Growing up, one of my favourite movies was 1953's KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE, starring Robert Taylor as the dashing Sir Lancelot du Lac, Stanley Baker as the villainous Mordred, Mel Ferrer as the gallant but wronged King Arthur and Ava Gardner as the fair Guinevere. Watching Taylor charging into battle and chopping down his foes with merry abandon before whisking his "damsel in distress" off into the sunset astride the mighty Beric was quite simply, glorious! The sheer nostalgia and sense of adventure that this film evoked was truly magical, prompting me to garb myself in cardboard armour and take up a foam sword to combat swathes of imaginary villains. It was wonderful; the heroes always triumphed and the bad guys always got their comeuppances... But Ridley Scott's THE LAST DUEL, isn't like that...
This film has a lot to like, a lot to dislike and a lot to talk about. The attention to period detail and costume design is nothing short of extraordinary. The film itself is heavily CGI'd in parts (to recreate medieval Paris, for example) but the animation is so good and so life-like that it actually doesn't matter. The cast (for the most part) is excellent and Jodie Comer's performance was nothing short of a revelation. And yet... something was missing. By the time of the story's climax, when the brutal Jean de Carrouges duels the villainous Jacques le Gris for the honour of his wronged wife, we have lost something: the stakes. The story itself is told from three perspectives (à la RASHOMON): Jean de Carrouges, Jacques le Gris and Marguerite de Thibouville. It's the same story told three different ways and at some points, that's really quite intriguing: in Jean's story, we see Jean (unsurprisingly) as the hero- a loving husband and a gallant warrior. However, in Marguerite's story, we see Jean as a brutal and ambitious man who cares more about his precious reputation than his wife's feelings. It's an intriguing turnaround, highlighting the rampant chauvinism of the period and making Marguerite a character that we can really empathise with. However, by breaking apart the story's structure, we lose its momentum. When Jean de Carrouges finally plunges his dagger into Jacques le Gris's mouth, we derive no actual catharsis from his death. The story's disjointed nature (in the end) prevents us from enjoying the stakes. The film becomes more like a hard-edged historical documentary than an edge-of-your-seat medieval drama. Had the story been told from beginning to end with no detours (and perhaps a few more battle scenes), I believe Scott would've held his audience until the very end. As it is, I felt no real excitement or tension when the credits finally came. Whilst I enjoyed parts of THE LAST DUEL, I did not find myself gripped by its story; a great shame when it really was such a gripping real life story.
On a closing note, the other major problem I have with THE LAST DUEL is its battle scenes. Ridley Scott has always been an expert at filming "swords 'n' steel" battles (the opening scene from GLADIATOR, need I say more?), but for some strange reason, he decided to have his actors (or stunt men) using modernised moves during the fighting: cuts and slashes that looked more like moves from WWE than medieval Europe. As soon as it was over, I turned to my Dad and said that the climactic Lancelot vs. Mordred duel from KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE was ten times' better, and you know what? Re-watching that fight scene, my opinion hasn't changed. If anything, I found the fight scene (even though this film was made in 1953- at a time of tin shields and plastic swords) more accurate than THE LAST DUEL's concluding bust up; when they finally draw their long swords, Taylor and Baker are clumsy, stumbling around and missing each other by metres. But this isn't inaccurate; it shows just how heavy swinging a medieval long sword was and coupled together with the stakes of the story (Part Four: The Final Battles) and the rousing soundtrack, I found my nostalgic love for KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE growing while my memories of THE LAST DUEL continued to fade into the distance...
This film has a lot to like, a lot to dislike and a lot to talk about. The attention to period detail and costume design is nothing short of extraordinary. The film itself is heavily CGI'd in parts (to recreate medieval Paris, for example) but the animation is so good and so life-like that it actually doesn't matter. The cast (for the most part) is excellent and Jodie Comer's performance was nothing short of a revelation. And yet... something was missing. By the time of the story's climax, when the brutal Jean de Carrouges duels the villainous Jacques le Gris for the honour of his wronged wife, we have lost something: the stakes. The story itself is told from three perspectives (à la RASHOMON): Jean de Carrouges, Jacques le Gris and Marguerite de Thibouville. It's the same story told three different ways and at some points, that's really quite intriguing: in Jean's story, we see Jean (unsurprisingly) as the hero- a loving husband and a gallant warrior. However, in Marguerite's story, we see Jean as a brutal and ambitious man who cares more about his precious reputation than his wife's feelings. It's an intriguing turnaround, highlighting the rampant chauvinism of the period and making Marguerite a character that we can really empathise with. However, by breaking apart the story's structure, we lose its momentum. When Jean de Carrouges finally plunges his dagger into Jacques le Gris's mouth, we derive no actual catharsis from his death. The story's disjointed nature (in the end) prevents us from enjoying the stakes. The film becomes more like a hard-edged historical documentary than an edge-of-your-seat medieval drama. Had the story been told from beginning to end with no detours (and perhaps a few more battle scenes), I believe Scott would've held his audience until the very end. As it is, I felt no real excitement or tension when the credits finally came. Whilst I enjoyed parts of THE LAST DUEL, I did not find myself gripped by its story; a great shame when it really was such a gripping real life story.
On a closing note, the other major problem I have with THE LAST DUEL is its battle scenes. Ridley Scott has always been an expert at filming "swords 'n' steel" battles (the opening scene from GLADIATOR, need I say more?), but for some strange reason, he decided to have his actors (or stunt men) using modernised moves during the fighting: cuts and slashes that looked more like moves from WWE than medieval Europe. As soon as it was over, I turned to my Dad and said that the climactic Lancelot vs. Mordred duel from KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE was ten times' better, and you know what? Re-watching that fight scene, my opinion hasn't changed. If anything, I found the fight scene (even though this film was made in 1953- at a time of tin shields and plastic swords) more accurate than THE LAST DUEL's concluding bust up; when they finally draw their long swords, Taylor and Baker are clumsy, stumbling around and missing each other by metres. But this isn't inaccurate; it shows just how heavy swinging a medieval long sword was and coupled together with the stakes of the story (Part Four: The Final Battles) and the rousing soundtrack, I found my nostalgic love for KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE growing while my memories of THE LAST DUEL continued to fade into the distance...