i like how they make a point of how Le Gris views his seduction of women by comparing what he did at Pierre's party with what he did with Marguerite. But we as the audience can see the horrifying reality of his actions and the pain before and after for Marguerite. Great film
It's an excellent portrayal of how psychopaths view their actions. Dude let his dick take control of his sanity, which resulted in him raping lady which resulted in his death. Dude probably also developed his "love" for her only as an excuse for wanting to cum inside her, and making up that she wanted him in order to justify his rape. A lot of women today, accuse men of rape when they regret having sex with them or when they didn't even have sex with them and just want revenge. But back than times were different, and women themselves were different too.
@@ishitrealbad3039 this 👆 Back then the rules were against the women so them lying would cost them worse But now rules r in their favour so u see lots of false rape accusations. Imo based on the movie she did get raped.
I disagree that the scenes didn't have to be done twice. I found 'that' scene to be very impactful shown two times with subtle differences between the male and female perspective. Excellent film, and that final duel was insane.
*_"I disagree that the scenes didn't have to be done twice...very impactful shown two times with subtle differences"_* I agree with you, but for any number of reasons you're gonna get viewpoints that are more sensitive _(or feign to be)_ , even when Affleck and Damon make it a point to _NOT_ present gratuitous images of nudity nor graphic physical battery. They literally saw to it that both perspectives of the actual "SA" were shown briefly (mere seconds) and in a non-gratuitous manner that only served to allow audiences to superficially connect with what transpired from the perspective of _Jacques Le Gris_ and from the perspective of _Marguerite._ Affleck and Damon even made it a point to have a female writer _( _*_Nicole Holofcener_*_ )_ contribute to how the "SA" would be displayed on screen. Briefly/fleetingly showing the two non-gratuitous "SA" seconds, also pays off at the end of the film when viewers see the consequence of the dead, nude carcass of Jacques Le Gris, strung up for public display. 📽 🎬 🎞 *HOLOFCENER:* _"Well, we knew we didn't want nudity, and we knew that the difference between the two scenes had to be really, really subtle because Jacques Le Gris did not think he raped Marguerite. He thought he was in love with her. And he thought she protested, you know, mildly because she's a woman, and that's what, you know, ladies did. And so, you know, we'd written it so that the dialogue is exactly the same in each scene, but her response is slightly different. Her response in Le Gris's eyes was more flirtatious. She seemed almost kind of into it and like she was playing a game. And when they're having sex - or he is raping her - she looks a lot more like she's enjoying it. So - but it's all really, really subtle. And that's, you know, a great performance by Jodie."_
Yeah, first time showed you what the male character thought were signals of consent, like she was playing hard to get to increase the thrill. 2nd showing showed you how those small differences were misinterpreted.
The scenes were fine to be done twice, but the third time was a bit annoying. Not speaking of that scene, but speaking of other scenes when they first met during that festival. Seeing that 3 times over was a bit tedious.
I agree with you, it needs to be shown to truly give impact, especially when she is curled up at the bottom of the bed, it really hits you. If it had cut away I don't think I would have had as much impact.
I loved how in Adam Driver’s perspective, the Lady takes her shoes off purposefully when running away from him. Versus her perspective where they fell off while she was running.
...Which further exemplifies how the reviewer's comment at 6:07 has no connection to the perspective/paradigm realities briefly displayed on screen. The reviewer says that the _brief non-detailed (zero nudity), non-gratuitous, fleeting_ scene was depicted the exact same way twice. It clearly was not...Even _dialogue, duration, actions, and positioning differ_ in the different perspectives.
@@ResonantRTS 1.) I didn't "speak". 2.) There is no regulation against commenting on inaccuracies _(in a open forum)_ stated by a reviewer. If someone says something inaccurate, ain't nothin' "deep" about clarifying incorrectness in a open comments section. I responded to a posted comment that exemplified _differences where the reviewer said there were none._ Others had no issue with it...You did...Yay! 👍🏽 A day after I mention an inaccuracy, other posters in the general comments go into detail about incorrect comments from the reviewer(s). Again not *"deep"* , but you may wanna go weirdly police👮🏼 them too.
Super fun actually...From Ibiza to Rio...NYC..., etc. Even helped a few DJ friends get televised commercial contracts... Love a great party/celebration!!! 🎶🎊🎆
In the "truth" of the rapist, I was convinced that the lady was actually enjoying it, but in the "truth" of the lady, I was so disgusted by how she was overpowered and Le Gris (the rapist) was still acting like they were both in love with each other. This is one of the greatest film I saw that came out this year.
The Cast is ludicruous idkw all these fake praise is for. Ben afleck lmao Jason borne and the jewish guy from the star wars worst saga, for everyone without a stick up his ass this looks like a B movie
@@carlosdelsol76 The Star Wars sequel trilogy is bad is because the writing and the directing is bad (and also Daisy Ridley being an asshole), Adam Driver is actually a decent actor in this film (he’s also one of the leading role of Marriage Story, which is another good movie).
I couldn’t disagree more that showing the SA twice was unnecessary or that they were too similar. Marguerite’s perspective was much harder to watch, and the first time we saw it was shocking enough. Adam Driver’s character didn’t remember the way she cried until the very end, and continued as he left the room.
*_"I couldn’t disagree more that showing the SA twice was unnecessary or....."_* I agree with you, but for any number of reasons you're gonna get viewpoints that are more sensitive _(or feign to be)_ , even when Affleck and Damon make it a point to _NOT_ present gratuitous images of nudity nor graphic physical battery. They literally saw to it that both perspectives of the actual "SA" were shown briefly (mere seconds) and in a non-gratuitous manner that only served to allow audiences to superficially connect with what transpired from the perspective of _Jacques Le Gris_ and from the perspective of _Marguerite._ Affleck and Damon even made it a point to have a female writer _( _*_Nicole Holofcener_*_ )_ contribute to how the "SA" would be displayed on screen. Briefly/fleetingly showing the two non-gratuitous "SA" seconds, also pays off at the end of the film when viewers see the consequence of the dead, nude carcass of Jacques Le Gris, strung up for public display. 📽 🎬 🎞 *HOLOFCENER:* _"Well, we knew we didn't want nudity, and we knew that the difference between the two scenes had to be really, really subtle because Jacques Le Gris did not think he raped Marguerite. He thought he was in love with her. And he thought she protested, you know, mildly because she's a woman, and that's what, you know, ladies did. And so, you know, we'd written it so that the dialogue is exactly the same in each scene, but her response is slightly different. Her response in Le Gris's eyes was more flirtatious. She seemed almost kind of into it and like she was playing a game. And when they're having sex - or he is raping her - she looks a lot more like she's enjoying it. So - but it's all really, really subtle. And that's, you know, a great performance by Jodie."_
I don't understand people saying there are the same scenes in each chapter. I just watched the film and it was very minimal. There was new things in every chapter and very little repeated.
I totally agree the second "scene" is way more violent and is suppose to represent an awful act , where as the pov of Le Gris in chapter 2 it was mutual feeling.
The repeated scenes 99% of the time have a very important yet small detail thats different in them. An expression being slightly different changes the scenes tone drastically
@@daft676 it wasn't mutual in part 2 whatsover lol. there was def some flirting (which was just marguerite trying to get on his good side) but the actual act was very r*pey, even from his own pov she verbally tells him no multiple times. notice that he doesn't even bother to look at her face, whereas from her pov, we have a clear shot of her face - where she is crying & in distress. he pov really didn't change the story much, he basically twisted everything she said/did into some delusional fantasy, bc even in his own pov he's a r*pist.
The film was pretty harsh on Jean de Carrouges - there's no reason to think that a man knighted on the battlefield for his prowess at fighting wouldn't have the respect of his fellow soldiers. Also implying he was inept with his finances and Marguerite prospered for 30 years after his death due her brilliance ignores the fact that the King gave him a small fortune and yearly salary after winning the duel (he became the King's personal bodyguard after the duel and was sent on special missions which denoted his valued position). The fact the Count favoured Le Gris meant a normal legal route wasn't a possibility, so as much as Jean may have been satisfying a rivarly or protecting his pride, in a chivalric age he was much risking his life for justice and honour in the duel against Le Gris, who despite having less military experience was apparently a much larger man.
@@EAfirstlast You see that in the movie since Jean sues over the land he expected from his wife's dowry and his issues with Jacques getting rich for being the count's friend while he is out fighting and getting nothing. As far as the respect of the soldiers, I think the battle he loses at the beginning is supposed to explain some of their actions. It's also not clear whether the soldiers who laughed at him were the same ones that served under his father or were with le Gris or Pierre.
Nicole Holofcener who wrote the third part of the film (marguerite perspective) seems to have decided that Jean de carrouges was an insensitive man who lacked empathy for his wife, I have tried to find has many archives of the time as possible about these events and I could not find any that confirm that Jean de carrouges was a jerk to his wife, Quite the contrary, he believed her and defended her multiple times. He had a warmer conversation with her before the duel and went back to her without needing the king to remind him to go look for his wife.
@@femtoservants You aren't going to find real accounts of what Jean was like with his wife when they were in private. Anything you read will probably be romanticized and from his pov. The only testimony we get from Marguerite occurred while he was there, so she wasn't going to say anything bad about her husband that could negatively affect her trial or her marriage after. Jean also had motives to defend his wife besides love or believing what she said was true. Even if he knew she was lying, he would probably take the opportunity to get revenge on Jacques. And you have to sell that lie just like Katniss and Peta in Hunger Games.
They should've almost switched actors because people were according to historic accounts in shock, that even the more battle hardend Jean would properly loose because Le gris was a very tall and apparently large man.
I gotta say, people often remark how Alex just criticizes everything, but notice how he was the one person pointing out the narrative power of how Adam Driver's character literally died thinking he'd done no wrong. He's not playing devil's advocate. He's just pointing out the cerebral aspect of how Driver's character went to the grave not understanding why what he did could be considered wrong. Particularly in a movie about contrasting perspectives, that's really interesting... if you're smart enough to pick up on it. Sometimes you just gotta give Alex that he's actually smart and there's a lot of stupid shit in the world. When there's something deep and smart worth pointing it out he isn't so committed to putting down others and their ideas that he dismisses it.
He can give out good points but sometimes his own bias leaks through. Look at their Halloween Kills review. He makes a very dumb comment saying that SPOILER …… the mob of people attacking Michael beat his ass for no reason. He hated the movie so much he’s trying to be funny and begins making comments that make no sense.
@@andrewgrimes5523 I like the movie….but come on. All those people were two small steps from being special needs. There’s some unkillable psycho killing the whole town….better let him know where we are! 🤦🏾♂️😂😂 I mean they have to. It’s the movie. But you’d have 12-15 people doing this. Not 20-30! Have you looked around lately. Not too many real tough guys anymore. And hell I’m 200 6ft and I ain’t chasing down some killer unless he killed my child and I’m trying to just die. Self preservation was too low with too many. But I was glad for it. Yes my children…run towards the fire. It welcomes you home this Halloween night😱😂😂😂👍🏾
In my view a BIG NO on the part that Adam Drivers character thought it was fine. He literally got a guy to get her to open the door and sneak in her home and rape her and it was his friends/ past friends wife as well. Does not matter what time period it is for that or their would not of even been a duel if people did not care about having their wives/women raped and used by others haha and also she was not a peasant or common person on some war mission, she was considered high status overall. The point was his ego/pride or whatever you want to call it caused him not to care about what she wanted and so forth and all that stuff and the point was he wanted to see what he wanted to see not what actually happened. In the end he wanted to conquer his obsessive mission in his eyes. You also have to understand he only saw the woman a few times from a distance and had one simple cultural friendly kiss and then said he was in love with her for example, which is a obvious red flag situation. He was deranged and in a predatory manic episode or whatever you want to call it and yes it was a time where Might meant Right but unless he was mentally retarded in some form he knew what he was doing obviously. But ya was a good movie. Live for medieval stuff.
