The Last Duel

Despite plenty of creative liberties with the story and how the story's ambiguous nature (historical documents do not indicate whether she was telling the truth) was made to be blatantly obvious in the movie, this was pretty good. Fight scenes are excellent, production values were immaculate, acting was on point. But don't expect this to be 100% accurate; see it as a medieval movie seen through a 2021 lens. Kinda like if they made a movie about Abraham Lincoln but they present him as a full blown racist.

Edited by HBarnill on Oct 27th 2021 at 10:23:00 AM

Not surprising. I wonder if it's flopping so far due to the subject matter or because of Covid.

As someone with no love for Jodie Comer, declaring her film career over due to one flop that has so many other issues tied to it seems comically premature.

Especially when she has another successful film out at the same time.

It's just... weird.

Edited by Larkmarn on Oct 20th 2021 at 1:54:07 PM

EDIT: Double post?!?

Edited by Larkmarn on Oct 20th 2021 at 1:53:56 PM

Thought about seeing this just because I like Adam Driver, but then I realized... An anti-sexual assault movie featuring not one but two Harvey Weinstein enablers... yeah, no thank you.

It is fitting how the best part of the movie was the third section, which was written by a woman. Knowing Matt & Ben, they probably think this is their redemption.

Edited by HBarnill on Oct 20th 2021 at 11:15:20 AM

And of course Driver, not one of them, plays the evil pervert…

Jodie Comer was The Rise of Skywalker and came out reputation unscathed. She’ll be fine.

Agreed. It is quite odd to see what reads like an premature obituary for Comer's film career than anything to do with the film itself.

Yes, we all know that Hollywood is evil toward women. Assuming her film career is already done in by one poor box office opening, especially for a film that is overall getting a warm reception from critics, is still rather presumptuous.

Edited by BaronVonFistcrunch on Oct 20th 2021 at 12:18:51 PM

They really could've picked a better historical subject for a #MeToo movie than a duel that was fought under a highly questionable "truth".

Edited by Forenperser on Oct 20th 2021 at 9:06:12 PM

I personally tend to figure that the allegation was true, and the positive spin Le Gris has had historically is of a kind with other historical rapists (i.e. Thomas Mallory and unfortunately probably also Geoffrey Chaucer) who people have wanted to believe were just lovable womanizers.

In light of how well-connected Le Gris was, it seems telling that he couldn't quite avoid consequences, which I imagine he would have if the allegation was faked (and even if it was true he probably had a pretty good chance of avoiding consequences) and there seems to be more downsides than upsides for Jacques/Marguerite accusing him.

But in terms of adapting the story into a movie, I think that the best approaches are either Medieval!Gone Girl (the Le Gris is innocent version) or Medieval!Erin Brockovich (the Le Gris is guilty version).

Edit - And yeah, I don't get the suspiciously gleeful insistence that Comer's career is over.

Edit 2 - I've also kind of been wondering about the "connection" to Game of Thrones. What I mean, is that not only is that show a particularly well-known representation of trials by combat, but the Oberyn/Gregor duel particularly evokes comparison. But since Game of Thrones has kind of lost popularity and fallen out of the zeitgeist, the movie doesn't have that comparison as a selling point.

Edited by Hodor2 on Oct 20th 2021 at 2:36:23 PM

I mean, I'm confused why anyone would think this would be a big crowd pleaser anyway.

It seems very much something that would be a niche film.

According to Hollywood powers that be, giving Ridley Scott a big movie involving swords should be a no-brainer success. (It hasn't been true since the modestly successful Kingdom of Heaven, but goodness do they try.)

Didn't Kingdom of Heaven end up having to have a director's cut because the executives didn't let Ridley Scott do his thing?

Depends on how you mean “have to.” Even though all poorly-received movies are made by studio executives and all well-received movies are made by auteur geniuses, not every poorly-received movie gets a director’s cut.

According to Wikipedia (citing the Flash-dependent and now-inaccessible website), the cuts were Ridley Scott’s concessions to preview audiences, and the director’s cut was an opportunity to chide preview audiences and the incompetent directors who use them.

Why wasn't Mulligan cast? I find her to be the better actress, but just as important, Mulligan can survive a flop since she's an established star.

Edited by HBarnill on Oct 27th 2021 at 10:24:08 AM

Okay seriously. What is with your weird obsession with the idea that this movie will have indelibly sunk Comer based on literally nothing whatsoever?

Also comes across a bit misogynistic-sounding by treating actresses as inherently interchangeable. Not to mention nonsensical since literally no producer goes into casting for a movie with the mindset "well, if the movie flops, then this star would be relatively unaffected.

Which is increasingly nonsensical since your entire thesis is based on the idea of Hollywood not caring about its female stars and willing to throw them under the bus for a flop.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaaand you're adding it to the wiki side, too. Seriously. Explain yourself.

Edited by Larkmarn on Oct 22nd 2021 at 3:32:20 PM

I saw the movie last week and have just been sitting on my thoughts. The performances were exceptional, but I was mostly engaged with its depiction of the social politics of 14th century France, the erosion of a friendship and the extremes they go to "redeem" their honor. I can certainly understand some of the criticisms, simply the subject matter and going through the effort of depicting the rape twice.

I do think the "Rashomon"-Style was not necessarily needed, but probably more so that we don't spend 2 hours getting back to the title duel but keep it in memory longer. That said, the use of shifting POV's was interesting for how subtle the differences are. Rather than radically self-serving perspectives, all the differences were more a matter of tone, pacing and focus.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, while Ridley Scott thanks Disney for distributing the film, he blames "apathetic millennials" for the film's underperformance in a little rant.

Boomer response.

Everyone watches everything on cellphones now, that’s why Quibi did so well.

Ah, yes, the apathetic millennials. So cynical and un-empathetic that they would rather watch... *checks notes* Up-beat Marvel Movie, Up-beat NOT Marvel Movie Venom 2, Last James Bond, Halloween Sequel, or Dune instead of... *further checks notes* a nearly 3-hour R-rated grim and gritty period movie about sexual assault. Starring Matt Daemon.

Yeah, it's totally the phones. Those kids tweeting "I want Adam Driver to split me like a log" is really killing media. And totally pushing the success of Quibi- oh, wait.

Also, a thing that Scott fucking supported in the first place so, hypocrite there too.

Edited by InkDagger on Nov 22nd 2021 at 3:29:52 AM

Not sure why he thought this would do well box office wise?

Even if we weren't in a pandemic this isn't exactly something you go to the cinema to watch when you can do that at home..

3 hours, fucking Christ Almighty.

At least Avengers Endgame was the culmination of a decade of storytelling. Scott should have just released this movie on Netflix or something like The Irishman.