. After that it gets more contentious but Gladiator might be third.
Multiple new movies I want to see this weekend? Movies are back, baby!
Seriously, between No Time to Die, Halloween Kills, The Last Duel, Dune, Last Night in Soho, The French Dispatch and The Eternals, I have been/will be spending a LOT of time in dark theaters this month.
I went to see Halloween Kills before work this week because I just can’t fit that shit in on the weekend right now.
Yeah I’m going to squeeze No Time to Die in sometime next week
This sounds pretty good, or at least intelligent! It’s like a Fall Film of old.And I wonder: since Scott’s first film was The Duellists, does he mean this to be his last? He is pretty old, and no one would begrudge him a retirement party. However, I’m sure that if I checked the IMDb, I’d find he has several projects filming or in development, or already finished even.
Scott would be one of the last directors I would expect to ever retire. I’m not even certain he’s conscious of half the movies he directs these days, might just be what he does when he sleepwalks.
Well, there’s House of Gucci that’s coming out literally a month after this one.
Oh that’s right, the Gucci Mane biopic. Silly of me to forget such a quintessentially Ridley Scott project as that.
Yup, he has another coming out this year, House of Gucci.
He’s directing a Napoleon movie right now.
Maybe he can use Stanley Kubrick’s notes. I hear there’s a warehouse full of them.
Nah, he’s incapable of truly retiring. He’s going to go out like John Huston, directing until he’s dead.He’s really not even capable of taking vacations—A Good Year was his idea of a vacation, making a film while spending a couple of months at in his country house in Provence, France.
Huston directed The Dead from a wheelchair and an oxygen mask. That’s dedication to one’s craft!
Kitbag is supposed to come out in 2 years also…
with the number of “in development” projects he always seems to have, I get a strong Clint Eastwood vibe from him, that he’ll literally work until he dies, and I respect that, as long as his movies don’t suddenly get shitty as Clint’s have.
Yes, let’s hope he can continue to produce the same level of cinematic genius as in Exodus: Gods and Kings, Robin Hood and Alien: Covenant…
I acknowledge your snark and direct you to the top of this page where people have listed their favorite Ridley Scott movies, and it’s an impressive list that should remind you how he has made some classic movies across a wide array of genres (I had completely forgotten he made the pretty underrated IMO “American Gangster”). He gets THE best casts to work with him, practically unlimited budgets, suggesting that a lot of people “in the know” have great confidence in him.
And I’ll direct you to the same threat at the top of the page, where I suggested a film I thought others were overlooking. I’m obviously not suggesting Scott hasn’t made good films. He’s one of the few directors to have directed beloved cult films (Blade Runner), genuinely iconic popular phenomena (Gladiator) AND cineaste favourites (Thelma and Louise). He’s a giant of modern cinema.
But in terms of his films ‘getting shitty’, since 2007 he’s made only one film that I think is generally considered a real success (The Martian; All the Money in the World was apparently well-ish-ly reviewed, but I’ve never heard anyone mention it since). He’s always been a hit-and-miss director, but the last decade and a half have had a lot more misses than hits. [particularly when you consider that his first three films were The Duellists, Alien, and Blade Runner – that’s got to be up there with anyone’s first three, I’d think!][Of Scott’s last 9 films, only 4 got 70% or over on RT. Likewise, of Eastwood’s last 9 films, only 4 got over 70%. Scott’s had one real success (The Martian), one well-reviewed-but-largely-ignored film (AtMitW) and one polarising film (Prometheus); and Eastwood’s had one real success (Sully), one well-reviewed-but-ignored film (Richard Jewell) and one polarising film (American Sniper). One balance I’d give the edge to Scott, but not by a huge margin. And if we do it by time (the last 15 years) instead of by film, Eastwood’s clearly ahead (he has more chance to disappoint because he’s more prolific). I think Eastwood is judged more harshly because he had such a run of hits – a six-year period of Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Flags of our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, Changeling, Gran Torino, Invictus – followed by a sudden drop-off, whereas Scott has always been hit-and-miss and his highest points were longer-ago…]
Eastwood has had his share of stinkers throughout his career, as do most prolific directors. But he’s still capable of making a solid film.
An intelligent, adult-oriented, self-contained film? It’ll be slagged as a dad movie in no time.
