I read a book about WWI where a soldier described the horrific screams a man makes when stabbed in the guts with a bayonet. He said the fear of getting skewered was second only to his fear of poison gas.
@@karifuuh I can't remember. I've probably read 50 books about WWI during my 58 years on planet earth. I'm a history junkie but the soldier's description shivered me timbers!
Not really bravery, mustache guy is just much more confident because of his abilities; you see how he is getting more and more of a mental upperhand during the duel, he even shows off. In reality, the loser probably would have fucking noped out after getting injured, instead of fighting to the death. Looks as if he was trying to die in the clip.
It is attempting to portray fear of death and how injury can kick primal instinct into acting. The man in the green trousers appeared to be an officer, so would likely have had formal fencing lessons, might have been in a few fights already or was brave and collected, and was as well taller. It is fairly convincing of a plausible scenario during those days, and this is a fairly recent time period. In all the scene is masterfully done.
You know what the most realistic thing in this entire fight is? The fear, evident in each man's face. You are literally fighting for your life, no matter how good you might be, a small misstep will be the end of you.
I don't really think Keitels character is supposed to be afraid here. His character is a bully that goads others into duels they cannot win and he's done it a lot. IIRC correctly this scene is supposed to be one such duel. He knew he outclassed his opponent from the very start it's why he's doing it in the first place. So to me either he isn't supposed to be afraid or if he is he's at this point kind of addicted to it or at the very least extremely used to it.
A lot of keyboard warriors and even martial artists know just how much the psychological aspects mattered. Knowing your life is on the line makes every decision in a fight absolutely harrowing. The indecisiveness and jumpiness of the bald guy really depicts this brilliantly.
But nah action movies want to make violence cool. Badass. Explosions, totally unfair fights where the protagonist wins through the powers of coreography
The way you can tell from his body movement that he's trying to lure the bald dude in for a closer attack is fascinating. You can almost see the gears turning as he tries to make his opponent swing wildly, building up his frustration and rash decisions until there was an opening. Someone planned this out exceptionally well and the actors really put in everything to make the scene believable.
It was clear after the first attack by the bald guy that he was outmatched. The other fellow then seemed to gage and test his opponent for a few times. Then he really went after him.
That all makes sense except for where was bald man's sword when he was stabbed? Watch the scene. Bald man grabs the sword in his chest with his sword hand, but where was his sword? Did he drop it? Why would he drop it? Cinema and "realism" always miss this. Bald man was stabbed, but he has a sword and can STAB back. Where is his sword? Why didn't he stab back, even though he was pierced?
The decision to make the soundtrack horrifyingly tense once the losing man draws blood and in desperation to end the fight right there right now is perfect. This is what I wish in a fictional duel. Shows the horror of needless violence, not glorify it.
Most people watching this won't view it the same way. They glorify the fight and mentally dismiss the idea that a man was in the process of dying in that universe. Death isn't pretty, it isn't glorious, and even when actors try to display it as horrific, they cannot really capture it because they've likely never seen it and certainly haven't experienced it. The rawness of it isn't easy to convey and probably wouldn't make for good film. The shaking, terror, and the movements to try and alleviate pain are painful to watch even in animals if you understand what you're seeing.
Agree but the winning man drew blood not the losing man. “Draws blood” or in other words “to cause blood to flow from a person’s body.” It was tense once the winning man drew blood from the other man.
@@ZedF86 it depends tho. Death is not just one thing. In this clip, the terror of death comes from how desperate the losing man is to end the fight. His death comes from a stab which shock kills him just in seconds. Another death can be a traffic accident, most of the death almost immediately after impact. Not all death can be portrayed as shaking and in pain. Especially in a duel where adrenaline kicks in. Even mutilation could be overlooked if your body is in a fight or flight scenario. This is why the soundtrack is important to dictate how you feel. This isn't like Avengers where people are dying with pop music.
This is arguably more intense than a long drawn out Hollywood scene. You feel as if the tide could turn at any moment, you feel like both men are so incredibly vulnerable.
Well, they are, they are just human beings, even the guy with long hair (who seems to be the superior fighter) doesnt do anything rash and keeps calm until he sees an openning, even if he is the superior fighter, he knows that one wrong move could mean his death.
Well, I was actually a TA in Fencing for years - foil and sabre. I'm sure there are others in here who have done HEMA and modern fencing as well so.... :) And yeah, sometimes we'd have "duels" outside of the gym on battlements and the like in a realistic setting, just to have fun. So I wouldn't be above commenting on fights in films.
+purpleanex You have no idea what you are talking about. The sports and styles like HEMA, belegarth, kendo, foil fencing are very much alive. Judo is centuries old; does that mean no one is qualified to talk about Judo?
McDucky You don't literally need to die or kill people in order to figure out scientifically what works and what doesn't through good hard sparring with protective gear.
There is so much filmmakers can learn from this scene. The natural, lunging movements and pauses make it so much more terrifying than the choreographed nonsense you get in modern movies today.
The assumption is that audiences don't have the attention span to appreciate pauses in the action, even if it serves to demonstrate the characters' apprehension effectively
It gives it more gravitas because instead of the fight taking so long because they both are so good at blocking it takes so long because they both don’t want to get stabbed
Another reason why it’s so realistic is the one guy’s reaction once he gets hit. He panics and carelessly attempts to go in with a barrage of strikes forgetting all about what to do and he pays the price for it.
Not that realistic. After getting the killing blow the winner is just like "whatever" and calmly walks away. In real life the loser would have attempted to chase and stab him in the back, instead, the loser's sword is magically teleported away.
@@BoxStudioExecutive With a sword sticking straight through him? The winner seems to walk away mad at the guy whom he just had to kill because the loser didn't back off. I wouldn't describe it as a "whatever" gesture.
@@martijnheil8825 Yes. A person who is full of adrenaline probably wouldn't even notice they were stabbed until they bleed out. Unless someone was stabbed in the heart brain or spine, they're acting with a purpose for at least a couple seconds, more than enough time to catch up to someone who is walking around, pretending the guy they just stabbed in the chest doesn't exist, and deliver a lethal wound. There's hundreds of stories about soldiers sustaining lethal injuries, yet fighting on heroically like nothing happened to them. It's the same exact physiological mechanism which allows them to do that which indicates the winner in this clip acts in a reckless, idiotic, and unrealistic manner.
@@BoxStudioExecutive I doubt someone with a sword through them could bend over and pick up a sword and make any reasonable attempt at stabbing someone.
Well it can go in more than one way, adrenaline can take over your senses and numb your decision making giving you an even harder time with a fight, but everything is over fantasized to extend a movies length and get the viewers attention, samurai fights didn't last as long as they do on movies.
It feels way more intense than, say, every Revenge of the Sith Lightsaber duel. It passes well the idea of how in a sword duel every move can be deadly, so both parts are cautious, instead of just swinging the blades like crazy or spinning and jumping around for no reason.
People don't like to get hurt or die, and people don't like to hurt or kill other people, especially in close quarters with things like swords. I think most of the "difficulty" in choreographing realistic action really just comes from intentionally ignoring both of those things. Obviously that's fine, it's an artistic choice (what it says about us that we have to imagine people don't mind killing or getting hurt to be heroic notwithstanding), but more realism would be nice.
Just so everyone knows, the reason he throws his hands up in frustration at the end is because it wasn't very common for someone to die on the spot in sword duels is the revolutionary war time. Usually someone would yield after a single wound or slash, like the one the guy took across his hand
@@goatymcgoatface3575 well not usually. Duels during that time were rare, and vast majority of them were fought to the death as a way of settling scores to honor of a house, clan or persons.
Pretty well shot overall but there is room for improvement. For example employing shaky cam. They can give the impression of frenetic movement and action by simply throwing the camera down a well. Much better than actually showing the fight.
It's a fantastic scene, and Keitel was great, but let's give some deserved props to his opponent. It takes a really good stage combatant to make your character look like he's out of his depth. Not only did he have to convincingly pull off bad weapon handling and tactics, just look at his legs....all shaky and unsure. Very good acting there. Remember that the actor's job is to tell a story....the duels are a means to that end.
One of the nice ways the director helps him convey it is by showing him constantly running back and forth, which is a natural and instinctual threat response even though it doesn't help very much in a fight like this.
I also like how Keitel starts the fight with as much caution as his opponent, and as he confirms his obvious superior skill is visibly far more relaxed and simply waits the inevitable mistakes to be made by his opponent
This scene occurs at the very beginning of the film and to anyone familiar with Napoleonic history (especially in 1800 which is the date given in this scene) the Keitel character is obviously a soldier, whereas the opponent is obviously a civilian (and he's not moving like an experienced duellist.) Those buttoned trousers and the pigtails mark Keitel as a cavalryman (and more specifically as a Hussar; the pigtails were a direct affectation by French Hussars they copied from the Hungarian Hussars of the period.) As a Hussar, Keitel's character would have primarily been more familiar with the saber, not with a smallsword. Most probably the duel was initiated by Keitel taking offense to something petty which the civilian had done (watch the movie; the entire sequence of duels with Carradine starts because Keitel's character is a hotheaded bully who takes offense at practically anything and immediately challenges.) As the challenged party, the civilian would have choice of weapons and would almost certainly have picked smallsword. The smallsword was the preferred sidearm of a civilian and probably the only weapon with which he had trained. Gentlemen of the era were expected to take at least some instruction in fencing; it was as expected as much as knowing which fork to use at table. He almost certainly would NOT have chosen saber. And would probably not have chosen pistols. Although the odds of being hit in a pistol duel were smaller as dueling pistols were notoriously inaccurate (they were not rifled, were prone to misfires and didn't even have a sighting device, not even a bead) if you WERE hit by a pistol shot, you were more likely to be killed or maimed. Smallsword wounds were generally not disfiguring and barring infection, rarely deadly unless a major organ was struck. Technically (unless the duel was specifically set up beforehand as a "to the death" scenario) the opponent could have, with honor, dropped his sword immediately after suffering the wound to his hand. He would have faced his opponent, born the risk of death and could have walked. The fact that he (rather stupidly) continued after suffering the wound permitted Keitel to continue to defend. If Keitel had insisted on carrying on after wounding him, the dishonor would have fallen on HIM, not the civilian. "First blood" was the normal termination of a duel and it was the challenged or wounded party who usually made that call. Duels were affairs to prove one's honor and courage (or lack of cowardice), not to kill one's opponent. It was assuming the risk that proved honor, not chopping one's opponent into shreds. As for any quibbles over distance between the two opponents, Keitel simply takes a stance and pretty much maintains it thru the fight; it is the opponent who changes the distance with advances (clumsily), retreats and circles. It may appear that they are far apart but that distance can close rapidly if one opponent advances and the other moves to meet that advance and attack. The two men begin the fight by 'watching;' they're evaluating the foe and his apparent skill. When Keitel does advance, he does it specifically to initiate an attack (and to terrify the other guy!) The final blow is struck when the opponent is advancing; Keitel does precisely what he should do...he retreats correctly, waits for an opening, parries an attack and ripostes. End of duel. One must understand that in that era it was perfectly possible to "win" the duel and still die. One fighter might suffer a horrific injury and surrender, thus losing, but if the "winner" suffered the smallest injury, given the medical standards of the time, he could be dead of infection and in the ground before the "loser" even took off whatever bandages he might have needed.