This film BLEW ME AWAY. It takes a while to know wtf is happening at the start, but wow does it all click in all together. The end was phenomenal. Ridley Scott is a master
Yeah the beginning was HELLA confusing. I was like this guy disrespects that guy and then marries his daughter in the next scene and it’s over the course of 17 years. But, it was ohenominal
@@almightytwee1188 Bruh it literally showed in the same scene. The "disrespect" was bc he was loyal to the king and the man was a traitor. We then see his reaction to the daughter and it was clear he was interesed in her
Yes, this was based on a real event. Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Jacque Le Gris (Adam Driver) were once friends and squires together. However, Le Gris was also a cleric of the Church and thus could both read and write. That gave him a leg up and saw him rise rapidly in favor with Count Pierre d'Alençon (Ben Affleck), and he was knighted and allowed to purchase the valuable property of Aunou-le-Faucon. Carrouges would remain a squire for quite a long time, during which his first wife and only son would die tragically. Eventually he would become a knight, after a lengthy campaign against the English. He would also marry Marguerite de Thibouville, through which he had some claim on Aunou-le-Faucon as her dowry. Le Gris and the Count fought this in court (I'm glossing over a lot here) and succeeded. It was during all of this that the rape allegations are made. Trivia: Each part was written by a different writer. Matt Damon wrote the part centered on Carrouges. Ben Affleck wrote the Le Gris part (which he was originally supposed to play but scheduling issues killed that), and Nicole Holofcener wrote Marguerite's part. Also, each part is based on the direct testimony of the people involved. This is one of if not the most well documented and preserved medieval trials we know of. The original documents are still in the archive in Paris. Spoiler Most historians believe that Le Gris was guilty, but they admit there is no way to truly prove that. A big issue is that Le Gris' own alibi witness would be caught raping a woman during the build up to the trial, and Le Gris claimed he could not have made such a trip that time of the year in a single day; he was 56 years old. And no Marguerite de Thibouville did not burn at the stake over this.
No offense to Ben Affleck who is of course a very talented actor in his own right but I'm glad that Adam Driver ended up getting cast in place of Ben. I've only seen the trailers & heard Joe, OJ & Alex's opinions of The Last Duel as I'm gonna have to wait until Sunday to see the movie but from what I can tell, Adam seems to have been brilliantly cast as Matt Damon's close friend turned bitter rival.
@@gothelvis3541 Yet the movie got a few things wrong, like Le Gris claiming that he had a consensual sexual encounter with Marguerite. He never made any such claim, not even to his lawyer whose meticulous notes are still in the archive in Paris. A lawyer who still strongly believed his client was guilty, but never explained why in his notes.
That's a little bit incorrect. Le Gris was only knighted at the duel to make the two combatants of equal status. He was a squire up until that point, albeit one with much higher actual status than Carrouges. Carrouges wanted the estate Arnou-le-Faucon as dowry for his marriage despite the fact that Count Pierre d'Alencon, whom Le Gris served under, had legally purchased it from her father and awarded it to Le Gris both for his service and for giving him a loan to move his court.
The contradictory narratives of shared events is called "Rashomon Effect" named after Rashomon by Kurosawa. A lot of the repeated scenes are similar save a few characters withhold lines of dialogue, but the scene of sexual assault there are a few notable differences. I believe the lighting is darker when Jacques enters (need to doublecheck) and the camerawork emphasizes Marguerite's attempts to make distance in her version. In his version she takes the shoes deliberately off whereas in her version they fall off in her frantic attempt to make an escape. The playful chase from Jacques's perspective is a lot longer with Marguerite trying to fake him out whereas in her version it's a lot faster and he catches her abruptly, in his version once he has placed her on her back there's no more physical resistance, her legs aren't kicking out, whereas they do while she's on her back in her version. And obviously she's screaming no and pleading and crying a lot more in her version. Obviously it's sexual assault in both situations but there are very clear differences to the memory and it's obviously more harrowing the second time.
To me the sexual assault in Jacques version was meant to make it look like she was pretending to fight him off like in the sex scene with the girls. He was trying to make her seem like she was actually willing but upholding modesty. I kept thinking is she liking this or not. While he was pushier and more predatory like but she was less resistant. While her version actually he actually seemed gentler at first but with a manipulative fake approach. He definitely seemed like he had a motive and it wasn’t love. He less frantic almost like he was trying to calm her but it was fake and threaten her less but then proceeding to disturbingly rape her. In this version she seemed more frantic less playful, seemed to almost outrun him, called her servant 3 times instead of once and he didn’t mock her, she was resistant and was visibly frightened. But the whole time I just got the vibe he was trying to convince her that what happened didn’t just happened and that he “loved her”. Just a complete mind fuck and shows how sadistic he really was. He did that to get back at Jean and that’s that. It was sick how he tried to play with her mind in her version.
I also noticed that in his version, she seemed to take longer to close the door and looked like she deliberately left it a little bit open for him. But in her version, she's trying so hard to close it and get away and he slams it open.
@@Ash-qu9sx good catch, I didn't specifically catch that as an objective difference, but that lines up with how I remember it. Another example of Jacques misreading the situation/twisting reality to fit his desired memory of events.
Kingdom of Heaven is a decent movie... The directors cut of Kingdom of Heaven is one of my favorite movies of all time... Shares a rotating slot with Children of Men.
I feel like people have definitely missed some of the very subtle hints in the chapters, it very much leans into her side of the story being the truth and you definitely need to rewatch. Jodie Comer is an awesome actress, it annoys me that more people aren’t talking about her acting more in this!
Some people also apparently missed the very not subtle hint when "the truth" stayed on screen longer during her chapter intro. And yes she was great. This whole cast was top notch.
@@the_only_andy True, I was meaning more this year people will have seen her in Free Guy than this low performing Ridley Scott movie despite how good it is.
I think you guys missed the differences between scenes that were repeated in each pov. For example, the scene where Damon and Driver make up and Driver meets Marguerite for the first time. In Damon's perspective, he is the one who says they should not quarrel b/c they are servants of the king. In Drivers perspective, he says it and in Marguerite's perspective, it is Damon's other friend who said it. Each guy tries to present himself as more honorable. Even the opening battle scene is different as Damon's pov highlights him saving Driver and Driver's shows that he saved Damon first. The only one I think could have been done better is the Driver pov of the rape scene. To a modern audience, it definitely looks like rape (even though I've seen some people weren't sure). The chastity protesting could have been introduced better earlier and/or have her not fight back as much (even though it was less than in her pov).
The two scenes of the allegation weren’t the same. Very subtle differences between the two if u watch closely. One she keeps screaming and he tells her to hush as if he knows he’s in the wrong. The other she screams out once and moves his hand to his ear as if it’s no big deal because he feels like it’s okay and he’s not in any danger. There’s a couple more as well.
I’m not sure why this film hasn’t been more successful than it was. Score was beautiful, wonderful cast, incredible choreography, good staging wonderful set pieces and a beautiful exploration of the depths of the “truth” how it is a matter of perspective and it’s all capped off with a glorious final battle that still manages to feel you empty on the inside. This was a masterpiece of a movie that leaves you saying “damn” as the credits roll. Whether or not it’s flop is due to the uncomfortable topics it explores or simple missed opportunity, covid idk but imo it’s the best film of the year.
Well we can thank disney for making sure it would not be a sucess (as much as i remember they bought 20th century fox which are behind the film) but here it is : they released the film while it's competing with Halloween kills, Dune, No time to die and Venom let there be carnage... adds to that ZERO advertising and covid making it more difficult for old people to go see it in theaters and you can see why this movie flopped. It was screwed by the network.
Best film I've watched since The Joker. For some reason most cinemas weren't showing it in London. And the one's that were only screened it once a day (a week after it's release). Had to book a day ahead because it sold out on two previous attempts: the screen only had a 30 seat capacity. Very strange.
After seeing it with my family, I can see exactly why many people did not see this movie. Mainly showing the two scenes of rape caused some of them to leave the room and say it was too much. I understand the purpose of perspective, but it crosses many very viewers boundaries multiple times.
I just watched this movie last night. I was absolutely blown away by this film. The different perspectives was so impacted the story. I hate rape scenes. I get very uncomfortable watching them but this was one of the rare films where not only did they show it once. They showed it 2 times and both times were needed. Since the story revolves around the rape and thier stories seeing the act makes the story have so much weight. The last fight scene was one of the most climatic scenes I've ever watched. These 2 guys battling to death one for his life and his wife's honor. The psychological way at the end where he still wouldn't confess would fuck a man up for years with doubt
This is a masterpiece. Simply put. You walk away from this movie with it stuck in your head, like the blade in the final act. This movie was brutally phenomenal. Everybody played the part perfectly- the stand out performance, in my humble opinion, was the mother. Every second she’s on screen, you just felt the ice coldness, and her overbearing ways.
Hardly. It takes a lot of liberties from the actual historical accounts. I get things are subject to taste, but this is certainly not a masterpiece. Just more Hollywood schlock.
@@bebaguette766 Shakespeare didn't base any of his plays on an actual historically recorded event. This did, and then twisted said event to fit a narrative/agenda.
If you haven't already, check out the teasers for this year's *'THE TRAGEDY OF MACBETH'* _(starring Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand)._ 2019's *'THE KING'* (from Brad Pitt's Plan B), starring, Timothée Chalamet (now in _'Dune'_ ), Joel Edgerton, Sean Harris, Robert Pattinson...is also good...🗡📽🎬🎞 2022, *'THE NORTHMAN'* .....
Its amazing how 3 people can miss the fact that the SA was NOT the same in both scenes....in Marguerite truth...she is SCREAMING and yelling and fighting to stop le gris...but in le gris perspective it was a "mild protest"...clear differences..cmon guys
To be fair, I was confused like half the movie to wether or not he was the king.. didn’t seem well explained as I thought he was king until they show the young king at the end of each chapter
@@philliphuey231 at no time was there ever any doubt who Affleck's character was. they repeatedly refer to him as COUNT Pierre and even address him as such.
Best duel ever. I thought it would be the one pass on the horses, like most times, and done. The fact it went on and kept going was incredible. Did not expect that. Really made the ending so intense. I also thought the other guy would win. Spoiler, very small. I was surprised she was wearing lipstick in that end scene. I know, what? The whole film it seemed very realistic for the women being very plain and then that scene. It just seemed odd because I thought only harlots wore makeup in that time.
That’s is a reason I thought this movie was so incredible. The fact that many people thought that the other dude would win is in my opinion and example of great story telling because they really knew how to get you to think something but have a great twist.
@@rileygibson242 yesss but at the same time I thought Damon would win because he had waaay more combat experience because he was always going off to war
I am glad this movie turn out great. Unfortunately I do not think it will make any big money with how low the promo campaign of the movie, even with all of the big casts.
I think an important point to note about the movie is how Matt Damon’s character was being treated , how he has to pay expensive taxes , looses his promised land and his inheritance position of captain of a fort. All while risking his life in battle all the time .Then to hear his wife was raped you can see how he feels betrayed by everyone around him and that explains his demeanour. He did care about his wife although a bit misguided he risked his name and his honor just to prove she was innocent risking his life - like to me he’s a real hero but not perfect he was just misguided and broken. He had loyalty, honour , respect, and was religious
In Le Gris' mind he did not believe he actually took her by force, she was giggling in his mind. Called back to the orgy scene earlier in the movie where the woman was being playful. That's why it was important to show the scene twice. To be honest how'd all 3 you miss this and make a review and mistell the scene.
Watched it yesterday. I liked it. I don't like Super hero movies, getting tired of all that CGI shitfest, and it's refreshing to see movies that actually tries to tell a story. Yes, movie could be shorter, and some scenes are not necessary, they differs from different perspectives, but not necessary. Watching THAT scene twice, was painful. I understand why they did it this way. 1st time was from guys perspective, and felt water down, and didn't felt that she didn't tried hard enough to reject him, and may even enjoy it. 2nd time when you watch from her perspective, it's way more brutal, and felt more like a real deal. Maybe that's whole the point. He didn't saw that as a r*pe and thinks it's all just a game. As he had foreshadowthat scene with a hookers.
I agree I remember watching the first scene and I was kinda confused why the girl did not resist that much and it honestly kinda seemed like she slightly was toying with him but from her perspective it was definitely not consensual. Which in the end of the movie I really enjoyed the story telling of how they did that.
Earlier we see Adam's character chasing another girl playfully around the table before catching her and tossing her onto the bed in the Count's party. It shows that Adam truly thinks that that is ok and the correct way to hook up
@16:00. If you saw the title cards for each chapter it’s clear that her version is the truth. They hit it very on the nose, by keeping the word TRUTH on the screen after the other words disappear.
0:35 Ben affleck was the duke Le Pierre. Did Joe even watch the movie or just judge it based on other reviews and the trailer? 5:15 Kingdom of Heaven extended is absolutely brilliant.... Anyone who disagress doesn't like movies xD 06:15 it happends differently on the account of Le Gris and Lady Marg. on her it it looks extremely borderline crossing haunting.. On his end there's as he claims just a brief act of resistance...
You guys completely missed how different two portrayals of sexual assault were. It wasn't about making people uncomfortable, it was actually showing different emotions by Margaret character. When it's shown from her perspective it is much more violent and distressing, while when showed from Adam Driver's character it's much less violent.