When he makes a movie just called “The,” then we’ll know.
I would also note this event is so well known because of the absurd amount of first hand accounts. Dozens of people wrote what they saw, details down to who through what swing at which part of the armor. For an event from the 1300s its comically will documented. Also yeah its a fascinating story of objectivity and truth.
That was one of the most interesting aspects of the book: The duel itself had an extensive (for the time, at least) historical record, the trial only slightly less so, but figuring out the movements of these individuals to wind up where they were at the time the accusation was levied required Jager to piece together a narrative from stuff like tax and property records. He did a very good job of never stating anything definitively but putting you in the mind of how Carrogues or Le Gris could build up tremendous resentment over the few definitive things we know about their holdings changing hands through the years.
(The weird little detail I’m hoping makes it to the screen in some way is how even animals could be tried and convicted of murder, including that one horse that is on record as being hung in absentia after its owner helped it escape.)
The book reminded me a lot of historian Hallie Rubenholds book about the victims of Jack the Ripper. She was able to make a lot of educated guesses and definitive statements based on census records, work employment documents and other minor pieces of evidence.
“The law must be upheld in all situations! If we don’t execute this horse in absentia we make a complete mockery of the justice system!”
(The weird little detail I’m hoping makes it to the screen in some way is how even animals could be tried and convicted of murder, including that one horse that is on record as being hung in absentia after its owner helped it escape.)
https://organicdriedpoppypods.com/product/unwashed-poppy-seeds/
Lazlo Cravensworth cameo?
The last known occurrence was her in the US in 1923:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Morton
Part of those trial records include:
– Someone literally riding to test Le Gris’s first alibi, where he claims he could not have even been in that city that day based on where he supposedly was- Lots and lots of trial records from Le Gris’s own lawyer (who seemed to imply he assumed his client was guilty).Part of the reason so many people could record the duel specifics was that the King was very invested in it as entertainment and MADE THEM RESCHEDULE when he was not going to be in town.
Oh, the stuff from Le Gris’ lawyer is hilarious. Stopped just short of writing “This dude guilty” in his own records.
I’m seeing a lot of leather and bare heads for something that takes place during the Little Ice Age. Medieval people wore big hoods, miles of wool and big stupid hats! Embrace the big hats! (Sin of Idleness, shown as a man too lazy to get off his donkey to take a shit – Penitential Psalms, The Dunois Hours, France, c. 1339 – c. 1450)
No one would have blamed you for saying to lazy to get off his ass.
When I see pictures of what people actually wore in the medieval period, particularly the wealthy in the latter stages, I’m OK with the less-than-historically-accurate Hollywood Middle Ages look. All those bowl cuts, pointy boots, pantaloons, cod pieces, and big fur hats would would be too distracting.
Found the clergyman…
Agreed. There’s history, and then there’s the cinematic language of depicting it. It will always be somewhat formed by the preferences at the time of making the movie, and the specific tastes of the costume designers and director. Personally, I always find it a plus when they put some effort into making it kind of historically accurate, but it’s not really needed if the story is worth telling.
I can confirm, after watching this at FilmFest Gent yesterday evening, that copious amounts of woolen fabric and a whole lotta silly hats (including one plopped right on top of Driver’s head at one point) are prominently featured. Honestly, the costuming in this movie is just spectacular.
Would you say the costumes are rather Janty?
Well, counting Hasselt, you, and myself, there’s a surprisingly disproportionate amount of Belgians in this comment section. I’ve just recently moved from Ghent to Brussels, so I’m not at the film festival this year, but nice to see some representation here.
That does make me feel better, thanks.
Good to hear!
The book it’s based on is not a novel. Looking forward to the film.
Unfortunately the intelligent drama is undercut by the actors’ choices to do all the dialogue in outrageous Monty Pythonesque French accents.
Would be better if Damon and Affleck just used their real Boston accents.
Your Mother was a hamster and your Father smelt of apples.
Elderberries!
Yeh mah was a hahmstah and yah fahdah smelt ‘a eldahbehries.
“En Gaaaaaaaaaaaahd…”
The lahhhhhhst duel will take place at Fenway Park!
But not during the playoffs, Go Sox!
I don’t think anything ever at all is better with a Boston accent.