+dee coe - Keitel totally had my attention in this movie (I've watched it numerous times). I couldn't stand being in the same room with someone like his character. Anything would set him off. Joe Pesci could pick up some pointers on how to act touchy.
I find the distance realistic. One of the main changes stage fighting forces is to place combatants unrealistically close to each other. This is a nice change.
The reason why is that it’s simply easier to make a fantastical fight scene with gratuitous violence to try and wow the audience. It’s shallow and lazy. Realistic fight scenes are harder to get right because it isn’t as simple as just making two people fight. You have to capture the emotion, and a good one will utilize tension. That’s a staple of Old Westerns, the duels. It’s just two guys staring at each other and then shooting, and if forced to make a duel at all, a lazy screenwriter would have them do a long, drawn-out gunfight with infinite bullets that get completely stopped by a 2x4. Good screenwriters can take a 10sec scene of guys standing still in the middle of the street and make it into 60sec of the two playing mind games with each other. Real life isn’t boring, it’s just hard to capture
You can tell almost instantly who the better swordsman is by the acting and where the camera's focus lays. We're standing behind the protagonist for quite a few shots in the scene because he's the most stable. The other guy has more opportunity to show his visual distress... while the protagonist every time we get a close up on his face, he's calm. He's stable and in control and it only resolves because of that. It's a really elegant scene in its composition but the acting is there as well and so its fidelity to reality.
@@darronlockett9211 Protagonist is not positive. He is most definitely a protagonist. He's one of the central POV characters and while his relationship with Keith Carradine (the ostensibly better person) is antagonistic, they are dual protagonists.
They showed this at my local independent cinema (started by Ridley Scott's great uncle in the 30's). One of my friends giggled through the whole thing, one was bored, one kept asking what was going on...I need new friends.
It's weird to see a swordfight in a film where it actually looks like they're trying to cut and stab each other, rather than aiming for the air above the other's head or aiming for eachother's sword
@@patricknewton9872 Yes and also smashing swords together chips your weapon, reducing it's effectiveness, and could even break it entirely. They can parry then counter attack or throw a feinting attack as a distraction to cover footwork then launch the real attack, or they can move out of the way of an attack and then counter attack, but rarely would they be banging away at the enemy's weapon unless they have a much smaller weapon and you are trying to disarm them in a situation where your weapon will almost certainly fair better than theirs, like someone with a heavy polearm vs someone with a short sword, and you were trying to disarm the person with the smaller weapon by making them lose their grip. Or perhaps they might try to hit their hand and not the blade.
@@hzuiel the duels in this era were fought with smallswords, which didn't really have an edge. Hence the slapping as a way of parrying. Its just how you fence with foils/Épées/Smallswords
This has been a long favorite movie of mine. I once witnessed two kendo practitioners spar hard for about an hour. Both had decades of experience each, one was 10 years senior and the more experienced practitioner. Every exchange was explosive, with 100% commitment and over within 1-3 moves. The senior practitioner was calmer and acted as if he could read the opponent’s intentions before they had formed. He used the smallest of movements to effortlessly block, then violently smack and stab the opponent. He’d often win by counterattack or attacking THEN countering the opponent’s reaction. Lots of cuts to the hands or arms. Lots of keeping the point of the blade in the opponent’s face. Many exchanges were won similar to this clip by letting the aggressor make a mistake and get stabbed as he lunged forward to attack. However the exchanges I witnessed were often ended with loud punishing stabs to the armor covering the throat. Absolutely brutal. Every movement was so precise and controlled it was evident the moves had been practiced masterfully hundreds of thousands of time. The economy of movement on the winner’s part was beautiful and terrifying. It gave me a whole new perspective on how deadly and quick a sword fight would be and ruined my enjoyment of many movie sword fights.
bring back duelling and make it great again. Politicians should be duelling ALL THE TIME. if they want to have power, then let them put their life on the line for it.
Just because you know how something is in reality doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy the highly fantasized version as well. Like, I totally get how lots of real life martial arts fights would look, but I still love the hell out of king fu films, including the fakiest of the lot, like the ones with tiptoeing over the tops of tree foliage and jumping/flying 30 feet into the air, lol. One of them is fun fantasy and intense, the other is realistic dire and intense.
Personally I love movie fight scenes, I watch a TON of MMA, train boxing and MMA, and have seen plenty of real fights in the street (RUclips videos I mean), and personally I wouldn’t want most movie fights to look like that. It’s ok to have some drama and choreography in a movie scene (and they can still be really brutal too, like Eastern Promises for a more grounded and desperate example, or The Raid for a more over the top example).
Just watching the scene I feel like it’s realistic. Hell yeah I’d be scared shitless if someone were waving a sword at me. Even if I had a sword. You bet I’d be standing as far away as possible
I don't know I think its pretty good but theres some nonsense that they do when they are attacking like parrying to much the blade especially on the sec9nd half and the way the bald man gets his hand injure is something not even a noob would do, you wouldn't try to grab a blade that thin with your bare hands it just looks odd but thats probably nitpicking so overlay good would give it an 8/10 defently more realistic that usual stuff but not 100% realistic great for a movie though
@@Juguitosdemora Both of those I *think* are character styles more so than mistakes with the fight scene. The calmer guy obviously is slightly insane, and is playing with the fearful bald guy like a cat plays with a mouse before killing it. The cut to the hand was a move by the calm man, not an attempt to grab the blade (That move was parry opponent's sword to the side, slide his own blade behind the man, hook the hand with the blade, and draw it sharply out.) and the slightly extra parrying bits were just the man toying around, doing a couple fakes to watch how his opponent reacts (something I do often in martial arts sparring... a low-effort kick here, punch there, are you gonna try to back up or block, just testing the waters)
In the centuries duels were popular in Europe there also was another habbit - to drink wine instead of water very often. If you wanna see how alcohol enlarges courage just go to the nearest sleazy nightclub and look at aggressive jerks (the same jerks that are humbler than the dust at daytime in their offices).
It's not flashy or cool looking at all, but still manages to engage the viewer and the suspense is palpable. Maybe the lack of fanciness in everything we see here tells the audience "This is serious, a battle for life and death"
My thoughts exactly. Can't believe they don't make more swordfight movies for realism fans. I mean I must watch this movies. This was the most intense fight scene I've seen in ages. The realism captures so much more emotion than wild spinning. You can clearly see that the other guy is terrified, he is not an experienced fighter. The pigtail guy knows what's up but doesn't want to get skewerd to a fool move, and you can see him growing more confident with each exchange. Absolutely brilliant.
It doesn't satisfy the need for over-the-top action mixed with a short attention span, sadly. But i wholeheartedly agree, I too miss this pace of "action".
If you haven't seen this movie yet, then just DO it. You'll find a real gem, a masterpiece, a classic. Just put aside the story (which is GREAT) and feast your eyes in the decoration, lightining, landscapes, interiors....you'll be absolutely amazed by the level of attention to the tiniest detail, the craftamnship of costumes and props......just brilliant. The very last shot, the very last image of the movie will leave you speechless, it's the most common example teachers point to their classes in cinema schools as "the perfect shot".....
It's so well done and the acting is so real that I could barely watch, like watching a real life stabbing, horrific yet we've been so used to it in movies, this is something else
I've heard this is the most realistic fight scene in a movie, but I don't think it was bad cinema at all. The way it went from tense to shocking was absolutely brutal. Despite other fight scenes actually being more violent, this one feels more violent because you actually feel the pain of him cutting his hand and getting ran through.
@@crunkers_ That's funny, I've only ever heard the opposite. Have you ever heard someone actually saying this? Just asking out of curiosity, as I'm fairly certain that the overwhelming majority of people likes realistic fight scenes in movies.
@@iegoriasynetskyi1003 I posted this a while ago but yeah I do think thats a common sentiment. My only point was from my perspective, if a fight tries overly hard to be realistic it can sometimes become worse. Especially if they are trying to add realism with no tact or understanding. My example would be the kinds of high action spy thrillers that involve really shakey cameras and people just swinging at each other with no finess in an effort to appear realistic. So yeah, I wasn't really saying other people were saying it. I was saying it defied my expectations.
I read someone once said in a knife fight there are no winners or losers, only survivors and dead men. This reminded me of that, hand to hand combat is a brutal and visceral experience and rarely does anyone walk away completely unscathed. I can’t imagine the stones it took.
I love this scene because it’s a perfect demonstration about how keeping your nerve is just as valuable as being good at fighting during a duel to the death
That's one thing I think is missing in most fight scenes - the anxiety over the risk of injury or death you are facing, even if it seems like you are the better fighter; there are no guarantees in battle. I don't mind some less-than-realistic maneuvers that aren't too over-the-top for the sake of entertainment, but they should never compromise the emotional element.
@@howlinhobbit The swords they are using are like Spadroons., meant for thrusting more than cutting. These, in the movie are very similar to the US Civil War period M1840 NCO sword.
Cmon, this is youtube, EVERY title must be ironic in some sort man! I came here expecting to watch a really shitty sword fight and ended up with a very nice, realistic one...