What a horrible review especially you talking about this movie should ha ve been trimmed down. NO! This movie is perfect for how epic and well structured it is. It is raw, realistic and spellbinding. These type of movies NEED to come back. Smart movies that let the story play out and isn’t catering to the lowest common denominator or worried about ‘boring’ anyone. No forced humor, no bullshit just an amazing story told beautifully with outstanding acting and gorgeous cinematography.
Showing the rape scene again isn't just "to make you uncomfortable". It's to show that it didn't happen the way Adam Drivers character tells how it did. And it is the really uncomfortable scene. From his perspective it's by far not as uncomfortable and that's the damn point. Both scenes are necessary.
@@AstaIsAMonster umm pretty sure they are not joking… it is a happy ending. Obviously the story had no happiness in it. But if the other dude (don’t remember the name) would have won the fight it would have been a sad ending because the girl would have died and he would have been able to live on and get away with his crimes and continue to be blessed.
His output in the 90s was the worst if he didn't retire back then that means he still got it in him. He should stay clear from the Alien franchise though, just let it go.
Scott is still fantastic. The BEST parts of Prometheus and Covenant are the AI parts so I’d much rather see him just transition and work with Villenueve on Blade Runner sequels to his hearts content cause that’s CLEARLY where his interests are.
@@tooglianprimus15 Absolutely. Both films had the potential to be the next Blade Runner in terms of quality but they had the misfortune of being part of the Alien universe. Should've made them their own thing
I love the fact that they think that SA scene is the same, just shows the subtle the differences were that they couldn't pick it up. I mean the way she backs up, her shoe falling off versus being taken off, her voice inflection throughout the scene, the more obvious crying. Each person thought and interested what happened to the point where I actually think Adam Driver's character didn't think it was rape as from his point of view and from that time period's social norms, it was flirting and so many scenes make it seem like she was in love with him. The shared book interest scene with her than smiling at him while dancing with her husband. Once you know the whole truth, we know he was in the wrong, and without her side, I would bet a jury would not be 100% sold, that's how subtle the movie was when showing two scenes again. Great movie and sad to see it bomb.
It’s not like it wasn’t wrong then either, though. Don’t make excuses for poor behavior in the past just because ‘it was a different time’, that’s a lazy justification for barbarism.
What's there to judge? As Joe and Alex pointed out. The people of that time period were saying things and believed the same things that today's conservatives and Republicans say and believe and think. Nothing has changed.
@@Foxfire_forty-nine literally not true in the slightest. Go virtue signal on some other thread. That way you’ll at least have some other people to circle jerk with
To the husband she was naive and little. The Jacques she was a seductress and almost sinfully smart and witty to the point she seemed fast (I say this because I assume it was considered inappropriate or rebellious to be that smart as a woman in those times feeding more into her appearing untamed and independent. Which in a way kind of made her seem naughty, right?). From the wife perspective she was smart, assertive and honest. I thought the movie was uncomfortable and corny at first but I realized it was the bloating of the powerful mans perspective. These men were egotistical and ridiculous and now I get why it was so cringey. That was the point. It wasn’t bad acting. It was on purpose. Powerful men have been known to have cringe uncomfortable perspectives, behavior and thoughts. But I noticed when we got to the wife’s perspective the movie got more serious, realistic, less ridiculous(more ridiculous with the men) and got more to the point of what the movie was all about. The humor turned to disgust and shock. Strangeness turned psychopathy especially for the king. He gave me serious little shit from game of thrones vibes towards the end. But everyone’s behaviors started to make more sense in contrast to the wife who was obviously living in reality and not of ego. Also, if you notice the women in general lived in reality and matched our feelings better than the men at times. They seemed to be disturbed and or aware of what was happening while the men where completely morons and lived in another world and didn’t have a clue of the kind of damaging they were doing.
You didn't talk about how each Chapter was written by a different person: Matt Damon did the screenplay for his, Ben Affleck did Adam Driver's, & Nicole Holofcener did the female perspective. And how Ben Affleck was supposed to play Adam Driver's character. But due to scheduling conflicts involving his next film, he had to step down..
I'm so glad I got to see this movie in an empty theater by myself since no one has really heard of this movie and it's currently set to be the biggest box office bomb of all time considering the subject matter , but I adored this one. Ridley Scott in his seventies still has it and I had a hell of an experience watching it unfold. Hopefully we get a 4k disc of this one day since the sound and visuals are absolutely stunning.
I really think they had to show the SA scene twice. Everything from her response to him saying "I love you" to her response was completely different. The first time we see it we know its awful, but the second time we get to see how truly awful it is without the barrier of Adam Driver's character's perspective, without him thinking that all ladies put up a "bit" of a fight.
You should read the history on this (not the novel). It’s very fascinating. He claimed total innocence and that he was never even there, he was also a clergyman with a family and was not known to be promiscuous. Very much unclear what the truth was, historically.
The facts were a lot more interesting than the movie in my opinion. The director was more interested in very petty social commentary and shock (really poor shock at that) than portraying anything interesting . The actual trial was fascinating but the really dumb it down here
@@jimmyramos1989 why should we just assume she's telling the truth...because she's a woman? This is the problem with the world...don't look at the facts..let's just believe someone based on their gender. Totally wrong...a big problem with the movie....the truth according to Marguerite is implied to be the truth...but the same implication isn't given to either of the male perspectives...very wrong...make it equal.
@@danielfrancis1208 Yeah...but in this instance it was rape no matter what way you cut it. No need to bring the "both sides" argument into this. Not applicable in this instance.
Widows tend to have a certain amount self authority in this period of france. Being a widow allows you to manage, especially for children, estates of your deceased husband. Widows tend to be some of the few women that could commit to deals and contracts in the time
So my question is..... Did Le Gris dream that first encounter with Lady Marguerite? SPOILER ALERT: The one after they first meet? Where she shows up at his quarters? He awakens alone.... and it is kinda left up in the air. And the encounter doesnt exist in Lady Marguerite’s version of the story... Which makes me think it never happened and Le Gris dreamed it. I had to rewatch it to understand this, but i can only surmise it was a dream.
Ben affleck wasn’t the king. He was a count with Matt Damon and Adam Driver serving as his vassals. King Charles IV, is played by Alex Lawther who eventually approved of the Duel. This is a key component in the story.
@iconocast I love how alot of people here in the comments section are talking about Kingdom of Heaven: Director's Cut. That film deserves to be noticed & appreciated by more & more film fans. It is truly 1 of the greatest epic films ever made & easily amongst Ridley Scott's greatest films that he's ever made period👍
I watched this and absolutely loved it! My only complaint was Adam Drivers' perspective of the event. After his perspective, I felt like "yeah he's guilty". I feel like his perspective should have had us going "uhh did he? or was it as he claims?".. But I understand that could be bad if not done correctly.
Yea think it was supposed to show Le Gris mindset... he considered his version as not being rape. Which shows his state of mind, as he is used to just taking lower class women against their will, but they just take it and never complain because no one cares. In his mind "she wanted it" and was just playing hard to get.
I think they wanted to highlight how he thinks its ok to treat women violently (and in that era and time it was actually ok) so it reflects how society and on a personal level the mentality of degrading women, so even though we thought he looked bad from his own perspective .. it was ok to him , notice how he said "of course she did protest..etc " with so much disregard to it.
@@arca376 imo from his perspective it looked more playful so he actually died believing he didn't clap her. But either way she clapped in both perspectives and from her perspective she really didn't fight back let's be honest she just let it happen gave in she hated her husband, thought the younger guy was better looking and smart, she cried when he died because she knew she shouldn't have said anything about it, at the end of the movie and even irl clap victims get happier over time because the get a baby which all woman want. It's a shityy situation but he died believing it wasn't clap because she was playful which she was. They all play the game until its to late then cry to ruin men even when she liked it imo this movie is good shows both sides of the coin and imo if she didn't want it let's say she truly didn't.. she should have fought and should have scratched kicked and even try to kill the man but she didn't did she no. Good story telling shows that we need to look into these situations from all sides of the coin because it's never one sided.
Why do we all believe her story and not the other two? Do women not lie? Her story has multiple women lying in it such as her own friend who does not believe her. The book and the real historical events do not make any statements of her for sure innocence or guilt. I think what the count says in the film is very true, people need villains and heroes with no gray in between. We want to believe her because it gives us that. She is a victim, stunning and brave and triumphs in the end. They are villains who suffer and die. There is no reason to believe she is any more reliable than the other two narrators.
Major themes in feudal system : loyalty to higher power and class, taxation, heirs and reproduction , desire for the unattainable , moving up the social class., warfare, ..all modern stuff
I think the repeat scenes was needed to show that the pov of diff people isn’t wildly different but nuanced different so they had to show ‘almost’ the same scenes but little differences that made a big differences. People think they’re heroes in their own story and slightly remember it differently.
I'm in alignment with all of the positives that this channel's reviewers praised *_'The Last Duel'_* for. I just watched 'The Last Duel' tonight and it was _exceedingly_ more immersive & fulfilling _(on every level, and in scope)_ than something like that over-hyped underwhelming 'The Green Knight' bs. My enjoyment of *_'The Last Duel'_* now has me looking forward to, and hoping the best in regard to, A24's *_'The Tragedy of Macbeth'_* .
@@TheHuffmanator I expect that sure- it just seems to be the overall theme of 'law and order- medieval times'; _you have your word, I have my word, we can't agree, let the better fighter kill the other to be called truthful because how else to decide which liar to punish_
@@IAmTheAce5 Its more the overall theme of what Affleck wanted to tell. Nothing to do with reality, but everything to do with trying to conflate history with the present. Carrouges desired the duel becuase Count Pierre would favor Le Gris. It was never up to the court, only because there was no proof either way did they agree with the duel. Not much of the movie was true with respects to Marguerite. Expected a lot more from Scott...
Is it a commentary on how people have not changed over the several centuries since this story? I mean the "deny deny deny" remark about the rape accusation, and the "rape cannot lead to pregnancy" remarks are lifted from today's conservatives and U.S. Republicans.
no the first assault “scene” if you listen close enough she has a sound of enjoyment, she is resisting but still moaning in a way of enjoyment even though it is being forced, where as the second assault scene she is literally screaming and crying . I thought this was a big part of the movie because from the guy’s perspective she was resistant but still enjoyed it eventually where from the girl’s perspective she hated it the whole time. Showing the scene twice was not too much but necessary to show the differences in perspective.
I went into this movie thinking it'd be cheesy and shit. Then I saw Rydley scotts name and I simply had to give it a chance. It was amazing, especially the harshe medieval combat.
At that time the majority of nobles in England and France speak the old version of Occitan. Most Norman and Plantagenet nobles did not want to learn English as they saw it as a commoners language. Henry V of England was the first who actually learn to speak English. English, French, Burgundian, and Navarre nobles have no difficulty understanding each other. Those noble were cousins, they came from the House Capet, and speak the same language.
French not Occitan. Occitan was language of South France - Provance and Gascony, and while very influential in earlier medieval period it lost it chances after region was ravaged by Catholic-Cathar war. Northern France spoken variouis dialect of O'Il language/language group - Normandian, Old French, Picard and so on. Norman nobility in English probably also used Normandian.
*Spoiler* I know a lot of people weren’t happy with having the watch the rape scene twice but there was subtle changes in the scenes that completely changed the tone - from Adam Driver’s character prospective it was made to look ‘consensual’ from his prospective (she takes off her shoes on the stairs, the sounds and callbacks to an earlier sex scene) BUT from Joder Comer’s character prospective it was very clear that it was forced rape and it made you feel very uncomfortable
It looked to me she was more playful then resist in the man's pov in her pov it was sure terror but yet she got clapped and enjoyed getting clapped and athe end of the day it's all she said he said. From the man's pov he died believing he didn't clapped her because to him from his perspective she was playful and secretly wanted it. From her perspective imo she didn't fight back at all.. it's a shifty situation and still was a good movie imo the first part of the movie was a snooze fest, acts 2 & 3 got better. Liked the final duel. Good movie.
Great review guys! Bit disappointed that you didn’t mention Jodie Cormer’s name as one of the main actors though. She’s a fantastic actor, not just Matt Damon’s wife.
The assault scene was different, VERY much so, I’m not sure how that could have been missed considering the fact in one scene she’s crying and screaming and in the other one she isn’t. Although I will say both scenes were cases of assault, even the one from Adam Drivers perspective.
From what i read about the history the guy that Driver played, basically tired out to the point he couldnt fight anymore. Hadnt seen the movie but thats just shows you how difficult that era of fighthing was.