“Gotta make a trial of combat, kid! Gotta sort them barneys out, son.”
A couple of Massholes running around in armor and wielding swords? I think we saw that in Dogma, didn’t we?
Oh Affleck basically does and it’s remarkable
They kind of do? At least there’s no attempt at French or even that vaguely British accent that used to show up all the time in historical dramas.
Say what you like, when Damon drew first blood and hissed, “I fart in your general direction”, I got chills.
does anyone else think they made matt damon look like theo von for this film?
Kiss! Kiss! Kiss!
Talk about a case that has been poorly handled by historians. Apparently until fairly recently the standard interpretation was that Marguerite had wrongly identified her attacker.
You do realize that history isn’t set in stone, right?
Facts are. The way we remember them, not so much…
I’ve been hearing from several fronts that Affleck is terrific in this, which is a pleasant surprise, considering beforehand the discourse was mostly mocking his hair.Between this and the buzz on The Tender Bar, I wouldn’t be shocked if Ben has a shot at a third Oscar.
He does a great job and rekindled Bennifer. His year has been more successful then most.
Funny supporting Affleck (Good Will Hunting, Extract) is by far the best Affleck, so this has me excited. I’m hoping this dude is essentially the 14th Century version of his character in Mallrats.
You mean like the back of a dung wagon?
And Shakespeare in Love, too. I think he’s good as a leading man, depending on the movie, but I think he definitely shines as a supporting role.
I’ve alleged for years that Affleck is the Gen X Alec Baldwin – an incredibly funny and surprisingly subtle character actor miscast in his youth as a generic leading man because of his looks (see also Farrell, Colin).
wish he’d start a podcast like baldwin. those kevin smith dvd audio commentaries he was on were formative in my teens.
His audio commentary on ARMAGEDDON is classic.
Ben is also sort of the only person still making old school mid-budget thrillers.
*Brad Pitt has entered the chat*
15?! I thought she was 36.
I actually think Adam Driver is doing a 14th century version of Affleck’s character from Mallrats in this movie. Affleck doing some kind of libertine royal deal
Jesus, I just watched this, and he kind of is lol
He’s hilarious in the second act. “He’s no fucking fun!”
Well, the hair is ridiculous and renders him unrecognizable, but Matt Damon’s hesher mullet is even more unflattering, so I’d say Affleck comes off better.
it is odd — and ironic — to me that rashomon is generally remembered as a movie about multiple people misremembering the same event, when the movie is actually about multiple people flat-out lying about the event
This B review has me a lot more interested in the movie than most As.
On HBO Max now. Well worth the watch imo.
I’m interested but *goddamn* this is long. I really don’t understand how American cinemas haven’t embraced the intermission yet.
152 minutes ain’t shitOnce Hollywood stopped making 4-hour blockbuster epics like Cleopatra or Lawrence of Arabia, the intermission was largely unnecessary
Number of screenings is paramount for profitability, and increasing the length of a film from 150 to 170 minutes will do the proprietors no favors.
Aaa shit, fair point.
I have no personal insight into cinema operations so I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I’ve read many times that theaters make most of their money from concessions. Seems like intermissions would help sales. Also with multiplexes being the norm I don’t see squeezing in an extra showing as being so important. If a movie is a hit it will be starting every 20 minutes on a different screen. I can’t remember the last time I saw a theater turn people away for lack of seating, even pre-pandemic.
Epic-length films, up into the 1960s at least, often with their own title cards and music. First time I ever saw one in a theater was Chitty Chitty Bang Bang!
Oh interesting ! Shame they stopped doing that….
So, am I to understand from this review that the assault in question is depicted twice? While it sounds like a very good film with good reasons for that directorial choice, I need to know that going in. Might be too much for me.
SPOILERS, I guess.Yes, the assault is depicted twice. They are not the most explicit or brutal depictions I’ve seen and they are relatively brief. The first one (In Jacques’ telling) is a bit detached and clinical, at least in comparison to the second (according to Marguerite), which was harder to watch as it was more obviously violent and showed more of her reaction during and after the event. If it makes a difference (MAJOR spoilers), things eventually go quite badly for the rapist and about as happily for Marguerite as could be hoped.
Nah. Graphic rape depiction gonna trigger me no matter what happens to the rapist. Punishment does not un-rape a person.