@Darkzz Lord Then I guess you would be expecting a more agressive fight, which wouldn't make much sense in this movie. The main aspect of this scene is that both fighters are afraid to die, and fight like that.
Masterful.. in the music placement, cinematography, choreography, and acting. I had no idea Harvey Keitel did a role like this, I'm going to watch it immediately!
It really does look like it fuckin *sucks* and since its a fresh slice it might not hurt as bad as it could *right away* but it will immediately get worse and worse and you see the realisation, the moment of cognition and anger churning afterwords, and the pain induced rage once he REALLY feels it about 5 seconds in, all portrayed masterfully by the actor.
Don't they know that every passage of swords should end with a kick or punch. The swords are there for the sound effects. Ting Ting Ting. Then a kick or punch to end the bout. Nobody gets stabbed in a Hollywood sword fight.
I would disagree. The point of this movie isn't to show the grand scale of the Napoleonic wars, but to hyper focus on a trivial matter between two characters that simply won't die over time. I actually think it's better that you don't much see the rest of the world around them; in a way, they have been so engrossed in their conflict that the rest of the world just moves on and they really aren't much a part of it. Their preoccupation (and outright fear) of each other demands the characters' full focus, and so it makes sense that the audience would focus on the same thing. How can you feel the sense that the main character is trapped in an inescapable situation that directs his destiny day and night if we pull away from that as an audience?
Interesting. I consider Carradine's performance to be a strength of the film. His sense of propriety and honor are ever-present, but so is his increasing agitation and resentment towards society's absurd hooks that have dug into him and kept him embroiled in a farcical but deadly situation. His honor and his resentment I think are both positive qualities, and yet they clash. For one quality to remain constant in the face of another which grows over the course of the film must have been hard to balance and I think he did a good job with them. His character is certainly more nuanced than most I see these days. I agree that sometimes the drama is lacking, and maybe even where it shouldn't be lacking, but I think again that may be an attempt to showcase society's expectations of "gentlemanly behavior" during that era. A little stuffy sometimes but not without merit. I'm no expert in French culture/history of this period or films or even of this particular film, but I thought it found its mark. To that end, I probably need to watch it again because looking back I find a larger weakness to be the nature of the men's relationships with women. It's not just that the female characters are marginalized; it's that many connections which could enrich the film seem not to be drawn at all. For example, we see that Carradine's first woman is upset, but we don't feel it because we don't know enough about her identity and her connection to him; then she is whisked away halfway through the film and it seems to have little effect on anybody. Rather than simplifying these relationships for the viewer to infer and get on with the story, I think that leaving these relationships unclear muddles the story and does weigh it down, leading to the drop in motivation to which you refer. Anyway, I appreciated your comment and it made me think. I'd be happy to hear more about the character developments that you would have liked to see or how the acting diluted what was in the script. Cheers.
I love this! No seesawing back and forth. No spinning around. No backflipping (sorry, Princess Bride). Just tenaciously searching for an opening for your blade. Brutal, gritty and realistic. Kudos to Ridley Scott!
Thrusting sword spammers gotta be parried! (and if possible by bare hand or weapon like in the second) but it´s not an estoc, it´s a rapier. An estoc is meant to penetrate armor, and has a crossguard and was commonly used in the late middle ages. The rapier is not a millitary sword, and is not capable of any penetration (be it metal or a gambeson), and instead of a crossguard they have a kinda disc-shaped hand protection...
I don't think this film could've been done better, the actors basically felt like they were in 19th Century France and they really, really got into it! A true masterpiece!
+wotnotbutter No, it's not a best guess. We have thousands of written accounts of smallsword duels like in this movie, with play-by-play detail. We have at least several accounts, often more, along with treatises describing the methodology of most other kinds of duel with most other medieval weapons, particularly swords and pole-arms. Saying our knowledge of these is at best a guess is ridiculous when we literally have sword-fighting manuals from the previous millennium.
I read this novel many years ago, when I watched this movie first time, it was almost exactly the same as pictures in my head I imagined when I was reading this story. Characters, places, atmosphere- everything was like they filmed this movie in my head. I like it very much.
Some of these comments nitpicking technicalities are so annoying. Yes rules and techniques count in a fencing tournament. But when you are literally fighting for your life as was portrayed in the film, some of the rules in the rule book fly out the window!
Still, a good technique can save your life much better than a shoddy one. Real fencers knew that. What we see in the movie is wrong on very basic levels - you don't "swing" or "cut" with a small sword, it has no cutting edge!
The difference in making a simulated swordfight looking realistic or not ist just in one point: What are the actors aiming at? Do their strikes aim at the opponents body or limbs? Or are they just trying to hit each others weapon? The first option is the only realistic one. But it's the second one, that you can see in most movies. Even these days.
leximatic beginners mistake in every fighting form I believe. Some naturally have the inclination to hit vitals or at least hit the body lol. When I started boxing, I could do drills all day long and look pretty good but as soon as you start sparring, shit I couldn't land a single hit because I was reacting defensively and trying not to hurt my partner. Even though I knew I couldn't hurt him lol. Didn't stop me from firing shots at his elbows and next to his face like a jackass ha!
If you've ever done any full contact sparring in any sport (in my experience, boxing) then you know the feeling of not wanting to reach out with an attack for fear of eating a brutal counter.
I love the constrast between Ferauds and the bald mans fighting styles. Feraud is cool, calculating and economic, aiming to counterattack and constantly striking towards the body. The bald man is unskilled and scared, flailing wildly with his rapier and barely being able to get near his opponent.
A lot of people wonder why we don't choreograph fight scenes like this nowadays, despite the accuracy and realism on display, and the answer is quite simple: schlocky, flashy swordfights are more exciting, and this? This fight isn't exciting- it's *terrifying.*
That is indeed quite realistic, people tend to stand still and guard, nobody dares to make a move unless they know it's a good one and the more time you spend the better moves you can think of
Excellent film. The one thing a successful duellist needs to remember is that no matter how good he is, the other guy only needs to get lucky for everything to go wrong. Amongst expert swordsmen the favourite phrase is always "Good on the day". The bald man was at his most dangerous when he forgot to be afraid and just went for it.
I can relate to their movements as a fencer, like how they dont bash their swords 24/7 against each other, but try to constantly trap their enemy somehow. Of course they are far far more skillfull and have actual reason to be afraid lol
I love the little taunt with with sword waggle, and the wild wave giving away he's about to strike. You can tell who's going to win, as well as have a tinge of hope for the balding man as he lunges forwards. Very well done conveying what they were thinking without a single word.
After the arm slash the guy loses his temper and that is the moment he lost this fight. Tactics fell out the window, and he just rushes foward with a clumsy strike that was never going to hit, leaving himself totally open for the counter and that's what happened. Rage = death [versus a decent opponent].
In addition to the intense, desperate fights throughout - the momentary still shots that open many of the scenes are beautiful replicas of works of art. Ridley was really on a roll with his first three movies (this, Alien, and Blade Runner)
Uhhh... no. It's more realistic because they aren't doing ridiculous spinning attacks and jumping around showboating like they do in most choreographed fights.
Is this a joke or serious...?! (Because if you're joking, it's a bit strong...) By the way... You don't seriously think that there would be a single actor who would continue to work if he had to deal with the fact that if a film director felt like it, he would even _deliberately_ kill the actor he signed during the filming... \_(ツ)_/ _FX ..._ (Film tricks) Have you heard of it ...?
2:11 I really enjoy the detail of the walk away, the emoting is nice, you have that shake which really hammers in the feeling of disgust and relief, "there! It's done!" kinda vibe. That being said turning your back on a mortally wounded person seems unrealistic, I've seen enough stabbing and actual blade fighting on camera to know no one simply slouches down, that's more common in animals shot by arrows. *edit the second paragraph is dumb, I don't know why I wrote that this is a duel, pretty obvious that the honor among the duel itself is why he walked away, moreover I appreciate the walk away differently now knowing it was both the feeling of relief at winning and also, as ircubic and eustace said, frustration at the duel ending as it did.
I interpreted it as frustration over being forced to mortally wound the opponent. Usually duels were not to the death, but to first blood (of course, not having seen the movie I can't tell if it was the case), but the opponent charging when he had actually lost forced the decision. Just like "Shit! It did not have to be like this, but have it your way, damnit."
@@ircubic His opponents clumsiness and lack of grace ruined his kill. He was irritated he just fell onto his sword : ) I love the wry humour of this film and it's something Scott is always good at. The absurd pettiness with which he seeks his opponents. He's an almost a farcical, but truly deadly, character and you feel wary for whichever target he lands in his sights.
Especially with the man still standing... people react differently to mortal wounds, I've definitely heard stories (probably slightly exaggerated... but they came from somewhere, no?) of men being stabbed in the chest and still fighting and killing others until their body literally gives out. In this scene, dude definitely looked like he had enough strength left to grab his sword and stab back
For those who may not know, the loser chooses to stop fighting in this scene. It's is what is called in modern times a "psychological stop". He is not incapable of continuing to fight, and if he was a more fearsome opponent it would be unwise to leave the sword in him. The pain and mental shock of having been impaled causes the defeated to give up. The wound may or may not be fatal. With contemporary good prompt medical treatment, such a wound is very unlikely to be fatal. In the time depicted, it's more of a toss-up. Without medical care it's extremely dangerous, but given the circumstances of this duel (formal, with seconds, among gentlemen) good prompt medical care of the era would be near and the defeated has a pretty good chance of survival despite the relative inefficacy of surgery at that time. He was a fool not to surrender the fight when his hand was cut. Typically duels were fought to first blood, not death, but the defeated here cannot bear to lose and presses the fight until he is gravely wounded. He ignored his cut hand, and continued to fight. He chose not to ignore having been stabbed through the torso. But make no mistake, he was physically capable of continuing to fight and, while not appropriate for a duel, had he been more motivated he could have done so. In combat training it is emphasized not to give up and die because of injury. The wound may or may not be fatal, and even if it is you may be able to stop or kill the enemy. On a battlefield it is extremely important that soldiers continue to fight when injured. Otherwise more of their comrades will become casualties. Many fatal injuries are not immediately incapacitating. In this time period, much of the mortality was the wound not healing well and becoming infected. This wouldn't happen immediately. If you weren't bleeding out you might stay strong enough to fight for days or weeks. If you are bleeding out you have from a few seconds to a few hours before you lose your strength. Severing a major artery or vein causes the most rapid incapacitation, measured in seconds (still enough time for the victim to kill others) but otherwise the victim has at least some minutes and it won't stop the victim from continuing the fight to it's conclusion despite bleeding. In a real desperate struggle to survive with motivated combatants, there will usually be multiple wounds as they will fight until one of them is no longer physically capable of fighting. Many fatal wounds will often be sustained. This is what the study of wound ballistics is all about. It's not difficult to reliably cause a fatal injury, but very difficult to reliably cause immediate incapacitation. It's the difference between causing a wound that's not treatable, and immediately shutting down the body.