@@CAL112100 i know some 50 year olds that can still wreck face. We had a gunny in my platoon that could still out fight 20 year olds. Different time but being old isnt the sole reason why someone would lose.
Historical accounts say that Le Gris had the upper hand through most of the duel but was knocked over and couldn't get back up. Not necessarily exhaustion, just heavy armor.
What u don't understand is she didn't even fight back like at all.. I'm sorry but a good man died to protect his name. From his point of view she was being playful. From her point of view she just let it happen she got upset that's about it from my perspective watching the movie.
Pretty sloppy review here. Within the first 5 minutes you couldn’t even remember the names of the characters and thought Ben Afflecks character was the king. If you really think each scene is as exactly the same then you’ve missed the subtle differences. All you can come up with about why you gave it a 6 is because of repeated scenes, what score would you give if the film was 10 min shorter? Props to the guy in the middle who decent but wow your reviews stink of low quality.
This movie was brilliant all the little differences between the chapters the only sad thing was that they never really cared for the wife in the end after the duel the praise was only for husband and of no concern for the wife which I believe is what they were going for but it was such a great movie. It was so good to see how in the beginning they make Jean look like a hero but after 2 you might think he doesn’t know any better and Jacques is a better fit for her but after the 3rd they tie in all the differences and it’s so good. I loved this movie and duel at the end was so epic loved this movie 9/10 for me!!
This movie was fantastic. I think this film will go down with Gladiator as some of my top favorite films. Excellent storytelling. I did some research on the real event and was pleasantly surprised at how faithful the movie was to the history. In fact, the extra details from the historical record make this drama even more fascinating.
I hope to see The Last Duel this weekend along with Halloween Kills. As a huge fan of Ridley Scott's films and as someone who loves his earlier historical epics like 1492: Conquest of Paradise, Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven: The Director's Cut and Robin Hood (2010), I really can't wait to see his latest big-screen epic. Ridley Scott's epic films such as the above-mentioned films & The Last Duel are all brilliant throwbacks to the days of Golden Era Hollywood when epic films like those were regularly made. Spartacus, El Cid, The Vikings, Joan of Arc and Ben-Hur amongst my favorite Classic Hollywood epics as well as the films of another master of the epic film genre Akira Kurosawa with The 7 Samurai, Throne of Blood, Ran (Joe is actually a big fan of that film), The Hidden Fortress (George Lucas' inspiration for the very first Star Wars film), Yojimbo & Rashomon being amongst his greatest ever films and speaking of Rashomon, I like that The Last Duel uses the different points of view of the film's 3 main characters to tell the story from different perspectives which is reminiscent of Kurosawa's Rashomon which first introduced to film the idea of telling the same story from multiple opposing POVs with each character's POV giving a different account of the same events depicted in the film. Definitely can't wait to see this one✌
What an interesting coincidence, as I'm in the middle of an Akira Kurosawa marathon due to _Star Wars: Visions_ . The films I've seen thus far were really groundbreaking for their time. Truly deserving of being considered cinematic classics. Looking forward to watching _The Last Duel_ as well, of course!
In Jacques le Gris's account of the event, Marguerite runs away from him _slowly_ and slows down even more so numerous times to look back at him, as if she is conflicted about his pursuit of her: a part of her is driven to evade him because she's married but a part of her wants him to catch her because she finds him attractive and does not enjoy sex with her husband. Hence, from Jacques' perspective, she is merely teasing him but is not truly trying to escape from him. The following differences between Jacques' account and Marguerite account illustrate why Jacques' interpreted the event as consensual. *1A: Jacques' Account:* Marguerite slowly runs toward the stairway and then stops to kick off her slippers when she reaches the base of the stairway. *1B: Marguerite's Account:* Marguerite quickly runs toward the stairway and doesn't stop to kick off her slippers when she reaches them; she kicks off her slippers _as_ she runs up the stairway, thereby not wasting any time getting away from Jacques. *2A: Jacques' Account:* Marguerite moves up the stairway and through the subsequent corridor so slowly that Jacques merely has to walk to stay closely behind her; it's as if she is leading Jacques to the bedroom. *2B: Marguerite's Account:" Marguerite moves up the stairway and through the subsequent corridor so quickly, that Jackques has to sprint to stay closely behind her; she is definitely trying to flee from him. *3A: Jacques' Account:* Margaurite turns around to look back at Jacques' after she enters the bedroom and as she attempts to close the door; she pauses for a second and makes eye contact, which gives Jacques enough time to catch up to her before she shuts the door. Also, when Jacques pushes the door open as she is attempting to close it, she stops attempting to close it and even pulls it back open herself as he pushes it open - thus assisting his entry into the room. *3B Marguerite's Account:* Marguerite's does not stop to look back at Jacques after she enters the room; she simply attempts to close the door as quickly as possible to prevent Jacques from catching her. *4A Jacques' Account:* Marguerite calmly calls out for help only once and without much panic in her voice, as if she's calling out just to be sure that no one else is around or to obstensibly appear to fulfill a woman's duty to call out for help. When Jacques grabs Marguerite, she calmly says "no," as if she doesn't mean it; she also doesn't struggle much to get out of his grasp and she doesn't cry when he enters her. *4B Marguerite's Account:* Marguerite's calls out for help not once but twice - and she sounds very scared and as if she's panicking. She also puts up more resistance when he grabs her and she cries when he enters her.
Nice review! I saw this movie tonight and loved it--didn't even notice the long runtime. I had seen the non-spoiler portion of this review beforehand and was surprised by how unrepetitive the different perspectives felt. Y'all had me thinking Ridley Scott repeated every single scene! At 4:20 OJ wondered why they didn't show only the key differences, but I felt like that's exactly what they did. The only stuff that got repeated (including the pivotal act of violence central) were things that *did* have important differences.
Saw this film myself before seeing this review (I just like to see your opinions guys) and also thought it was great, though confronting (kind of the point I guess). With the repeated scenes however I think you may have missed something. Those scenes that were redone were shown because SOMETHING was different that time around. A little 'spot the difference'
Oh come on, you're better than this. You're not the brightest are you? Think about when it was set? Do you know what 14th century old French sounds like. Also, they're speaking modern English so what's the point off having fake accents.
Just watched it on HBOmax. I thought it was great. I didn’t see it in the theater because I heard damen and Afleck said it was woke in an interview. I heard that and thought, “nope”. After seeing it, I don’t know what they were talking about unless they meant that it showed her point of view as well. The subtle differences in three versions of the story was brilliant. Some scenes looked like it could have just been a replay but sometimes it was just an actors look or smirk or body language was the only thing that was different. I wish I hadn’t heard whatever comment turned me off to seeing it in the theater.
Actually the sexual assault scene wasn’t the same. While they did use the same dialogue in chapter 2s scene and chapter 3s scene, they were directed and shown very differently. In chapter 2, lady Margarette was acting a little more playful and undecided yet in chapter 3 she was clear she wanted no part of it. Chapter 2 shows Jacques to be more calm and charming yet he was more abrasive and intruding in the 3rd one.
Really enjoyed it. It was riveting, powerful, and difficult to watch in certain moments. Beautifully shot and really liked the score, subtle but adds to the impact. Ridley Scott did a great job in choosing where to include music and where to leave it out. I really thought Damon and Jodie Comer were great but honestly as much as I really like Adam Driver, I don't think he fits with this historical time period. Maybe that's just me. Lastly, the way they tell the story is interesting but I think it could have flowed a little better if it was told differently.
I was bored. The movie is 45 mins too long, the dynamic is gone and the atmosphere leading up to the duel was absolutely wrecked. The differences in the perspectives (if it reealy has to be there...) should have been done in much quicker way and the Affleck Driver bromance was another wasted screen time that led to absolutely nothing.
The assault scene IS different. The difference is how she reacts to it. Adam's character does not see her emotions during or after.
preach
i like how they make a point of how Le Gris views his seduction of women by comparing what he did at Pierre's party with what he did with Marguerite.
But we as the audience can see the horrifying reality of his actions and the pain before and after for Marguerite.
Great film
It's an excellent portrayal of how psychopaths view their actions.
Dude let his dick take control of his sanity, which resulted in him raping lady which resulted in his death.
Dude probably also developed his "love" for her only as an excuse for wanting to cum inside her, and making up that she wanted him in order to justify his rape.
A lot of women today, accuse men of rape when they regret having sex with them or when they didn't even have sex with them and just want revenge.
But back than times were different, and women themselves were different too.
@@ishitrealbad3039 this 👆
Back then the rules were against the women so them lying would cost them worse
But now rules r in their favour so u see lots of false rape accusations.
Imo based on the movie she did get raped.
@@kriswayne7938 I agree
I disagree that the scenes didn't have to be done twice. I found 'that' scene to be very impactful shown two times with subtle differences between the male and female perspective. Excellent film, and that final duel was insane.
*_"I disagree that the scenes didn't have to be done twice...very impactful shown two times with subtle differences"_*
I agree with you, but for any number of reasons you're gonna get viewpoints that are more sensitive _(or feign to be)_ , even when Affleck and Damon make it a point to _NOT_ present gratuitous images of nudity nor graphic physical battery. They literally saw to it that both perspectives of the actual "SA" were shown briefly (mere seconds) and in a non-gratuitous manner that only served to allow audiences to superficially connect with what transpired from the perspective of _Jacques Le Gris_ and from the perspective of _Marguerite._ Affleck and Damon even made it a point to have a female writer _( _*_Nicole Holofcener_*_ )_ contribute to how the "SA" would be displayed on screen.
Briefly/fleetingly showing the two non-gratuitous "SA" seconds, also pays off at the end of the film when viewers see the consequence of the dead, nude carcass of Jacques Le Gris, strung up for public display.
📽 🎬 🎞 *HOLOFCENER:*
_"Well, we knew we didn't want nudity, and we knew that the difference between the two scenes had to be really, really subtle because Jacques Le Gris did not think he raped Marguerite. He thought he was in love with her. And he thought she protested, you know, mildly because she's a woman, and that's what, you know, ladies did. And so, you know, we'd written it so that the dialogue is exactly the same in each scene, but her response is slightly different. Her response in Le Gris's eyes was more flirtatious. She seemed almost kind of into it and like she was playing a game. And when they're having sex - or he is raping her - she looks a lot more like she's enjoying it. So - but it's all really, really subtle. And that's, you know, a great performance by Jodie."_
I agree with u
Yeah, first time showed you what the male character thought were signals of consent, like she was playing hard to get to increase the thrill.
2nd showing showed you how those small differences were misinterpreted.
The scenes were fine to be done twice, but the third time was a bit annoying. Not speaking of that scene, but speaking of other scenes when they first met during that festival. Seeing that 3 times over was a bit tedious.
I agree with you, it needs to be shown to truly give impact, especially when she is curled up at the bottom of the bed, it really hits you. If it had cut away I don't think I would have had as much impact.
I loved how in Adam Driver’s perspective, the Lady takes her shoes off purposefully when running away from him. Versus her perspective where they fell off while she was running.
...Which further exemplifies how the reviewer's comment at 6:07 has no connection to the perspective/paradigm realities briefly displayed on screen.
The reviewer says that the _brief non-detailed (zero nudity), non-gratuitous, fleeting_ scene was depicted the exact same way twice. It clearly was not...Even _dialogue, duration, actions, and positioning differ_ in the different perspectives.
@@m.worthy why do you speak so weird? Everyone heard the mistake, aint that deep
@@ResonantRTS
1.) I didn't "speak".
2.) There is no regulation against commenting on inaccuracies _(in a open forum)_ stated by a reviewer. If someone says something inaccurate, ain't nothin' "deep" about clarifying incorrectness in a open comments section.
I responded to a posted comment that exemplified _differences where the reviewer said there were none._ Others had no issue with it...You did...Yay! 👍🏽
A day after I mention an inaccuracy, other posters in the general comments go into detail about incorrect comments from the reviewer(s). Again not *"deep"* , but you may wanna go weirdly police👮🏼 them too.
@@m.worthy Not weird at all, it is just well written and you made perfect sense.
Super fun actually...From Ibiza to Rio...NYC..., etc. Even helped a few DJ friends get televised commercial contracts...
Love a great party/celebration!!! 🎶🎊🎆
The actors all did such a good job of playing different versions of their characters depending on whose point of view was being followed at the time
In the "truth" of the rapist, I was convinced that the lady was actually enjoying it, but in the "truth" of the lady, I was so disgusted by how she was overpowered and Le Gris (the rapist) was still acting like they were both in love with each other.
This is one of the greatest film I saw that came out this year.
@@hiway19891 I just said the same thing this movie was hands down the best I’ve seen all year the setting and acting was phenomenal.