That is correct. (Slight spoiler below.)It’s depicted first from the perspective of le Gris, where it is very much a rape and very much an unpleasant experience, but kind of polite and quiet. Then it is depicted from the perspective of Lady Carrouges, where it is fucking brutal.
“…and then there’s a ceremony where all the dudes kiss on the mouth!”
There might be. Medieval guys didn’t have the same hang ups lots of men do now. They tend to kiss and embrace a lot of you read stuff from back then.
The joke is that there was such a ceremony, it was in the original script, but Scott refused to film it.
Kissing on the lips was pretty much just an accepted, normal greeting between friends. I seem to remember that it was the black plague that changed it, kinda like how we all stopped shaking hands due to Covid.
There is ceremonial dude-kissing in the finished film. I think Scott was concerned that if Damon kissed Affleck specifically, it would be all people talked about.
I think Scott was concerned that if Damon kissed Affleck specifically, it would be all people talked about.That . . . definitely makes sense. Besides, people get too caught up in complete accuracy, anyway. If anyone tried, it’d be really distracting and still wouldn’t be totally accurate. The far past looked really silly. Plus, there was all the illness and lead paint makeup (for both men and women) and bad teeth. Plus, we have no idea what people sounded like prior to recorded audio, even the English accent we think of as an English accent wasn’t even around until the late 1800s. The best approximation of Shakespeare’s accent is here:
“Welp, going to the capitol to tell these socialists we won’t stand for their vaccines, masks and socialism. Yuppers.”
Guess I’m gonna be the odd man out and say Black Hawk Down. I’m not going to call it better than say, Alien, but for the type of story it’s telling it does an efficient job of setup and then moves straight through with brutal efficiency.Shitnuts, I meant to reply to the ‘What’s your favorite Ridley Scott film’ thread.
Thoughtful and well-written review, looking forward to the movie…if nothing else it sounds as though the writing (if not perfect) imposes coherence on Scott’s unquenchable thirst for spectacle, reality-be-damned (ahem Prometheus)
https://www.fiverr.com/web_ashiq2019/design-wordpress-website-with-divi-avada-child-or-any-theme
Re: Matt Damon….[Sarcasm]
Man, that faggot really is wearing the hell out of that cape.[/Sarcasm]Honestly, I want him booked on some VERY gay shows to promote this abortion.
probably too late, but – ‘actoors, acting on horses’, right? LOOK AT THEM!
Still, there’s a power to this film’s blunt era-crossing outrage.
I see where you’re going there
Went to see this film today. A couple of factors for why it bombed at the box office.1) It’s an 18 rated film here in the U.K. – is that NC-17 in the US – when even the most violent films usually scrape a 15. I’m guessing it’s the brutality of the violence and the extended rape, which was tough.2) The release timing. Bond is still doing good business and Venom 2 has a lot of appeal. I had to race to see this film this afternoon as it is moving to one late screening a day at my local cinemas after just one week. Should have waited a couple of weeks IMO3) It is utterly joyless! I think Comer has a giggle with her friends once but this is not a fun film! Life is a miserable trial for pretty much everyone (except Ben Affleck and a nutty looking Alex Lawther). Matt Damon’s hair is a crime in itself.I also got think if you know the plot – the accusation of rape and three points of view story telling – there are very little surprises or suspense. The final duel is pretty gripping but the attitudes to women are not surprising, the performers reliably good. Not sure what accent Harriet Walter was doing – maybe her damehood kept anyone from asking. Something American I think…? Or maybe she and Jodie Comer were busy reminiscing about their Killing Eve team up and she was preoccupied!I’m a big KE and Jodie Comer fan and she more than holds her own opposite Damon and Driver but it’s not a role that gives her that much meaty stuff apart from looking wronged. She has a few good scenes and slays them all but I’m looking forward to seeing the range she has demonstrated on TV on the big screen. Ultimately me and the 4 OAPs at my screening were probably glad to get out. Yes, well made, but over long and grim.
Seriously awesome movie, and I’m very sorry that it bombed. Great performances and the titular duel is an all-timer for great combat.
Good review, but I’d give it a straight A. I loved it.
Also, it does ultimately have a happy ending! Those three ending tags say it all, and I can only hope the last two were true.