That’s all true, but the scene is absolutely appropriate. It’s not hard to guess why they’re dueling...the young dashing hussar has been humping the frumpy older gentleman’s wife. The older man is terrified of dying, and yet can’t stand to live with the shame and heartache. When the inevitable occurs and the skilled younger swordsman thrusts him through, the old man gives up. He dreads death, yet accepts it. It’s an utterly brilliant scene.
@@johanmikkael6903 Rude, but correct. The OP has it right, but he repeated himself several times and could have cut out about 2/3 of that response and made his point.
The thing is. Footwork can still be impressive regardless of whether they do fancy things. The right music and cinematography, a realistic duel can impress modern audiences.
Finally a film where adrenaline doesn't boost man's skill (like in most movies), but actually leads him to his demise. Which is especially realistic in this situation.
Another Ridley Scott masterpiece. Every scene is like a painting. Based on a true story of two adversaries in the service of Napoleon. The bald guy who is clearly terrified is not one of them.
By far one of the best movies ever made. Every duel just got better and better throughout the movie. The attention to period detail, also amazing. From the evolution of uniforms & hairs styles of officers and the social dichotomy of these 2 Napoleonic officers. The class struggle that is exemplified by antagonist and protagonist. Best part, it is based on actual events, filmed on location where the story took place. I have had to replace worn out VHS tapes and non returned loaned out DVD's over the years since I bought my first copy in the late 80s. Much like Easy Rider, Back in 1977, this was an Independent full feature backed by a studio and Ridley Scott's first full length feature. I would rate as one of the best Historical Docudramas ever made.
This was an extremely realistic duel between swordsman. The pastoral setting, the mooing of cows, The quietness of the fight. The serious look of each swordsman thinking. this was the most realistic Duel of swords I have ever seen in a movie
I’d be curious to see this same thing with different weapon types, like how would a fight with a couple two handed weapons go, or sword and shield (But i doubt hollywood would do such a thing realistically any time soon). Cool scene!
Have you watched the entire movie? They dual with all sorts of periodic weaponry. Altough two handed swords and sword and shield is too medieval for this. For that i would recommend the movie The King
I've seen a few comments of some people guessing and some wanting to know the cause of the duel; so here it is; The Mayor's son(the Balding guy who get's ran through) wiped his muddy boots on Feraud(Harvey Keitel, The Officer with the pigtails)'s Uniform, naturally Feraud took that as an insult and in which; Challeneged the Mayor's son to a duel.
This is a damn good fighting scene I wish there was more stuff like this. A medieval fight would be cool as well. A realistic ship fight in the golden pirate age too and maybe a samurai fight as well.
The film (beautifully filmed and gorgeous on BR) has a couple of more scenes like that... including an especially gory one involving sabers. The film's epee dueling seems closer to competition dueling where opponents carefully size each other up and then explode for each attack.
properly displaying how dangerous a sword fight is makes it way more tense and really gets you on the edge of your seat, if the main character slashes through enemies with slow and sloppy strikes you dont realy feel anything but a stresfull and skillful fight really makes the character look cooler and cinematic.
This has to be one of the greatest movies I've ever seen! I wish i knew why Harvey's character was dueling that man in the beginning of the film though, from what I gathered he was easily offended and egotistical. Very well made film!
When he was called out for duelling later in the film, Feraud says something to the effect of ”would you let some kraut wipe his boots on the Emperor?” which tells us the reason for this duel was that his opponent had insulted Napoleon.
I remember when I used to play fight with toy swords with my friends. The thing I always remember happening is that we’d always smash each other’s hands that always was a thing.
So true. But in all honesty, it makes me wonder how many nicks, punctures and lacerations these gentlemen would obtain just in their training over a couple of decades.
As a fencer i can verify that this is actually pretty realistic. The form and movement is there and the stillness while the opponents wait for the other to make a move. This can be seen in tournaments after an initial attack has failed and the attacker is trying to keep the defender at bay (assuming there's no riposte by the defender) by extending his sword out as seen in the movie. While defining who is attacking is moot in a real fight, the same tactics are easily applied.
@@datipadisdick2462 are you talking about when they're just standing there and pointing their swords at each other? Usually this is to create some distance--if both men extend their swords neither one can lunge and reach the other. Or it can be used to encourage the user's opponent to hit the sword and close the distance--if the user is ready, they can avoid the blade and hit them instead. In tournaments it's there to create priority as the attacker.
@@ecartht5858 ah i see. I'm not familiar with that technique--most fencers today are taught to keep their left hands away from their chests as they create a larger target space. I would guess it has to do with the technique taught during that time.
My favorite part of the comment sections of videos like this one is not the sudden appearance of hundreds of experts in swordfighting (because a video like this is sure to attract a lot of people actually interested in the topic, just like a video about, say, fighting games is sure to attract a lot of avid fighting game players), but all the people feeling themselves in the comments Apparently enjoying a more grounded approach to swordsmanship makes you superior to the rest of the human population
One of the most interesting films I have ever seen. It does not feel like Hollywood, it has energy, the narration style has beauty, it is not demanding.
I love this scene. They communicate so much just off of body language.You can really see what’s going through Ferauds head from start to finish. Great acting and even better fencing.
1:38 I feel like the little AH he does to try get the opponent to possibly jump or flinch would genuinely work because I flitched so hard when he did it probably because I was so invested in the scene
Lol yea. In boxing, when someone's carefully walking you down, Guys will back straight up, carefully waiting for the opponent to commit & make his move.. then, real quick, guy backing up will give a grunt and just a fast tiny shoulder fake and a foot stomp which fools the guy coming in and makes him commit and throw a punch... And if you know when a guy is going to throw, and a good idea what he's throwing... You can pretty easily slip and counter. Just like Josh Taylor did in his last fight. (possibly 2nd to last, idk)
It was a braided hair style called cadenettes, adopted by Napoleon's Hussar Cavalry. Some grew their hair long and others used braided extensions. If a Hussar was killed his cadenettes were sent to his relatives.
I actually grew out my hair and wore cadenettes a couple of times, it is surprisingly "functional" - your hair stays firmly out of your eyes, and of course looks "dashing" by the time's standards :D Another reported function was putting sticks of wood or thin metal sticks though the center of the cadenettes (braids), and as they hung across the side of your face or neck and a blow from a sabre fell upon it that could potentially save your life. I also found it interesting how similar the fashion was to the braids and moustaches of the ancient celts of the same regions.
Remains to date, the most accurate description of a dueling sword-fight in a movie. I fence small-sword and everything they do seems pretty realistic from a technical perspective. Harvey Keitel's character is more experienced, and knows this, so he is playing with his prey, trying to draw him out by beating on his blade etc. He even opens himself up for attack to entice his opponent. The other man goes in for a sword grab and is thus wounded by the sword's sharp edge, this enrages him and makes him charge. This is the most foolish thing you can do in small-sword, as you're completely open for a thrust. And this happens. The scene is beautiful.
there is no sword design. they did this fight with blunt swords and were trying to hit each other. at the end theres a cut because theyre switching to plastic swords for the stab. thats why you cant see the sword whilst the stab actually happens.
Ha, so unrealistic, these guys are acting like they're swinging around giant razor blades.
... wait... that's what swords actually are..
I read a book about WWI where a soldier described the horrific screams a man makes when stabbed in the guts with a bayonet. He said the fear of getting skewered was second only to his fear of poison gas.
Well... you're not "that" wrong!
@@maxbrazil3712 what book?
@@karifuuh I can't remember. I've probably read 50 books about WWI during my 58 years on planet earth. I'm a history junkie but the soldier's description shivered me timbers!
@@maxbrazil3712 aw man, thank you anyways :)
The fear of death and injury is what makes it so real.
it seems like the mustache guy is a bit braver than the other guy
he is just much better at what he does
Not really bravery, mustache guy is just much more confident because of his abilities; you see how he is getting more and more of a mental upperhand during the duel, he even shows off.
In reality, the loser probably would have fucking noped out after getting injured, instead of fighting to the death. Looks as if he was trying to die in the clip.
Xell I believe it is written and shot to seem like that, and the 'villain' certainly acts such a performance
It is attempting to portray fear of death and how injury can kick primal instinct into acting. The man in the green trousers appeared to be an officer, so would likely have had formal fencing lessons, might have been in a few fights already or was brave and collected, and was as well taller.
It is fairly convincing of a plausible scenario during those days, and this is a fairly recent time period. In all the scene is masterfully done.
You know what the most realistic thing in this entire fight is? The fear, evident in each man's face. You are literally fighting for your life, no matter how good you might be, a small misstep will be the end of you.
Fear in combat is the subtext of this film and it draws you right in.
I don't really think Keitels character is supposed to be afraid here. His character is a bully that goads others into duels they cannot win and he's done it a lot. IIRC correctly this scene is supposed to be one such duel. He knew he outclassed his opponent from the very start it's why he's doing it in the first place. So to me either he isn't supposed to be afraid or if he is he's at this point kind of addicted to it or at the very least extremely used to it.
Keitel didn't afraid here.
He was pro fencer and baited some noob for some open attack, so he could easily rekt noob with thrust.
A lot of keyboard warriors and even martial artists know just how much the psychological aspects mattered. Knowing your life is on the line makes every decision in a fight absolutely harrowing. The indecisiveness and jumpiness of the bald guy really depicts this brilliantly.