The Cast is ludicruous idkw all these fake praise is for. Ben afleck lmao Jason borne and the jewish guy from the star wars worst saga, for everyone without a stick up his ass this looks like a B movie
@@carlosdelsol76 The Star Wars sequel trilogy is bad is because the writing and the directing is bad (and also Daisy Ridley being an asshole), Adam Driver is actually a decent actor in this film (he’s also one of the leading role of Marriage Story, which is another good movie).
@@hiway19891 u are right. It was pretty trash
I couldn’t disagree more that showing the SA twice was unnecessary or that they were too similar. Marguerite’s perspective was much harder to watch, and the first time we saw it was shocking enough. Adam Driver’s character didn’t remember the way she cried until the very end, and continued as he left the room.
*_"I couldn’t disagree more that showing the SA twice was unnecessary or....."_*
I agree with you, but for any number of reasons you're gonna get viewpoints that are more sensitive _(or feign to be)_ , even when Affleck and Damon make it a point to _NOT_ present gratuitous images of nudity nor graphic physical battery. They literally saw to it that both perspectives of the actual "SA" were shown briefly (mere seconds) and in a non-gratuitous manner that only served to allow audiences to superficially connect with what transpired from the perspective of _Jacques Le Gris_ and from the perspective of _Marguerite._ Affleck and Damon even made it a point to have a female writer _( _*_Nicole Holofcener_*_ )_ contribute to how the "SA" would be displayed on screen.
Briefly/fleetingly showing the two non-gratuitous "SA" seconds, also pays off at the end of the film when viewers see the consequence of the dead, nude carcass of Jacques Le Gris, strung up for public display.
📽 🎬 🎞 *HOLOFCENER:*
_"Well, we knew we didn't want nudity, and we knew that the difference between the two scenes had to be really, really subtle because Jacques Le Gris did not think he raped Marguerite. He thought he was in love with her. And he thought she protested, you know, mildly because she's a woman, and that's what, you know, ladies did. And so, you know, we'd written it so that the dialogue is exactly the same in each scene, but her response is slightly different. Her response in Le Gris's eyes was more flirtatious. She seemed almost kind of into it and like she was playing a game. And when they're having sex - or he is raping her - she looks a lot more like she's enjoying it. So - but it's all really, really subtle. And that's, you know, a great performance by Jodie."_
Question is did she sleep with him the first time
I don't understand people saying there are the same scenes in each chapter. I just watched the film and it was very minimal. There was new things in every chapter and very little repeated.
I totally agree the second "scene" is way more violent and is suppose to represent an awful act , where as the pov of Le Gris in chapter 2 it was mutual feeling.
The repeated scenes 99% of the time have a very important yet small detail thats different in them. An expression being slightly different changes the scenes tone drastically
@@daft676 it wasn't mutual in part 2 whatsover lol. there was def some flirting (which was just marguerite trying to get on his good side) but the actual act was very r*pey, even from his own pov she verbally tells him no multiple times. notice that he doesn't even bother to look at her face, whereas from her pov, we have a clear shot of her face - where she is crying & in distress. he pov really didn't change the story much, he basically twisted everything she said/did into some delusional fantasy, bc even in his own pov he's a r*pist.
@@nalad9387 I said in chapter 2 ,from the pov of Legris its mutual, from his pov. Its obviously not mutual in any regards.
I normally despise when films do this but the whole time watching this movie it never even bothered me
The film was pretty harsh on Jean de Carrouges - there's no reason to think that a man knighted on the battlefield for his prowess at fighting wouldn't have the respect of his fellow soldiers. Also implying he was inept with his finances and Marguerite prospered for 30 years after his death due her brilliance ignores the fact that the King gave him a small fortune and yearly salary after winning the duel (he became the King's personal bodyguard after the duel and was sent on special missions which denoted his valued position). The fact the Count favoured Le Gris meant a normal legal route wasn't a possibility, so as much as Jean may have been satisfying a rivarly or protecting his pride, in a chivalric age he was much risking his life for justice and honour in the duel against Le Gris, who despite having less military experience was apparently a much larger man.
I mean, in history the two had a very serious escalating feud over money and property rights. Like a biiiiiig deal.
@@EAfirstlast You see that in the movie since Jean sues over the land he expected from his wife's dowry and his issues with Jacques getting rich for being the count's friend while he is out fighting and getting nothing.
As far as the respect of the soldiers, I think the battle he loses at the beginning is supposed to explain some of their actions. It's also not clear whether the soldiers who laughed at him were the same ones that served under his father or were with le Gris or Pierre.
Nicole Holofcener who wrote the third part of the film (marguerite perspective) seems to have decided that Jean de carrouges was an insensitive man who lacked empathy for his wife, I have tried to find has many archives of the time as possible about these events and I could not find any that confirm that Jean de carrouges was a jerk to his wife,
Quite the contrary, he believed her and defended her multiple times. He had a warmer conversation with her before the duel and went back to her without needing the king to remind him to go look for his wife.
@@femtoservants You aren't going to find real accounts of what Jean was like with his wife when they were in private. Anything you read will probably be romanticized and from his pov. The only testimony we get from Marguerite occurred while he was there, so she wasn't going to say anything bad about her husband that could negatively affect her trial or her marriage after.
Jean also had motives to defend his wife besides love or believing what she said was true. Even if he knew she was lying, he would probably take the opportunity to get revenge on Jacques. And you have to sell that lie just like Katniss and Peta in Hunger Games.
They should've almost switched actors because people were according to historic accounts in shock, that even the more battle hardend Jean would properly loose because Le gris was a very tall and apparently large man.
Finally watched this. 9/10 and might even be a 10/10. Wasn’t bored once and actually wished it was longer I enjoyed the hell out of it.
I gotta say, people often remark how Alex just criticizes everything, but notice how he was the one person pointing out the narrative power of how Adam Driver's character literally died thinking he'd done no wrong. He's not playing devil's advocate. He's just pointing out the cerebral aspect of how Driver's character went to the grave not understanding why what he did could be considered wrong. Particularly in a movie about contrasting perspectives, that's really interesting... if you're smart enough to pick up on it. Sometimes you just gotta give Alex that he's actually smart and there's a lot of stupid shit in the world. When there's something deep and smart worth pointing it out he isn't so committed to putting down others and their ideas that he dismisses it.
Alex is the critic everyone hates cause he gives out a low score but you respect his critique. Valid points for the high and lows in a movie.
He can give out good points but sometimes his own bias leaks through. Look at their Halloween Kills review. He makes a very dumb comment saying that SPOILER …… the mob of people attacking Michael beat his ass for no reason. He hated the movie so much he’s trying to be funny and begins making comments that make no sense.
@@andrewgrimes5523
I like the movie….but come on. All those people were two small steps from being special needs. There’s some unkillable psycho killing the whole town….better let him know where we are! 🤦🏾♂️😂😂 I mean they have to. It’s the movie. But you’d have 12-15 people doing this. Not 20-30! Have you looked around lately. Not too many real tough guys anymore. And hell I’m 200 6ft and I ain’t chasing down some killer unless he killed my child and I’m trying to just die. Self preservation was too low with too many.
But I was glad for it. Yes my children…run towards the fire. It welcomes you home this Halloween night😱😂😂😂👍🏾
In my view a BIG NO on the part that Adam Drivers character thought it was fine. He literally got a guy to get her to open the door and sneak in her home and rape her and it was his friends/ past friends wife as well. Does not matter what time period it is for that or their would not of even been a duel if people did not care about having their wives/women raped and used by others haha and also she was not a peasant or common person on some war mission, she was considered high status overall. The point was his ego/pride or whatever you want to call it caused him not to care about what she wanted and so forth and all that stuff and the point was he wanted to see what he wanted to see not what actually happened. In the end he wanted to conquer his obsessive mission in his eyes. You also have to understand he only saw the woman a few times from a distance and had one simple cultural friendly kiss and then said he was in love with her for example, which is a obvious red flag situation. He was deranged and in a predatory manic episode or whatever you want to call it and yes it was a time where Might meant Right but unless he was mentally retarded in some form he knew what he was doing obviously. But ya was a good movie. Live for medieval stuff.
He is literally the only reason to listen to these reviews...honestly
This film BLEW ME AWAY. It takes a while to know wtf is happening at the start, but wow does it all click in all together. The end was phenomenal. Ridley Scott is a master
Yeah the beginning was HELLA confusing. I was like this guy disrespects that guy and then marries his daughter in the next scene and it’s over the course of 17 years. But, it was ohenominal
@@almightytwee1188 Bruh it literally showed in the same scene. The "disrespect" was bc he was loyal to the king and the man was a traitor. We then see his reaction to the daughter and it was clear he was interesed in her
@@EcopiuM I’m just saying it was confusing as fuck at the beginning because of how quick it happens.
Same the beginning / chapter 1 made no sense.. then chapters 2 and 3 got better.
Prometheus, Alien Covenant, Hannibal....yeah.....master.
I could see Adam Driver play Dracula if theres a Castlevania movie!
Maybe one day we can get live action. He would be a superb Dracula
He looks like a werewolf, very little make up needed.
@@davidknowles605 yes hes also tall like Dracula too
@@tylerdordon99 all he needs his some red contact lenses and the Dracula outfit
Absolutely fucking not
Yes, this was based on a real event. Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Jacque Le Gris (Adam Driver) were once friends and squires together. However, Le Gris was also a cleric of the Church and thus could both read and write. That gave him a leg up and saw him rise rapidly in favor with Count Pierre d'Alençon (Ben Affleck), and he was knighted and allowed to purchase the valuable property of Aunou-le-Faucon. Carrouges would remain a squire for quite a long time, during which his first wife and only son would die tragically. Eventually he would become a knight, after a lengthy campaign against the English. He would also marry Marguerite de Thibouville, through which he had some claim on Aunou-le-Faucon as her dowry. Le Gris and the Count fought this in court (I'm glossing over a lot here) and succeeded. It was during all of this that the rape allegations are made.
Trivia: Each part was written by a different writer. Matt Damon wrote the part centered on Carrouges. Ben Affleck wrote the Le Gris part (which he was originally supposed to play but scheduling issues killed that), and Nicole Holofcener wrote Marguerite's part.
Also, each part is based on the direct testimony of the people involved. This is one of if not the most well documented and preserved medieval trials we know of. The original documents are still in the archive in Paris.
Spoiler
Most historians believe that Le Gris was guilty, but they admit there is no way to truly prove that. A big issue is that Le Gris' own alibi witness would be caught raping a woman during the build up to the trial, and Le Gris claimed he could not have made such a trip that time of the year in a single day; he was 56 years old. And no Marguerite de Thibouville did not burn at the stake over this.
No offense to Ben Affleck who is of course a very talented actor in his own right but I'm glad that Adam Driver ended up getting cast in place of Ben. I've only seen the trailers & heard Joe, OJ & Alex's opinions of The Last Duel as I'm gonna have to wait until Sunday to see the movie but from what I can tell, Adam seems to have been brilliantly cast as Matt Damon's close friend turned bitter rival.
We know we watched the movie
@@gothelvis3541 Yet the movie got a few things wrong, like Le Gris claiming that he had a consensual sexual encounter with Marguerite. He never made any such claim, not even to his lawyer whose meticulous notes are still in the archive in Paris. A lawyer who still strongly believed his client was guilty, but never explained why in his notes.
That's a little bit incorrect. Le Gris was only knighted at the duel to make the two combatants of equal status. He was a squire up until that point, albeit one with much higher actual status than Carrouges. Carrouges wanted the estate Arnou-le-Faucon as dowry for his marriage despite the fact that Count Pierre d'Alencon, whom Le Gris served under, had legally purchased it from her father and awarded it to Le Gris both for his service and for giving him a loan to move his court.
@@100nitrog I stand corrected on that point.
The final fight in this film was so intense. Loved it.
Seeing Affleck and Damon together again is a treat
Should time stamp the rating for me
@@willg3220 12:45
A shame they told this movie on such a poorly paced way
They wrote this as well.
@@kellz9972 it’s written well, it’s just poorly paced due to the narrative structure (same arc told from 3 different perspectives)
The contradictory narratives of shared events is called "Rashomon Effect" named after Rashomon by Kurosawa.