But nah action movies want to make violence cool. Badass. Explosions, totally unfair fights where the protagonist wins through the powers of coreography
The way you can tell from his body movement that he's trying to lure the bald dude in for a closer attack is fascinating. You can almost see the gears turning as he tries to make his opponent swing wildly, building up his frustration and rash decisions until there was an opening. Someone planned this out exceptionally well and the actors really put in everything to make the scene believable.
Lol. It’s called feinting for offense
@@int0the3p1t32 lol your's is called "stating the obvious..."🙄
It was clear after the first attack by the bald guy that he was outmatched. The other fellow then seemed to gage and test his opponent for a few times. Then he really went after him.
he knows he's better from the start, that's all really
That all makes sense except for where was bald man's sword when he was stabbed? Watch the scene. Bald man grabs the sword in his chest with his sword hand, but where was his sword? Did he drop it? Why would he drop it? Cinema and "realism" always miss this. Bald man was stabbed, but he has a sword and can STAB back. Where is his sword? Why didn't he stab back, even though he was pierced?
The decision to make the soundtrack horrifyingly tense once the losing man draws blood and in desperation to end the fight right there right now is perfect. This is what I wish in a fictional duel. Shows the horror of needless violence, not glorify it.
Most people watching this won't view it the same way. They glorify the fight and mentally dismiss the idea that a man was in the process of dying in that universe. Death isn't pretty, it isn't glorious, and even when actors try to display it as horrific, they cannot really capture it because they've likely never seen it and certainly haven't experienced it. The rawness of it isn't easy to convey and probably wouldn't make for good film. The shaking, terror, and the movements to try and alleviate pain are painful to watch even in animals if you understand what you're seeing.
Agree but the winning man drew blood not the losing man.
“Draws blood” or in other words “to cause blood to flow from a person’s body.” It was tense once the winning man drew blood from the other man.
@@ZedF86 it depends tho. Death is not just one thing. In this clip, the terror of death comes from how desperate the losing man is to end the fight. His death comes from a stab which shock kills him just in seconds. Another death can be a traffic accident, most of the death almost immediately after impact. Not all death can be portrayed as shaking and in pain. Especially in a duel where adrenaline kicks in. Even mutilation could be overlooked if your body is in a fight or flight scenario. This is why the soundtrack is important to dictate how you feel. This isn't like Avengers where people are dying with pop music.
@@toxicdermyillunary4103 Sure.
Was fucking chilling.
The stabee actor does a good job looking genuinely terrified for his life
Plot Twist, he actually died on set ! (he probably did not)
thecsslife
That obi wan’s son. Show some respect.
@@joellaz9836 Hold up what
Ajay AVSM
Alec Guinness is his father
@@joellaz9836 ohh ok
I thought we were talking about Ewan McGregor
This is arguably more intense than a long drawn out Hollywood scene. You feel as if the tide could turn at any moment, you feel like both men are so incredibly vulnerable.
Well, they are, they are just human beings, even the guy with long hair (who seems to be the superior fighter) doesnt do anything rash and keeps calm until he sees an openning, even if he is the superior fighter, he knows that one wrong move could mean his death.
I dunno, the cavalryman looked in complete control and was calm the entire time.
Hum not really , we could see one have confidence and the other one lacks of it
"a long drawn out Hollywood scene" is exactly what this is. Sword fights last about 4 seconds.
Silvermage What "confidence" one wrong move and you're dead...
Isn't it marvellous how many battle hardened expert sword fighters we have in the comments section in the 21st century. Amazing.
Well, I was actually a TA in Fencing for years - foil and sabre. I'm sure there are others in here who have done HEMA and modern fencing as well so.... :) And yeah, sometimes we'd have "duels" outside of the gym on battlements and the like in a realistic setting, just to have fun. So I wouldn't be above commenting on fights in films.
+purpleanex You have no idea what you are talking about. The sports and styles like HEMA, belegarth, kendo, foil fencing are very much alive. Judo is centuries old; does that mean no one is qualified to talk about Judo?
+Max Loh
Most HEMA practitioners don't regularly engage in mortal combat though, do they?
McDucky
You don't literally need to die or kill people in order to figure out scientifically what works and what doesn't through good hard sparring with protective gear.
Max Loh
Sure, but there is a lot we can't know without the real threat of death and pressure to kill another human.
There is so much filmmakers can learn from this scene. The natural, lunging movements and pauses make it so much more terrifying than the choreographed nonsense you get in modern movies today.
The assumption is that audiences don't have the attention span to appreciate pauses in the action, even if it serves to demonstrate the characters' apprehension effectively
You're right. I got the tension seeing them pausing for a few seconds trying to outsmart their opponent. This scene is full of suspension lol
Not sure most movie swordfights are trying to be 'terrifying'.
Theatre of the mind is sometimes the best way to go.
It gives it more gravitas because instead of the fight taking so long because they both are so good at blocking it takes so long because they both don’t want to get stabbed
Another reason why it’s so realistic is the one guy’s reaction once he gets hit. He panics and carelessly attempts to go in with a barrage of strikes forgetting all about what to do and he pays the price for it.
Not that realistic. After getting the killing blow the winner is just like "whatever" and calmly walks away. In real life the loser would have attempted to chase and stab him in the back, instead, the loser's sword is magically teleported away.
@@BoxStudioExecutive With a sword sticking straight through him? The winner seems to walk away mad at the guy whom he just had to kill because the loser didn't back off. I wouldn't describe it as a "whatever" gesture.
@@martijnheil8825 Yes. A person who is full of adrenaline probably wouldn't even notice they were stabbed until they bleed out. Unless someone was stabbed in the heart brain or spine, they're acting with a purpose for at least a couple seconds, more than enough time to catch up to someone who is walking around, pretending the guy they just stabbed in the chest doesn't exist, and deliver a lethal wound.
There's hundreds of stories about soldiers sustaining lethal injuries, yet fighting on heroically like nothing happened to them. It's the same exact physiological mechanism which allows them to do that which indicates the winner in this clip acts in a reckless, idiotic, and unrealistic manner.
@@BoxStudioExecutive The loser's sword is dropped and can be seen sticking out of the ground at 2:12
@@BoxStudioExecutive I doubt someone with a sword through them could bend over and pick up a sword and make any reasonable attempt at stabbing someone.
The bald guy was just a very clever sword thief. Notice how he now has two swords instead of one? Genius.
shit dude. good joke good name and pic
peak british humor
@Dan Gurău he's truly a brainiac
I've disarmed him with my torso!
Galaxy brain. 200 IQ move.
i feel like it's even harder to choreograph realism than those over the top fight scenes but they did a flawless job at this
The final fight scene of Rashomon is kind of similar. It looks oddly amateur yet really complex at the same time.
Well it can go in more than one way, adrenaline can take over your senses and numb your decision making giving you an even harder time with a fight, but everything is over fantasized to extend a movies length and get the viewers attention, samurai fights didn't last as long as they do on movies.
@Deep Moticons I agree!
It feels way more intense than, say, every Revenge of the Sith Lightsaber duel.
It passes well the idea of how in a sword duel every move can be deadly, so both parts are cautious, instead of just swinging the blades like crazy or spinning and jumping around for no reason.
People don't like to get hurt or die, and people don't like to hurt or kill other people, especially in close quarters with things like swords. I think most of the "difficulty" in choreographing realistic action really just comes from intentionally ignoring both of those things. Obviously that's fine, it's an artistic choice (what it says about us that we have to imagine people don't mind killing or getting hurt to be heroic notwithstanding), but more realism would be nice.
Just so everyone knows, the reason he throws his hands up in frustration at the end is because it wasn't very common for someone to die on the spot in sword duels is the revolutionary war time. Usually someone would yield after a single wound or slash, like the one the guy took across his hand
Thank you really
If it were his sword hand he wouldn't have had a choice. But idiots will fight on for pride, and they'll die for it just like this guy.
Not always true, depended on the people and circumstances, people would sometimes die fighting for their honor
@@kristianferencik8685 yep. Uhhhh. That's why I said usually
@@goatymcgoatface3575 well not usually. Duels during that time were rare, and vast majority of them were fought to the death as a way of settling scores to honor of a house, clan or persons.
0/10 - Not enough shaky cams, lens flares and explosions.
agreed, needs more dragons and shit
what about assault rifles? schekelwood said they existed in medieval times which is clearly where this movie is starring
Pretty well shot overall but there is room for improvement. For example employing shaky cam. They can give the impression of frenetic movement and action by simply throwing the camera down a well. Much better than actually showing the fight.
Not enough Micheal Bay*
Plenty of shaky cam here. The handheld shots felt very unneeded. I think wide shots and steady close in shots would have done it.
We all know why this happened. Never make fun of a man's pigtails.
Many hussars had those pigtails back in those days. They thought it would protect you from sabre cuts
I suppose one mocked the braids and the other mocked the baldness.
I don't think you ever find out why the first duel is fought in this movie, but save to say it was probably nothing.
A lot of them would actually braid bullets into their hair which actually could have saved them from sabre cuts to the neck.
That he was... Personally I think he just liked to duel, and would take any opportunity to do so.
It's a fantastic scene, and Keitel was great, but let's give some deserved props to his opponent.
It takes a really good stage combatant to make your character look like he's out of his depth.
Not only did he have to convincingly pull off bad weapon handling and tactics, just look at his legs....all shaky and unsure. Very good acting there.
Remember that the actor's job is to tell a story....the duels are a means to that end.
The actor is the son of the British actor Sir Alec Guiness.
One of the nice ways the director helps him convey it is by showing him constantly running back and forth, which is a natural and instinctual threat response even though it doesn't help very much in a fight like this.
@@dark7element Yep...sometimes good stage combat is less about clanging weapons together and more about the ACTING that goes with it.
I hope I am wrong but, I feel this will be an underappreciated comment, but I feel you make a good point.
I also like how Keitel starts the fight with as much caution as his opponent, and as he confirms his obvious superior skill is visibly far more relaxed and simply waits the inevitable mistakes to be made by his opponent
After watching so many marval and DC fights... It was nice to see something more realistic for a change 🗡 ⚔️
Those marvel films have actually ruined cinema
And hearing "woosh" instead of "ziiing" even for a swiss army knife. So annoying in this kind of movies.
@@boomerhgt I wouldn't say that, superhero films are just a trend like western films were back then, that is going on.
@@boomerhgt there are also realistic action films such as John Wick
Marvel is about superheroes... obviously it isn't realistic. And if you think Marvel ruined cinema, you don't know cinema.
This scene occurs at the very beginning of the film and to anyone familiar with Napoleonic history (especially in 1800 which is the date given in this scene) the Keitel character is obviously a soldier, whereas the opponent is obviously a civilian (and he's not moving like an experienced duellist.) Those buttoned trousers and the pigtails mark Keitel as a cavalryman (and more specifically as a Hussar; the pigtails were a direct affectation by French Hussars they copied from the Hungarian Hussars of the period.) As a Hussar, Keitel's character would have primarily been more familiar with the saber, not with a smallsword. Most probably the duel was initiated by Keitel taking offense to something petty which the civilian had done (watch the movie; the entire sequence of duels with Carradine starts because Keitel's character is a hotheaded bully who takes offense at practically anything and immediately challenges.) As the challenged party, the civilian would have choice of weapons and would almost certainly have picked smallsword. The smallsword was the preferred sidearm of a civilian and probably the only weapon with which he had trained. Gentlemen of the era were expected to take at least some instruction in fencing; it was as expected as much as knowing which fork to use at table. He almost certainly would NOT have chosen saber. And would probably not have chosen pistols. Although the odds of being hit in a pistol duel were smaller as dueling pistols were notoriously inaccurate (they were not rifled, were prone to misfires and didn't even have a sighting device, not even a bead) if you WERE hit by a pistol shot, you were more likely to be killed or maimed. Smallsword wounds were generally not disfiguring and barring infection, rarely deadly unless a major organ was struck.
Technically (unless the duel was specifically set up beforehand as a "to the death" scenario) the opponent could have, with honor, dropped his sword immediately after suffering the wound to his hand. He would have faced his opponent, born the risk of death and could have walked. The fact that he (rather stupidly) continued after suffering the wound permitted Keitel to continue to defend. If Keitel had insisted on carrying on after wounding him, the dishonor would have fallen on HIM, not the civilian. "First blood" was the normal termination of a duel and it was the challenged or wounded party who usually made that call. Duels were affairs to prove one's honor and courage (or lack of cowardice), not to kill one's opponent. It was assuming the risk that proved honor, not chopping one's opponent into shreds.
As for any quibbles over distance between the two opponents, Keitel simply takes a stance and pretty much maintains it thru the fight; it is the opponent who changes the distance with advances (clumsily), retreats and circles. It may appear that they are far apart but that distance can close rapidly if one opponent advances and the other moves to meet that advance and attack. The two men begin the fight by 'watching;' they're evaluating the foe and his apparent skill. When Keitel does advance, he does it specifically to initiate an attack (and to terrify the other guy!) The final blow is struck when the opponent is advancing; Keitel does precisely what he should do...he retreats correctly, waits for an opening, parries an attack and ripostes. End of duel. One must understand that in that era it was perfectly possible to "win" the duel and still die. One fighter might suffer a horrific injury and surrender, thus losing, but if the "winner" suffered the smallest injury, given the medical standards of the time, he could be dead of infection and in the ground before the "loser" even took off whatever bandages he might have needed.
+dee coe - Keitel totally had my attention in this movie (I've watched it numerous times). I couldn't stand being in the same room with someone like his character. Anything would set him off. Joe Pesci could pick up some pointers on how to act touchy.
dee coe very good movie.
I find the distance realistic. One of the main changes stage fighting forces is to place combatants unrealistically close to each other. This is a nice change.
dee coe TL; DR
Possibly the most useful comment I've ever read in my whole life.
I've always thought you don't see realistic fights in movies because they would be boring, but this fairly realistic fight has my heart in my throat.
The reason why is that it’s simply easier to make a fantastical fight scene with gratuitous violence to try and wow the audience. It’s shallow and lazy. Realistic fight scenes are harder to get right because it isn’t as simple as just making two people fight. You have to capture the emotion, and a good one will utilize tension. That’s a staple of Old Westerns, the duels. It’s just two guys staring at each other and then shooting, and if forced to make a duel at all, a lazy screenwriter would have them do a long, drawn-out gunfight with infinite bullets that get completely stopped by a 2x4. Good screenwriters can take a 10sec scene of guys standing still in the middle of the street and make it into 60sec of the two playing mind games with each other. Real life isn’t boring, it’s just hard to capture
You can tell almost instantly who the better swordsman is by the acting and where the camera's focus lays. We're standing behind the protagonist for quite a few shots in the scene because he's the most stable. The other guy has more opportunity to show his visual distress... while the protagonist every time we get a close up on his face, he's calm. He's stable and in control and it only resolves because of that. It's a really elegant scene in its composition but the acting is there as well and so its fidelity to reality.
FWIW he is not the protagonist and is realistically the antagonist.
@@darronlockett9211 Protagonist is not positive. He is most definitely a protagonist. He's one of the central POV characters and while his relationship with Keith Carradine (the ostensibly better person) is antagonistic, they are dual protagonists.
Also, the other guy is balding. If he were fully bald, he'd have a chance, but you don't get to be plot-relevant with hair like that.
They showed this at my local independent cinema (started by Ridley Scott's great uncle in the 30's). One of my friends giggled through the whole thing, one was bored, one kept asking what was going on...I need new friends.
sad...
You DO need new friends. The Duelists is a great, great film
lol "whats going on" wtf. I haven't seen this movie in years but from what I remember its not hard to follow or anything!
Idiocracy was a documentary.
Yeah they sound entitled as fuck.
It's weird to see a swordfight in a film where it actually looks like they're trying to cut and stab each other, rather than aiming for the air above the other's head or aiming for eachother's sword
Actually you should try to aim for your opponent's sword, as there is no point in stabbing your opponent if you get stabbed yourself.
@@user-fg6mo2iz2q to parry an attack but your main goal isn’t to smash swords together like they do in movies
@@patricknewton9872 Yes and also smashing swords together chips your weapon, reducing it's effectiveness, and could even break it entirely. They can parry then counter attack or throw a feinting attack as a distraction to cover footwork then launch the real attack, or they can move out of the way of an attack and then counter attack, but rarely would they be banging away at the enemy's weapon unless they have a much smaller weapon and you are trying to disarm them in a situation where your weapon will almost certainly fair better than theirs, like someone with a heavy polearm vs someone with a short sword, and you were trying to disarm the person with the smaller weapon by making them lose their grip. Or perhaps they might try to hit their hand and not the blade.
@@user-fg6mo2iz2q Actually you should be aiming at the guy you are fighting.
@@hzuiel the duels in this era were fought with smallswords, which didn't really have an edge. Hence the slapping as a way of parrying. Its just how you fence with foils/Épées/Smallswords
This has been a long favorite movie of mine. I once witnessed two kendo practitioners spar hard for about an hour. Both had decades of experience each, one was 10 years senior and the more experienced practitioner.
Every exchange was explosive, with 100% commitment and over within 1-3 moves.
The senior practitioner was calmer and acted as if he could read the opponent’s intentions before they had formed. He used the smallest of movements to effortlessly block, then violently smack and stab the opponent. He’d often win by counterattack or attacking THEN countering the opponent’s reaction.
Lots of cuts to the hands or arms. Lots of keeping the point of the blade in the opponent’s face.
Many exchanges were won similar to this clip by letting the aggressor make a mistake and get stabbed as he lunged forward to attack. However the exchanges I witnessed were often ended with loud punishing stabs to the armor covering the throat. Absolutely brutal.
Every movement was so precise and controlled it was evident the moves had been practiced masterfully hundreds of thousands of time. The economy of movement on the winner’s part was beautiful and terrifying. It gave me a whole new perspective on how deadly and quick a sword fight would be and ruined my enjoyment of many movie sword fights.
bring back duelling and make it great again. Politicians should be duelling ALL THE TIME. if they want to have power, then let them put their life on the line for it.
Just because you know how something is in reality doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy the highly fantasized version as well. Like, I totally get how lots of real life martial arts fights would look, but I still love the hell out of king fu films, including the fakiest of the lot, like the ones with tiptoeing over the tops of tree foliage and jumping/flying 30 feet into the air, lol. One of them is fun fantasy and intense, the other is realistic dire and intense.
its time to wake up, you are late for school
@I_Commission_DSPriscilla_Art ur a fkn goof
Personally I love movie fight scenes, I watch a TON of MMA, train boxing and MMA, and have seen plenty of real fights in the street (RUclips videos I mean), and personally I wouldn’t want most movie fights to look like that. It’s ok to have some drama and choreography in a movie scene (and they can still be really brutal too, like Eastern Promises for a more grounded and desperate example, or The Raid for a more over the top example).
Just watching the scene I feel like it’s realistic. Hell yeah I’d be scared shitless if someone were waving a sword at me. Even if I had a sword. You bet I’d be standing as far away as possible
Haha yeah it makes the fear of death actually be real watching this. One slip up and your done.
I don't know I think its pretty good but theres some nonsense that they do when they are attacking like parrying to much the blade especially on the sec9nd half and the way the bald man gets his hand injure is something not even a noob would do, you wouldn't try to grab a blade that thin with your bare hands it just looks odd but thats probably nitpicking so overlay good would give it an 8/10 defently more realistic that usual stuff but not 100% realistic great for a movie though
@@Juguitosdemora Both of those I *think* are character styles more so than mistakes with the fight scene. The calmer guy obviously is slightly insane, and is playing with the fearful bald guy like a cat plays with a mouse before killing it. The cut to the hand was a move by the calm man, not an attempt to grab the blade (That move was parry opponent's sword to the side, slide his own blade behind the man, hook the hand with the blade, and draw it sharply out.) and the slightly extra parrying bits were just the man toying around, doing a couple fakes to watch how his opponent reacts (something I do often in martial arts sparring... a low-effort kick here, punch there, are you gonna try to back up or block, just testing the waters)
In the centuries duels were popular in Europe there also was another habbit - to drink wine instead of water very often. If you wanna see how alcohol enlarges courage just go to the nearest sleazy nightclub and look at aggressive jerks (the same jerks that are humbler than the dust at daytime in their offices).
Imagine being proud of being gay, lol. Crazy times we're living in.