A lot of the repeated scenes are similar save a few characters withhold lines of dialogue, but the scene of sexual assault there are a few notable differences. I believe the lighting is darker when Jacques enters (need to doublecheck) and the camerawork emphasizes Marguerite's attempts to make distance in her version. In his version she takes the shoes deliberately off whereas in her version they fall off in her frantic attempt to make an escape. The playful chase from Jacques's perspective is a lot longer with Marguerite trying to fake him out whereas in her version it's a lot faster and he catches her abruptly, in his version once he has placed her on her back there's no more physical resistance, her legs aren't kicking out, whereas they do while she's on her back in her version. And obviously she's screaming no and pleading and crying a lot more in her version. Obviously it's sexual assault in both situations but there are very clear differences to the memory and it's obviously more harrowing the second time.
To me the sexual assault in Jacques version was meant to make it look like she was pretending to fight him off like in the sex scene with the girls. He was trying to make her seem like she was actually willing but upholding modesty. I kept thinking is she liking this or not. While he was pushier and more predatory like but she was less resistant. While her version actually he actually seemed gentler at first but with a manipulative fake approach. He definitely seemed like he had a motive and it wasn’t love. He less frantic almost like he was trying to calm her but it was fake and threaten her less but then proceeding to disturbingly rape her. In this version she seemed more frantic less playful, seemed to almost outrun him, called her servant 3 times instead of once and he didn’t mock her, she was resistant and was visibly frightened. But the whole time I just got the vibe he was trying to convince her that what happened didn’t just happened and that he “loved her”. Just a complete mind fuck and shows how sadistic he really was. He did that to get back at Jean and that’s that. It was sick how he tried to play with her mind in her version.
I also noticed that in his version, she seemed to take longer to close the door and looked like she deliberately left it a little bit open for him. But in her version, she's trying so hard to close it and get away and he slams it open.
@@Ash-qu9sx good catch, I didn't specifically catch that as an objective difference, but that lines up with how I remember it.
Another example of Jacques misreading the situation/twisting reality to fit his desired memory of events.
It definitely sounds like another take on yabu no naka
I should've know this was going to be like a Kurosawa film in Medieval Europe
Kingdom of Heaven is a decent movie... The directors cut of Kingdom of Heaven is one of my favorite movies of all time... Shares a rotating slot with Children of Men.
Good taste
Directors cut of kingdom of heaven is possibly Scott’s best movie imo
totally agree
Watching Kingdom of Heaven without the Directors Cut is like watching the Star Wars trilogy and skipping Empire Strikes Back.
It’s probably the greatest director’s cut ever made. It’s a completely different film compared to the theatrical cut. So underrated
I feel like people have definitely missed some of the very subtle hints in the chapters, it very much leans into her side of the story being the truth and you definitely need to rewatch. Jodie Comer is an awesome actress, it annoys me that more people aren’t talking about her acting more in this!
She got clapped
Some people also apparently missed the very not subtle hint when "the truth" stayed on screen longer during her chapter intro. And yes she was great. This whole cast was top notch.
Sadly she'll probably get remembered more for her role in Free Guy as Millie than her role in this.
@@ericcaulfield4477 Maybe in the short term sure, but she's young and has an Emmy already, she's got plenty of career left.
@@the_only_andy True, I was meaning more this year people will have seen her in Free Guy than this low performing Ridley Scott movie despite how good it is.
I think you guys missed the differences between scenes that were repeated in each pov. For example, the scene where Damon and Driver make up and Driver meets Marguerite for the first time. In Damon's perspective, he is the one who says they should not quarrel b/c they are servants of the king. In Drivers perspective, he says it and in Marguerite's perspective, it is Damon's other friend who said it. Each guy tries to present himself as more honorable.
Even the opening battle scene is different as Damon's pov highlights him saving Driver and Driver's shows that he saved Damon first. The only one I think could have been done better is the Driver pov of the rape scene. To a modern audience, it definitely looks like rape (even though I've seen some people weren't sure). The chastity protesting could have been introduced better earlier and/or have her not fight back as much (even though it was less than in her pov).
Solid 9 for me. Fucking loved it. Looking forward to the director’s cut.
😂
where are your brain cells
The two scenes of the allegation weren’t the same. Very subtle differences between the two if u watch closely. One she keeps screaming and he tells her to hush as if he knows he’s in the wrong. The other she screams out once and moves his hand to his ear as if it’s no big deal because he feels like it’s okay and he’s not in any danger. There’s a couple more as well.
Well spotted
@@Krucifus yea top comment already put that tho 😅
From his perspective she was being playful.
I’m not sure why this film hasn’t been more successful than it was.
Score was beautiful, wonderful cast, incredible choreography, good staging wonderful set pieces and a beautiful exploration of the depths of the “truth” how it is a matter of perspective and it’s all capped off with a glorious final battle that still manages to feel you empty on the inside. This was a masterpiece of a movie that leaves you saying “damn” as the credits roll. Whether or not it’s flop is due to the uncomfortable topics it explores or simple missed opportunity, covid idk but imo it’s the best film of the year.
Well we can thank disney for making sure it would not be a sucess (as much as i remember they bought 20th century fox which are behind the film) but here it is : they released the film while it's competing with Halloween kills, Dune, No time to die and Venom let there be carnage...
adds to that ZERO advertising and covid making it more difficult for old people to go see it in theaters and you can see why this movie flopped. It was screwed by the network.
Best film I've watched since The Joker.
For some reason most cinemas weren't showing it in London. And the one's that were only screened it once a day (a week after it's release). Had to book a day ahead because it sold out on two previous attempts: the screen only had a 30 seat capacity.
Very strange.
After seeing it with my family, I can see exactly why many people did not see this movie. Mainly showing the two scenes of rape caused some of them to leave the room and say it was too much. I understand the purpose of perspective, but it crosses many very viewers boundaries multiple times.
I just watched this movie last night. I was absolutely blown away by this film. The different perspectives was so impacted the story.
I hate rape scenes. I get very uncomfortable watching them but this was one of the rare films where not only did they show it once. They showed it 2 times and both times were needed. Since the story revolves around the rape and thier stories seeing the act makes the story have so much weight.
The last fight scene was one of the most climatic scenes I've ever watched. These 2 guys battling to death one for his life and his wife's honor.
The psychological way at the end where he still wouldn't confess would fuck a man up for years with doubt
Ben afflecks character looks so much like one of the characters from final fantasy tactics its so spot on I can't remember his name tho
LOL, I was so obsessed with that game.
It was either Zalbaag or Daycedarg
Cidolfus...one of the best characters in the game!
@@Cheeki_breeki6 he means prince larg, the queens brother
@@ethoslost2887 yep Prince Larg
This is a masterpiece. Simply put. You walk away from this movie with it stuck in your head, like the blade in the final act.
This movie was brutally phenomenal. Everybody played the part perfectly- the stand out performance, in my humble opinion, was the mother.
Every second she’s on screen, you just felt the ice coldness, and her overbearing ways.
Hardly. It takes a lot of liberties from the actual historical accounts. I get things are subject to taste, but this is certainly not a masterpiece. Just more Hollywood schlock.
Historical accuracy isn't a priority in art (obv depends, but generally); no Shakespeare play is historically accurate, still the best writing.
I walked away from this movie thinking "this one sucked... Why did I waste 20€ on this?"
@@bebaguette766 Shakespeare didn't base any of his plays on an actual historically recorded event. This did, and then twisted said event to fit a narrative/agenda.
@@alexubel the Henriad, Henry VIII, Thomas More, arguably Julius Caesar and Antony and Cleopatra. Plenty were based on history and knowingly twisted.
i love medieval movies.. can't wait to see this one
Same! I'm so happy period piece movies are finally coming back
If you haven't already, check out the teasers for this year's *'THE TRAGEDY OF MACBETH'* _(starring Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand)._
2019's *'THE KING'* (from Brad Pitt's Plan B), starring, Timothée Chalamet (now in _'Dune'_ ), Joel Edgerton, Sean Harris, Robert Pattinson...is also good...🗡📽🎬🎞
2022, *'THE NORTHMAN'* .....
Damon looks like Theo Von in this.
Gang gang
Theo who???????
I saw the thumbnail and did a double-take.
@@F16486g Buzz buzz
@@DragonHeart613 Theo these nuts
Seems like a throwback to Ridley Scott's debut The Duelists which was simply a masterpiece imo.
Its amazing how 3 people can miss the fact that the SA was NOT the same in both scenes....in Marguerite truth...she is SCREAMING and yelling and fighting to stop le gris...but in le gris perspective it was a "mild protest"...clear differences..cmon guys
This is why I don't respect Joe he said Ben Affleck was the king which is not true in the slightest
To be fair, I was confused like half the movie to wether or not he was the king.. didn’t seem well explained as I thought he was king until they show the young king at the end of each chapter
@@philliphuey231 at no time was there ever any doubt who Affleck's character was. they repeatedly refer to him as COUNT Pierre and even address him as such.
Best duel ever. I thought it would be the one pass on the horses, like most times, and done. The fact it went on and kept going was incredible. Did not expect that. Really made the ending so intense. I also thought the other guy would win. Spoiler, very small.
I was surprised she was wearing lipstick in that end scene. I know, what? The whole film it seemed very realistic for the women being very plain and then that scene. It just seemed odd because I thought only harlots wore makeup in that time.
That’s is a reason I thought this movie was so incredible. The fact that many people thought that the other dude would win is in my opinion and example of great story telling because they really knew how to get you to think something but have a great twist.
@@rileygibson242 yesss but at the same time I thought Damon would win because he had waaay more combat experience because he was always going off to war
@@hammercorps6386 I know Damon gonna won, because I knew about whole duel before.
TBH actual duel was shorter, Scott made it bit overblown
A happy ending for a woman in historical fiction: “her husband died from fill-in-the-blank and no one ever touched her again.”
I am glad this movie turn out great. Unfortunately I do not think it will make any big money with how low the promo campaign of the movie, even with all of the big casts.
Ya tbh if I wasn’t in AMC Stubs membership I never would’ve watched this. Pleasantly surprised how good it was.
It was feminist crap
@@dogsbreakfast4952 not really
@@dogsbreakfast4952 you clearly don't know what feminist is. It's based on a historical event.
I think an important point to note about the movie is how Matt Damon’s character was being treated , how he has to pay expensive taxes , looses his promised land and his inheritance position of captain of a fort. All while risking his life in battle all the time .Then to hear his wife was raped you can see how he feels betrayed by everyone around him and that explains his demeanour. He did care about his wife although a bit misguided he risked his name and his honor just to prove she was innocent risking his life - like to me he’s a real hero but not perfect he was just misguided and broken. He had loyalty, honour , respect, and was religious
I feel like OJ just gives every movie an average score unless it's rocky
In Le Gris' mind he did not believe he actually took her by force, she was giggling in his mind. Called back to the orgy scene earlier in the movie where the woman was being playful. That's why it was important to show the scene twice. To be honest how'd all 3 you miss this and make a review and mistell the scene.
Watched it yesterday. I liked it. I don't like Super hero movies, getting tired of all that CGI shitfest, and it's refreshing to see movies that actually tries to tell a story.
Yes, movie could be shorter, and some scenes are not necessary, they differs from different perspectives, but not necessary.
Watching THAT scene twice, was painful. I understand why they did it this way.
1st time was from guys perspective, and felt water down, and didn't felt that she didn't tried hard enough to reject him, and may even enjoy it.
2nd time when you watch from her perspective, it's way more brutal, and felt more like a real deal.
Maybe that's whole the point. He didn't saw that as a r*pe and thinks it's all just a game. As he had foreshadowthat scene with a hookers.
I agree I remember watching the first scene and I was kinda confused why the girl did not resist that much and it honestly kinda seemed like she slightly was toying with him but from her perspective it was definitely not consensual. Which in the end of the movie I really enjoyed the story telling of how they did that.
Earlier we see Adam's character chasing another girl playfully around the table before catching her and tossing her onto the bed in the Count's party. It shows that Adam truly thinks that that is ok and the correct way to hook up
Just left the theater and wow was this a great film. 'Gossip' is extremely powerful.
@16:00. If you saw the title cards for each chapter it’s clear that her version is the truth. They hit it very on the nose, by keeping the word TRUTH on the screen after the other words disappear.
The two ‘awkward’ scenes are very different if you pay attention
Yeah, in the first one she wasn’t resisting so much
@@mr.fahrenheit007 she was really playful imo from Adam's Pov...
0:35 Ben affleck was the duke Le Pierre. Did Joe even watch the movie or just judge it based on other reviews and the trailer? 5:15 Kingdom of Heaven extended is absolutely brilliant.... Anyone who disagress doesn't like movies xD 06:15 it happends differently on the account of Le Gris and Lady Marg. on her it it looks extremely borderline crossing haunting.. On his end there's as he claims just a brief act of resistance...
2 Boston guys playing medieval French nobles lol. Saw it last night, was great with probably the best ensemble this year. Jodie Comer killed it.