It's not flashy or cool looking at all, but still manages to engage the viewer and the suspense is palpable. Maybe the lack of fanciness in everything we see here tells the audience "This is serious, a battle for life and death"
In my opinion the tension made it way cooler to watch than most movie fights
But wait....where the spinning around multiple times and useless sword twirls???
@@weswolever7477 yeah where are the senseless slashing and swinging like it's a bar fight?
this was intense as fuck
In modern days maybe but a few centuries ago this was nothing.
fighting for your life is always intense, regardless of century
My thoughts exactly. Can't believe they don't make more swordfight movies for realism fans. I mean I must watch this movies. This was the most intense fight scene I've seen in ages. The realism captures so much more emotion than wild spinning. You can clearly see that the other guy is terrified, he is not an experienced fighter. The pigtail guy knows what's up but doesn't want to get skewerd to a fool move, and you can see him growing more confident with each exchange. Absolutely brilliant.
It doesn't satisfy the need for over-the-top action mixed with a short attention span, sadly. But i wholeheartedly agree, I too miss this pace of "action".
If you haven't seen this movie yet, then just DO it. You'll find a real gem, a masterpiece, a classic.
Just put aside the story (which is GREAT) and feast your eyes in the decoration, lightining, landscapes, interiors....you'll be absolutely amazed by the level of attention to the tiniest detail, the craftamnship of costumes and props......just brilliant.
The very last shot, the very last image of the movie will leave you speechless, it's the most common example teachers point to their classes in cinema schools as "the perfect shot".....
The tension in this scene makes it a masterpiece. The power dynamic demonstrated by the stances is great
It's so well done and the acting is so real that I could barely watch, like watching a real life stabbing, horrific yet we've been so used to it in movies, this is something else
I've heard this is the most realistic fight scene in a movie, but I don't think it was bad cinema at all. The way it went from tense to shocking was absolutely brutal. Despite other fight scenes actually being more violent, this one feels more violent because you actually feel the pain of him cutting his hand and getting ran through.
Yes you can feel tension, both sides are very careful. After he cut his hand he throws everything into that stab clumsily and it costs his life
I don't understand your use of "but"? Would a realistic fight scene make a movie bad?
@@crunkers_ That's funny, I've only ever heard the opposite. Have you ever heard someone actually saying this? Just asking out of curiosity, as I'm fairly certain that the overwhelming majority of people likes realistic fight scenes in movies.
@@iegoriasynetskyi1003 I posted this a while ago but yeah I do think thats a common sentiment. My only point was from my perspective, if a fight tries overly hard to be realistic it can sometimes become worse. Especially if they are trying to add realism with no tact or understanding. My example would be the kinds of high action spy thrillers that involve really shakey cameras and people just swinging at each other with no finess in an effort to appear realistic.
So yeah, I wasn't really saying other people were saying it. I was saying it defied my expectations.
I read someone once said in a knife fight there are no winners or losers, only survivors and dead men. This reminded me of that, hand to hand combat is a brutal and visceral experience and rarely does anyone walk away completely unscathed. I can’t imagine the stones it took.
"In a knife fight, the loser dies in the street and the winner dies in the hospital."
I love this scene because it’s a perfect demonstration about how keeping your nerve is just as valuable as being good at fighting during a duel to the death
That's one thing I think is missing in most fight scenes - the anxiety over the risk of injury or death you are facing, even if it seems like you are the better fighter; there are no guarantees in battle. I don't mind some less-than-realistic maneuvers that aren't too over-the-top for the sake of entertainment, but they should never compromise the emotional element.
It's how they actually try to stab their opponent with their sword, and hit the other blade only to get it out of the way.
chazz30000 no shit Sherlock
@@Zjonishealing The point is that this is not the case in most sword fights in most films
You mean the pointy end is meant to get stuck into somebody? Thats so manly...
killing with the point lacks artistry...
@@howlinhobbit The swords they are using are like Spadroons., meant for thrusting more than cutting. These, in the movie are very similar to the US Civil War period M1840 NCO sword.
Cmon, this is youtube, EVERY title must be ironic in some sort man! I came here expecting to watch a really shitty sword fight and ended up with a very nice, realistic one...
@Darkzz Lord Sorry if you expected spinning attacks, explosions and hot ladies.
@Darkzz Lord Then I guess you would be expecting a more agressive fight, which wouldn't make much sense in this movie. The main aspect of this scene is that both fighters are afraid to die, and fight like that.
@Darkzz Lord It's gud. I'm always tilted, too.
It's got Harvey Keitel in it. So you know when it'll be a good one!
Fuck you, because of people like you it's hard to search shit.
Masterful.. in the music placement, cinematography, choreography, and acting. I had no idea Harvey Keitel did a role like this, I'm going to watch it immediately!
And what did you think about it?
I felt that blade slicing his hand. It made me flinch, and his reaction made me feel his pain and agony.
It really does look like it fuckin *sucks* and since its a fresh slice it might not hurt as bad as it could *right away* but it will immediately get worse and worse and you see the realisation, the moment of cognition and anger churning afterwords, and the pain induced rage once he REALLY feels it about 5 seconds in, all portrayed masterfully by the actor.
Wheres the lava? Explosions? Giant collapsing structures? 20 minutes of riding on mining equipment?
And neither one even had the high ground!
You can make fun of that moment but 5 year old thought that was the coolest thing ever, and even now it’s still very cool
To be fair, they are space wizards.
@@HageanFQ truth
Haha. That mining equipment one is so specific. 😄
What movie are you referencing there?
Don't they know that every passage of swords should end with a kick or punch. The swords are there for the sound effects. Ting Ting Ting. Then a kick or punch to end the bout. Nobody gets stabbed in a Hollywood sword fight.
Why don't more people talk about this film! So amazing!
Lost attention span.
I would disagree. The point of this movie isn't to show the grand scale of the Napoleonic wars, but to hyper focus on a trivial matter between two characters that simply won't die over time. I actually think it's better that you don't much see the rest of the world around them; in a way, they have been so engrossed in their conflict that the rest of the world just moves on and they really aren't much a part of it. Their preoccupation (and outright fear) of each other demands the characters' full focus, and so it makes sense that the audience would focus on the same thing. How can you feel the sense that the main character is trapped in an inescapable situation that directs his destiny day and night if we pull away from that as an audience?
Where the fuck do you watch it? You've gotta be fucking Indiana Jones to find old movies these days.
+F4c2a I think it's on Netflix.
Interesting. I consider Carradine's performance to be a strength of the film. His sense of propriety and honor are ever-present, but so is his increasing agitation and resentment towards society's absurd hooks that have dug into him and kept him embroiled in a farcical but deadly situation. His honor and his resentment I think are both positive qualities, and yet they clash. For one quality to remain constant in the face of another which grows over the course of the film must have been hard to balance and I think he did a good job with them. His character is certainly more nuanced than most I see these days.
I agree that sometimes the drama is lacking, and maybe even where it shouldn't be lacking, but I think again that may be an attempt to showcase society's expectations of "gentlemanly behavior" during that era. A little stuffy sometimes but not without merit. I'm no expert in French culture/history of this period or films or even of this particular film, but I thought it found its mark.
To that end, I probably need to watch it again because looking back I find a larger weakness to be the nature of the men's relationships with women. It's not just that the female characters are marginalized; it's that many connections which could enrich the film seem not to be drawn at all. For example, we see that Carradine's first woman is upset, but we don't feel it because we don't know enough about her identity and her connection to him; then she is whisked away halfway through the film and it seems to have little effect on anybody. Rather than simplifying these relationships for the viewer to infer and get on with the story, I think that leaving these relationships unclear muddles the story and does weigh it down, leading to the drop in motivation to which you refer.
Anyway, I appreciated your comment and it made me think. I'd be happy to hear more about the character developments that you would have liked to see or how the acting diluted what was in the script. Cheers.
I love this! No seesawing back and forth. No spinning around. No backflipping (sorry, Princess Bride). Just tenaciously searching for an opening for your blade. Brutal, gritty and realistic. Kudos to Ridley Scott!
2:00 DAMN FINALLY ! Finally a swordfight when you feel the pain of the character when he's cut ! Finally a swordfight who feels real !
Love the throw of the hands at the end. "There fool! You got what you wanted!"
To me it's the most noticeable thing through out the whole scene .. the look of realization , then disgust by throwing up his arms .
He should have used an offhand ceastus and tried to parry this Estoc spammer.
more like ultra realistic casul
against the rules of duel.
His first mistake was leveling dex like a filthy casul
Thrusting sword spammers gotta be parried! (and if possible by bare hand or weapon like in the second)
but it´s not an estoc, it´s a rapier. An estoc is meant to penetrate armor, and has a crossguard and was commonly used in the late middle ages. The rapier is not a millitary sword, and is not capable of any penetration (be it metal or a gambeson), and instead of a crossguard they have a kinda disc-shaped hand protection...
I mean I can understand their fashion souls but the least they could've done is add some Havel's legs or gauntlets
I don't think this film could've been done better, the actors basically felt like they were in 19th Century France and they really, really got into it! A true masterpiece!
The music queue showing the guy start to panic after being cut really brings this scene together.
Probably as realistic as Hollywood is ever likely to get...
+wotnotbutter No, it's not a best guess. We have thousands of written accounts of smallsword duels like in this movie, with play-by-play detail. We have at least several accounts, often more, along with treatises describing the methodology of most other kinds of duel with most other medieval weapons, particularly swords and pole-arms. Saying our knowledge of these is at best a guess is ridiculous when we literally have sword-fighting manuals from the previous millennium.
Not exactly a "Hollywood" film.
This is pre-Hollywood Ridley Scott, his first film after many years of directing TV commercials.
This movie literally has nothing to do with Hollywood though..
It's a British movie, not Hollywood.
Damn, those moments near the end were he tries to 'bait' out a response, the little bark/sound he made and the feign he made after.. Nicely done.
One of my favourite ever films. Beautifully composed from start to finish. A great sense of period too. A Konrad short story brought to visual life.
The fear of being pierced by sword is surreal, even i felt it lol.
"keep it"
I read this novel many years ago, when I watched this movie first time, it was almost exactly the same as pictures in my head I imagined when I was reading this story. Characters, places, atmosphere- everything was like they filmed this movie in my head. I like it very much.