You guys completely missed how different two portrayals of sexual assault were. It wasn't about making people uncomfortable, it was actually showing different emotions by Margaret character. When it's shown from her perspective it is much more violent and distressing, while when showed from Adam Driver's character it's much less violent.
You can never make someone too uncomfortable with a rape scene. It’s just how it is.
That’s not true. If they’re leaving the theater then it was too much.
What a horrible review especially you talking about this movie should ha ve been trimmed down.
NO! This movie is perfect for how epic and well structured it is. It is raw, realistic and spellbinding.
These type of movies NEED to come back. Smart movies that let the story play out and isn’t catering to the lowest common denominator or worried about ‘boring’ anyone. No forced humor, no bullshit just an amazing story told beautifully with outstanding acting and gorgeous cinematography.
Showing the rape scene again isn't just "to make you uncomfortable".
It's to show that it didn't happen the way Adam Drivers character tells how it did. And it is the really uncomfortable scene. From his perspective it's by far not as uncomfortable and that's the damn point. Both scenes are necessary.
Affleck plays the Kings cousin, count Pierre. did we watch the same movie ?
Top 3 favorite movies from this year imo
You don't have say your opinion if it's one of your favorites
Oh yea? What are your top three favorite movies from this year in MY opinion?
@@anthonylombardo1261 good one
@@anthonylombardo1261 that was clever😂👌
@@brandonchutt312 Dune is one of the best sci fi movies since long
Don’t really see that ending as happy, considering the final shot is her starring into the camera while looking totally dead inside.
You know they are joking around 😂 they know it’s not a happy ending.
It shows her with her kid at the end.
In reality, the couple had two additional children, they turn celebrities and even the husband served as bodyguard of the king.
@@AstaIsAMonster umm pretty sure they are not joking… it is a happy ending. Obviously the story had no happiness in it. But if the other dude (don’t remember the name) would have won the fight it would have been a sad ending because the girl would have died and he would have been able to live on and get away with his crimes and continue to be blessed.
@@rileygibson242 no they are joking didn’t you see the faces of them 3 whe they said “happy ending” 😂
Glad to know Riddley Scott still has it in him. His previous films (Prometheus and Covenant) made me think he should've retired to be honest.
He's made other movies too lol. The Martian for example
His movies always look beautiful though.
His output in the 90s was the worst if he didn't retire back then that means he still got it in him. He should stay clear from the Alien franchise though, just let it go.
Scott is still fantastic. The BEST parts of Prometheus and Covenant are the AI parts so I’d much rather see him just transition and work with Villenueve on Blade Runner sequels to his hearts content cause that’s CLEARLY where his interests are.
@@tooglianprimus15 Absolutely. Both films had the potential to be the next Blade Runner in terms of quality but they had the misfortune of being part of the Alien universe. Should've made them their own thing
I love the fact that they think that SA scene is the same, just shows the subtle the differences were that they couldn't pick it up. I mean the way she backs up, her shoe falling off versus being taken off, her voice inflection throughout the scene, the more obvious crying. Each person thought and interested what happened to the point where I actually think Adam Driver's character didn't think it was rape as from his point of view and from that time period's social norms, it was flirting and so many scenes make it seem like she was in love with him. The shared book interest scene with her than smiling at him while dancing with her husband. Once you know the whole truth, we know he was in the wrong, and without her side, I would bet a jury would not be 100% sold, that's how subtle the movie was when showing two scenes again. Great movie and sad to see it bomb.
I hate when people judge an entire period of people based on todays morality standards...
It’s not like it wasn’t wrong then either, though. Don’t make excuses for poor behavior in the past just because ‘it was a different time’, that’s a lazy justification for barbarism.
@@CaliberStone stop projecting your own morality onto a different time period weirdo
What's there to judge? As Joe and Alex pointed out. The people of that time period were saying things and believed the same things that today's conservatives and Republicans say and believe and think. Nothing has changed.
@@Foxfire_forty-nine literally not true in the slightest. Go virtue signal on some other thread. That way you’ll at least have some other people to circle jerk with
@@cheeto6057 people can express their opinion however they want you know. You don't like freedom of speech it seems....
ridley scott may not understand the alien franchise anymore
but holy shit he still gets it w medieval shit man
fucking good movie
To the husband she was naive and little. The Jacques she was a seductress and almost sinfully smart and witty to the point she seemed fast (I say this because I assume it was considered inappropriate or rebellious to be that smart as a woman in those times feeding more into her appearing untamed and independent. Which in a way kind of made her seem naughty, right?). From the wife perspective she was smart, assertive and honest. I thought the movie was uncomfortable and corny at first but I realized it was the bloating of the powerful mans perspective. These men were egotistical and ridiculous and now I get why it was so cringey. That was the point. It wasn’t bad acting. It was on purpose. Powerful men have been known to have cringe uncomfortable perspectives, behavior and thoughts. But I noticed when we got to the wife’s perspective the movie got more serious, realistic, less ridiculous(more ridiculous with the men) and got more to the point of what the movie was all about. The humor turned to disgust and shock. Strangeness turned psychopathy especially for the king. He gave me serious little shit from game of thrones vibes towards the end. But everyone’s behaviors started to make more sense in contrast to the wife who was obviously living in reality and not of ego. Also, if you notice the women in general lived in reality and matched our feelings better than the men at times. They seemed to be disturbed and or aware of what was happening while the men where completely morons and lived in another world and didn’t have a clue of the kind of damaging they were doing.
Yeah the king does go batshit in real life.
You didn't talk about how each Chapter was written by a different person: Matt Damon did the screenplay for his, Ben Affleck did Adam Driver's, & Nicole Holofcener did the female perspective. And how Ben Affleck was supposed to play Adam Driver's character. But due to scheduling conflicts involving his next film, he had to step down..
I think it's wrong to review such a movie when u can't even pronounce the characters names and/or don't even know their names...
I'm so glad I got to see this movie in an empty theater by myself since no one has really heard of this movie and it's currently set to be the biggest box office bomb of all time considering the subject matter , but I adored this one. Ridley Scott in his seventies still has it and I had a hell of an experience watching it unfold. Hopefully we get a 4k disc of this one day since the sound and visuals are absolutely stunning.
Ridley Scott is 84! Not in 70s lol
@@ArthurKnight1899 that’s even crazier! Love it!
You guys should actually learn the laws of your state in regards to women
Why do that when you can just believe the activists from the main stream media.
I really think they had to show the SA scene twice. Everything from her response to him saying "I love you" to her response was completely different. The first time we see it we know its awful, but the second time we get to see how truly awful it is without the barrier of Adam Driver's character's perspective, without him thinking that all ladies put up a "bit" of a fight.
You should read the history on this (not the novel). It’s very fascinating. He claimed total innocence and that he was never even there, he was also a clergyman with a family and was not known to be promiscuous. Very much unclear what the truth was, historically.
The facts were a lot more interesting than the movie in my opinion. The director was more interested in very petty social commentary and shock (really poor shock at that) than portraying anything interesting . The actual trial was fascinating but the really dumb it down here
@@NNNIII972 oh god...lemma guess your one of those people who doubts shes telling the truth at the end....
@@NNNIII972 totally disagree 100%
@@jimmyramos1989 why should we just assume she's telling the truth...because she's a woman?
This is the problem with the world...don't look at the facts..let's just believe someone based on their gender.
Totally wrong...a big problem with the movie....the truth according to Marguerite is implied to be the truth...but the same implication isn't given to either of the male perspectives...very wrong...make it equal.
@@danielfrancis1208 Yeah...but in this instance it was rape no matter what way you cut it. No need to bring the "both sides" argument into this. Not applicable in this instance.
all the nobles in england would also be speaking french in this period
Widows tend to have a certain amount self authority in this period of france. Being a widow allows you to manage, especially for children, estates of your deceased husband. Widows tend to be some of the few women that could commit to deals and contracts in the time
So my question is..... Did Le Gris dream that first encounter with Lady Marguerite?
SPOILER ALERT:
The one after they first meet? Where she shows up at his quarters? He awakens alone.... and it is kinda left up in the air. And the encounter doesnt exist in Lady Marguerite’s version of the story... Which makes me think it never happened and Le Gris dreamed it. I had to rewatch it to understand this, but i can only surmise it was a dream.
Of course he dreamt it that never happened
"I really don't like Matt Damon, he's kinda boring" - Joe for Ben Afflack 2021
Ben affleck wasn’t the king. He was a count with Matt Damon and Adam Driver serving as his vassals. King Charles IV, is played by Alex Lawther who eventually approved of the Duel. This is a key component in the story.
the director knows how to work a camera thats for sure. was on my watch list just for that.
kingdom of heaven directors cut is a great movie for sure.
Yep, thats ridley scott for ya.
One of the finest directors of our time.
@@lk5388 Ridley Scott is a filmmaking legend period. Right up there with the likes of Spielberg, Hitchcock, Scorsese, Kurosawa and Howard.
@iconocast
I love how alot of people here in the comments section are talking about Kingdom of Heaven: Director's Cut. That film deserves to be noticed & appreciated by more & more film fans. It is truly 1 of the greatest epic films ever made & easily amongst Ridley Scott's greatest films that he's ever made period👍
@@DragonHeart613 love how the AJ boys are fans too.
@@iconocast I know right. I love that Joe & the guys recognize the movie's undeniable greatness👍
I think Le Gris was innocent. Some people may think he was guilty.
I watched this and absolutely loved it! My only complaint was Adam Drivers' perspective of the event. After his perspective, I felt like "yeah he's guilty". I feel like his perspective should have had us going "uhh did he? or was it as he claims?".. But I understand that could be bad if not done correctly.
Yea think it was supposed to show Le Gris mindset... he considered his version as not being rape. Which shows his state of mind, as he is used to just taking lower class women against their will, but they just take it and never complain because no one cares. In his mind "she wanted it" and was just playing hard to get.
I think they wanted to highlight how he thinks its ok to treat women violently (and in that era and time it was actually ok) so it reflects how society and on a personal level the mentality of degrading women, so even though we thought he looked bad from his own perspective .. it was ok to him , notice how he said "of course she did protest..etc " with so much disregard to it.
@@arca376 imo from his perspective it looked more playful so he actually died believing he didn't clap her. But either way she clapped in both perspectives and from her perspective she really didn't fight back let's be honest she just let it happen gave in she hated her husband, thought the younger guy was better looking and smart, she cried when he died because she knew she shouldn't have said anything about it, at the end of the movie and even irl clap victims get happier over time because the get a baby which all woman want. It's a shityy situation but he died believing it wasn't clap because she was playful which she was. They all play the game until its to late then cry to ruin men even when she liked it imo this movie is good shows both sides of the coin and imo if she didn't want it let's say she truly didn't.. she should have fought and should have scratched kicked and even try to kill the man but she didn't did she no. Good story telling shows that we need to look into these situations from all sides of the coin because it's never one sided.
Why do we all believe her story and not the other two? Do women not lie? Her story has multiple women lying in it such as her own friend who does not believe her. The book and the real historical events do not make any statements of her for sure innocence or guilt. I think what the count says in the film is very true, people need villains and heroes with no gray in between. We want to believe her because it gives us that. She is a victim, stunning and brave and triumphs in the end. They are villains who suffer and die. There is no reason to believe she is any more reliable than the other two narrators.
Major themes in feudal system : loyalty to higher power and class, taxation, heirs and reproduction , desire for the unattainable , moving up the social class., warfare, ..all modern stuff
I think the repeat scenes was needed to show that the pov of diff people isn’t wildly different but nuanced different so they had to show ‘almost’ the same scenes but little differences that made a big differences. People think they’re heroes in their own story and slightly remember it differently.
I'm in alignment with all of the positives that this channel's reviewers praised *_'The Last Duel'_* for.
I just watched 'The Last Duel' tonight and it was _exceedingly_ more immersive & fulfilling _(on every level, and in scope)_ than something like that over-hyped underwhelming 'The Green Knight' bs.
My enjoyment of *_'The Last Duel'_* now has me looking forward to, and hoping the best in regard to, A24's *_'The Tragedy of Macbeth'_* .
HOLY CRUD!
There's a Macbeth coming out?!
Starring *DENZEL WASHINGTON* .
Peep👁 the new trailer(s)...📽🎬🎞
@@m.worthy And here I am, liking both movies :c
Why do you talk like that lol
You guys are wrong it does happen differently From his perspective it wasn’t as ruthless and assaulting but from her perspective it was different.
Either way she clapped
Or, the tale of how feudal society had next to no way of determining truth, investigating crimes, and defending against liars highly placed.
But they did...you realize none of this happened like in the movie, right?
@@TheHuffmanator I expect that sure- it just seems to be the overall theme of 'law and order- medieval times'; _you have your word, I have my word, we can't agree, let the better fighter kill the other to be called truthful because how else to decide which liar to punish_
@@IAmTheAce5 Its more the overall theme of what Affleck wanted to tell.
Nothing to do with reality, but everything to do with trying to conflate history with the present.
Carrouges desired the duel becuase Count Pierre would favor Le Gris. It was never up to the court, only because there was no proof either way did they agree with the duel.
Not much of the movie was true with respects to Marguerite.
Expected a lot more from Scott...
Is it a commentary on how people have not changed over the several centuries since this story? I mean the "deny deny deny" remark about the rape accusation, and the "rape cannot lead to pregnancy" remarks are lifted from today's conservatives and U.S. Republicans.
@@Foxfire_forty-nine if not, it should
no the first assault “scene” if you listen close enough she has a sound of enjoyment, she is resisting but still moaning in a way of enjoyment even though it is being forced, where as the second assault scene she is literally screaming and crying . I thought this was a big part of the movie because from the guy’s perspective she was resistant but still enjoyed it eventually where from the girl’s perspective she hated it the whole time. Showing the scene twice was not too much but necessary to show the differences in perspective.
Ben Affleck did not interpret the King, but one of the most powerful lord of Normandy at that time.
More of a Dark Knight 🥁 😂
@@coryjack606 He's a Dark Lord now
I went into this movie thinking it'd be cheesy and shit. Then I saw Rydley scotts name and I simply had to give it a chance. It was amazing, especially the harshe medieval combat.
Risky movie I think. Good on Hollywood for actually trying.
script written by Ben Affleck and Matt Damon themselves
@@HazyChestNutz cool
Not too risky. Actually no risk at all.
At that time the majority of nobles in England and France speak the old version of Occitan. Most Norman and Plantagenet nobles did not want to learn English as they saw it as a commoners language. Henry V of England was the first who actually learn to speak English. English, French, Burgundian, and Navarre nobles have no difficulty understanding each other. Those noble were cousins, they came from the House Capet, and speak the same language.
French not Occitan. Occitan was language of South France - Provance and Gascony, and while very influential in earlier medieval period it lost it chances after region was ravaged by Catholic-Cathar war.
Northern France spoken variouis dialect of O'Il language/language group - Normandian, Old French, Picard and so on. Norman nobility in English probably also used Normandian.
I mean Joe literally soiled the ending of the film then follwed it up by "I don't wanna spoil the ending".
I don't think you can spoil history 🤣
It’s been 600 years bro, no more spoiler alerts
*Spoiler*
I know a lot of people weren’t happy with having the watch the rape scene twice but there was subtle changes in the scenes that completely changed the tone - from Adam Driver’s character prospective it was made to look ‘consensual’ from his prospective (she takes off her shoes on the stairs, the sounds and callbacks to an earlier sex scene) BUT from Joder Comer’s character prospective it was very clear that it was forced rape and it made you feel very uncomfortable
It looked to me she was more playful then resist in the man's pov in her pov it was sure terror but yet she got clapped and enjoyed getting clapped and athe end of the day it's all she said he said. From the man's pov he died believing he didn't clapped her because to him from his perspective she was playful and secretly wanted it. From her perspective imo she didn't fight back at all.. it's a shifty situation and still was a good movie imo the first part of the movie was a snooze fest, acts 2 & 3 got better. Liked the final duel. Good movie.
Great review guys! Bit disappointed that you didn’t mention Jodie Cormer’s name as one of the main actors though. She’s a fantastic actor, not just Matt Damon’s wife.
The assault scene was different, VERY much so, I’m not sure how that could have been missed considering the fact in one scene she’s crying and screaming and in the other one she isn’t. Although I will say both scenes were cases of assault, even the one from Adam Drivers perspective.
From what i read about the history the guy that Driver played, basically tired out to the point he couldnt fight anymore. Hadnt seen the movie but thats just shows you how difficult that era of fighthing was.
The dude was in his fifties.
@@CAL112100 i know some 50 year olds that can still wreck face. We had a gunny in my platoon that could still out fight 20 year olds. Different time but being old isnt the sole reason why someone would lose.
@@destrocrimson Fair enough.
Historical accounts say that Le Gris had the upper hand through most of the duel but was knocked over and couldn't get back up. Not necessarily exhaustion, just heavy armor.
@@100nitrog what i read was that his was so tired he couldnt get up. but
i could see that as real armor weighs alot and after a prolonged fight.
What u don't understand is she didn't even fight back like at all.. I'm sorry but a good man died to protect his name. From his point of view she was being playful. From her point of view she just let it happen she got upset that's about it from my perspective watching the movie.
knight got me tooed
I hate how people are proclaiming this awesome film as "woke". How can it be that if its based on actual events and is actually very accurate.
Stop complaining 😆
Except from what I've read it's not accurate to history at all?
Those people are stupid and usually grifters
Pretty sloppy review here. Within the first 5 minutes you couldn’t even remember the names of the characters and thought Ben Afflecks character was the king. If you really think each scene is as exactly the same then you’ve missed the subtle differences. All you can come up with about why you gave it a 6 is because of repeated scenes, what score would you give if the film was 10 min shorter? Props to the guy in the middle who decent but wow your reviews stink of low quality.
"he slept with muh waif"
everyone: bruh just look at him?
* the end *
This movie was brilliant all the little differences between the chapters the only sad thing was that they never really cared for the wife in the end after the duel the praise was only for husband and of no concern for the wife which I believe is what they were going for but it was such a great movie. It was so good to see how in the beginning they make Jean look like a hero but after 2 you might think he doesn’t know any better and Jacques is a better fit for her but after the 3rd they tie in all the differences and it’s so good. I loved this movie and duel at the end was so epic loved this movie 9/10 for me!!
This movie was fantastic. I think this film will go down with Gladiator as some of my top favorite films. Excellent storytelling. I did some research on the real event and was pleasantly surprised at how faithful the movie was to the history. In fact, the extra details from the historical record make this drama even more fascinating.
Wait, the movie was that good? I thought it was gonna suck based on the trailer.
Hell no. Gladiator is in its own league.
This movie is not in the same stratosphere as gladiator in my opinion. I liked it a lot but Gladiator is my greatest movie of all time
I hope to see The Last Duel this weekend along with Halloween Kills. As a huge fan of Ridley Scott's films and as someone who loves his earlier historical epics like 1492: Conquest of Paradise, Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven: The Director's Cut and Robin Hood (2010), I really can't wait to see his latest big-screen epic.
Ridley Scott's epic films such as the above-mentioned films & The Last Duel are all brilliant throwbacks to the days of Golden Era Hollywood when epic films like those were regularly made. Spartacus, El Cid, The Vikings, Joan of Arc and Ben-Hur amongst my favorite Classic Hollywood epics as well as the films of another master of the epic film genre Akira Kurosawa with The 7 Samurai, Throne of Blood, Ran (Joe is actually a big fan of that film), The Hidden Fortress (George Lucas' inspiration for the very first Star Wars film), Yojimbo & Rashomon being amongst his greatest ever films and speaking of Rashomon, I like that The Last Duel uses the different points of view of the film's 3 main characters to tell the story from different perspectives which is reminiscent of Kurosawa's Rashomon which first introduced to film the idea of telling the same story from multiple opposing POVs with each character's POV giving a different account of the same events depicted in the film.
Definitely can't wait to see this one✌
What an interesting coincidence, as I'm in the middle of an Akira Kurosawa marathon due to _Star Wars: Visions_ . The films I've seen thus far were really groundbreaking for their time. Truly deserving of being considered cinematic classics.
Looking forward to watching _The Last Duel_ as well, of course!
Seeing this tonight.
Looks like it’ll be good!
was it?
@@Chonked_Chang It was really good. 8.5/10 for me.
In Jacques le Gris's account of the event, Marguerite runs away from him _slowly_ and slows down even more so numerous times to look back at him, as if she is conflicted about his pursuit of her: a part of her is driven to evade him because she's married but a part of her wants him to catch her because she finds him attractive and does not enjoy sex with her husband. Hence, from Jacques' perspective, she is merely teasing him but is not truly trying to escape from him.
The following differences between Jacques' account and Marguerite account illustrate why Jacques' interpreted the event as consensual.
*1A: Jacques' Account:* Marguerite slowly runs toward the stairway and then stops to kick off her slippers when she reaches the base of the stairway.
*1B: Marguerite's Account:* Marguerite quickly runs toward the stairway and doesn't stop to kick off her slippers when she reaches them; she kicks off her slippers _as_ she runs up the stairway, thereby not wasting any time getting away from Jacques.
*2A: Jacques' Account:* Marguerite moves up the stairway and through the subsequent corridor so slowly that Jacques merely has to walk to stay closely behind her; it's as if she is leading Jacques to the bedroom.
*2B: Marguerite's Account:" Marguerite moves up the stairway and through the subsequent corridor so quickly, that Jackques has to sprint to stay closely behind her; she is definitely trying to flee from him.
*3A: Jacques' Account:* Margaurite turns around to look back at Jacques' after she enters the bedroom and as she attempts to close the door; she pauses for a second and makes eye contact, which gives Jacques enough time to catch up to her before she shuts the door. Also, when Jacques pushes the door open as she is attempting to close it, she stops attempting to close it and even pulls it back open herself as he pushes it open - thus assisting his entry into the room.
*3B Marguerite's Account:* Marguerite's does not stop to look back at Jacques after she enters the room; she simply attempts to close the door as quickly as possible to prevent Jacques from catching her.
*4A Jacques' Account:* Marguerite calmly calls out for help only once and without much panic in her voice, as if she's calling out just to be sure that no one else is around or to obstensibly appear to fulfill a woman's duty to call out for help. When Jacques grabs Marguerite, she calmly says "no," as if she doesn't mean it; she also doesn't struggle much to get out of his grasp and she doesn't cry when he enters her.
*4B Marguerite's Account:* Marguerite's calls out for help not once but twice - and she sounds very scared and as if she's panicking. She also puts up more resistance when he grabs her and she cries when he enters her.
Nice review! I saw this movie tonight and loved it--didn't even notice the long runtime. I had seen the non-spoiler portion of this review beforehand and was surprised by how unrepetitive the different perspectives felt. Y'all had me thinking Ridley Scott repeated every single scene!
At 4:20 OJ wondered why they didn't show only the key differences, but I felt like that's exactly what they did. The only stuff that got repeated (including the pivotal act of violence central) were things that *did* have important differences.
Saw this film myself before seeing this review (I just like to see your opinions guys) and also thought it was great, though confronting (kind of the point I guess).
With the repeated scenes however I think you may have missed something. Those scenes that were redone were shown because SOMETHING was different that time around. A little 'spot the difference'
Oh come on, you're better than this. You're not the brightest are you?
Think about when it was set? Do you know what 14th century old French sounds like. Also, they're speaking modern English so what's the point off having fake accents.
Just watched it on HBOmax. I thought it was great. I didn’t see it in the theater because I heard damen and Afleck said it was woke in an interview. I heard that and thought, “nope”.
After seeing it, I don’t know what they were talking about unless they meant that it showed her point of view as well. The subtle differences in three versions of the story was brilliant. Some scenes looked like it could have just been a replay but sometimes it was just an actors look or smirk or body language was the only thing that was different. I wish I hadn’t heard whatever comment turned me off to seeing it in the theater.
Can’t believe Theo Von got on the big screens finally! XD
Actually the sexual assault scene wasn’t the same. While they did use the same dialogue in chapter 2s scene and chapter 3s scene, they were directed and shown very differently. In chapter 2, lady Margarette was acting a little more playful and undecided yet in chapter 3 she was clear she wanted no part of it. Chapter 2 shows Jacques to be more calm and charming yet he was more abrasive and intruding in the 3rd one.
Really enjoyed it. It was riveting, powerful, and difficult to watch in certain moments. Beautifully shot and really liked the score, subtle but adds to the impact. Ridley Scott did a great job in choosing where to include music and where to leave it out. I really thought Damon and Jodie Comer were great but honestly as much as I really like Adam Driver, I don't think he fits with this historical time period. Maybe that's just me. Lastly, the way they tell the story is interesting but I think it could have flowed a little better if it was told differently.
I was bored. The movie is 45 mins too long, the dynamic is gone and the atmosphere leading up to the duel was absolutely wrecked. The differences in the perspectives (if it reealy has to be there...) should have been done in much quicker way and the Affleck Driver bromance was another wasted screen time that led to absolutely nothing.