A good fight scene has context, characters with motivations and tells a story in itself. This fight scene has all of that.
Some of these comments nitpicking technicalities are so annoying. Yes rules and techniques count in a fencing tournament. But when you are literally fighting for your life as was portrayed in the film, some of the rules in the rule book fly out the window!
Still, a good technique can save your life much better than a shoddy one. Real fencers knew that. What we see in the movie is wrong on very basic levels - you don't "swing" or "cut" with a small sword, it has no cutting edge!
“Why you walking away!? Come back here, we are not finished!? Coward! Forfeit, he left!
"Tis but a scratch!"
Hey!!!
I didn't hear no bell 🔔...
A couple of guys needed help cleaning up a car.
I DIDN'T HEAR NO BELL!
@@ahabduennschitz7670 Just A Flesh Wound
The difference in making a simulated swordfight looking realistic or not ist just in one point: What are the actors aiming at? Do their strikes aim at the opponents body or limbs? Or are they just trying to hit each others weapon? The first option is the only realistic one. But it's the second one, that you can see in most movies. Even these days.
I always laugh when beginners at fencing just keep hitting my blade. I am like 'Stop hitting my blade and hit me!'.
You think that's air you're breathing now?
leximatic beginners mistake in every fighting form I believe. Some naturally have the inclination to hit vitals or at least hit the body lol. When I started boxing, I could do drills all day long and look pretty good but as soon as you start sparring, shit I couldn't land a single hit because I was reacting defensively and trying not to hurt my partner. Even though I knew I couldn't hurt him lol. Didn't stop me from firing shots at his elbows and next to his face like a jackass ha!
Hence the Starwars Prequels
If you've ever done any full contact sparring in any sport (in my experience, boxing) then you know the feeling of not wanting to reach out with an attack for fear of eating a brutal counter.
I love the constrast between Ferauds and the bald mans fighting styles. Feraud is cool, calculating and economic, aiming to counterattack and constantly striking towards the body. The bald man is unskilled and scared, flailing wildly with his rapier and barely being able to get near his opponent.
They’re not actually using rapiers, they’re using small swords
@@Blizzardholocron You are right, my bad
A lot of people wonder why we don't choreograph fight scenes like this nowadays, despite the accuracy and realism on display, and the answer is quite simple: schlocky, flashy swordfights are more exciting, and this? This fight isn't exciting- it's *terrifying.*
Well music and dialogue can very well change the tone.
That is indeed quite realistic, people tend to stand still and guard, nobody dares to make a move unless they know it's a good one and the more time you spend the better moves you can think of
Yes!
I don’t need cuts every second to understand that a fight is intense..
Thank you very much
Excellent film. The one thing a successful duellist needs to remember is that no matter how good he is, the other guy only needs to get lucky for everything to go wrong. Amongst expert swordsmen the favourite phrase is always "Good on the day". The bald man was at his most dangerous when he forgot to be afraid and just went for it.
I can relate to their movements as a fencer, like how they dont bash their swords 24/7 against each other, but try to constantly trap their enemy somehow. Of course they are far far more skillfull and have actual reason to be afraid lol
I love how after he stabs him he just throws his arms up like “good job bruh”
😄😄😄😄😄😄😄
You can see that his sword got stuck - he was trying to pull it out. So it was more like he throws his arms up to say "You keep it then"
"Fuck sake bro just got this sword"
Like "alright there i did it, now someone move the body"
His opponents clumsiness and lack of grace ruined his kill. He was irritated he just fell into his sword : )
I love the little taunt with with sword waggle, and the wild wave giving away he's about to strike. You can tell who's going to win, as well as have a tinge of hope for the balding man as he lunges forwards. Very well done conveying what they were thinking without a single word.
After the arm slash the guy loses his temper and that is the moment he lost this fight. Tactics fell out the window, and he just rushes foward with a clumsy strike that was never going to hit, leaving himself totally open for the counter and that's what happened.
Rage = death [versus a decent opponent].
My favorite bit is how the *moment* the other guy is injured, that's it. He's now distracted by pain and panics, and the advantage is lost. Amazing
A well shot conversation is more intense than a lot of the blockbuster action scenes nowadays
In addition to the intense, desperate fights throughout - the momentary still shots that open many of the scenes are beautiful replicas of works of art. Ridley was really on a roll with his first three movies (this, Alien, and Blade Runner)
That long ending shot to this movie as Feraud walks the hills overlooking the river.... Brilliant!!
I'll tell you why this seems realistic while other movies have unrealistic fight scenes.
No background music.
Uhhh... no. It's more realistic because they aren't doing ridiculous spinning attacks and jumping around showboating like they do in most choreographed fights.
There is actually background music, but unlike a lot of movie it's used pretty well there, to raise tension at the appropriate moment.
Then what's that cheesy try-hard music at 2:02 ?
Pleb weeb I disagree; that is not better than modern usage, but it was good for its time
Harvey Kitel is showboating.
Only a little, and it's consistent with his character that he do so. He's showboating for the other characters in the movie, not for the audience.
What makes this completely realistic is that Ridley let Harvey actually kill the other man. What powerful directing.
Is this a joke or serious...?!
(Because if you're joking, it's a bit strong...)
By the way...
You don't seriously think that there would be a single actor who would continue to work if he had to deal with the fact that if a film director felt like it, he would even _deliberately_ kill the actor he signed during the filming...
\_(ツ)_/
_FX ..._ (Film tricks) Have you heard of it ...?
2:11
I really enjoy the detail of the walk away, the emoting is nice, you have that shake which really hammers in the feeling of disgust and relief, "there! It's done!" kinda vibe.
That being said turning your back on a mortally wounded person seems unrealistic, I've seen enough stabbing and actual blade fighting on camera to know no one simply slouches down, that's more common in animals shot by arrows.
*edit the second paragraph is dumb, I don't know why I wrote that this is a duel, pretty obvious that the honor among the duel itself is why he walked away, moreover I appreciate the walk away differently now knowing it was both the feeling of relief at winning and also, as ircubic and eustace said, frustration at the duel ending as it did.
I interpreted it as frustration over being forced to mortally wound the opponent. Usually duels were not to the death, but to first blood (of course, not having seen the movie I can't tell if it was the case), but the opponent charging when he had actually lost forced the decision. Just like "Shit! It did not have to be like this, but have it your way, damnit."
@@ircubic His opponents clumsiness and lack of grace ruined his kill. He was irritated he just fell onto his sword : )
I love the wry humour of this film and it's something Scott is always good at. The absurd pettiness with which he seeks his opponents. He's an almost a farcical, but truly deadly, character and you feel wary for whichever target he lands in his sights.
Especially with the man still standing... people react differently to mortal wounds, I've definitely heard stories (probably slightly exaggerated... but they came from somewhere, no?) of men being stabbed in the chest and still fighting and killing others until their body literally gives out. In this scene, dude definitely looked like he had enough strength left to grab his sword and stab back
For those who may not know, the loser chooses to stop fighting in this scene. It's is what is called in modern times a "psychological stop". He is not incapable of continuing to fight, and if he was a more fearsome opponent it would be unwise to leave the sword in him. The pain and mental shock of having been impaled causes the defeated to give up. The wound may or may not be fatal. With contemporary good prompt medical treatment, such a wound is very unlikely to be fatal. In the time depicted, it's more of a toss-up. Without medical care it's extremely dangerous, but given the circumstances of this duel (formal, with seconds, among gentlemen) good prompt medical care of the era would be near and the defeated has a pretty good chance of survival despite the relative inefficacy of surgery at that time. He was a fool not to surrender the fight when his hand was cut. Typically duels were fought to first blood, not death, but the defeated here cannot bear to lose and presses the fight until he is gravely wounded. He ignored his cut hand, and continued to fight. He chose not to ignore having been stabbed through the torso. But make no mistake, he was physically capable of continuing to fight and, while not appropriate for a duel, had he been more motivated he could have done so. In combat training it is emphasized not to give up and die because of injury. The wound may or may not be fatal, and even if it is you may be able to stop or kill the enemy. On a battlefield it is extremely important that soldiers continue to fight when injured. Otherwise more of their comrades will become casualties. Many fatal injuries are not immediately incapacitating. In this time period, much of the mortality was the wound not healing well and becoming infected. This wouldn't happen immediately. If you weren't bleeding out you might stay strong enough to fight for days or weeks. If you are bleeding out you have from a few seconds to a few hours before you lose your strength. Severing a major artery or vein causes the most rapid incapacitation, measured in seconds (still enough time for the victim to kill others) but otherwise the victim has at least some minutes and it won't stop the victim from continuing the fight to it's conclusion despite bleeding. In a real desperate struggle to survive with motivated combatants, there will usually be multiple wounds as they will fight until one of them is no longer physically capable of fighting. Many fatal wounds will often be sustained. This is what the study of wound ballistics is all about. It's not difficult to reliably cause a fatal injury, but very difficult to reliably cause immediate incapacitation. It's the difference between causing a wound that's not treatable, and immediately shutting down the body.
You win: Most long winded reply ever (that no one is going to read).
@@BDUBZ49 wow that's rude
That’s all true, but the scene is absolutely appropriate. It’s not hard to guess why they’re dueling...the young dashing hussar has been humping the frumpy older gentleman’s wife. The older man is terrified of dying, and yet can’t stand to live with the shame and heartache. When the inevitable occurs and the skilled younger swordsman thrusts him through, the old man gives up. He dreads death, yet accepts it. It’s an utterly brilliant scene.
@@johanmikkael6903 Rude, but correct. The OP has it right, but he repeated himself several times and could have cut out about 2/3 of that response and made his point.
Probably my biggest issue with movie fights. It’s way too easy to kill people on the spot.
The thing is. Footwork can still be impressive regardless of whether they do fancy things. The right music and cinematography, a realistic duel can impress modern audiences.
Finally a film where adrenaline doesn't boost man's skill (like in most movies), but actually leads him to his demise. Which is especially realistic in this situation.
Another Ridley Scott masterpiece. Every scene is like a painting. Based on a true story of two adversaries in the service of Napoleon. The bald guy who is clearly terrified is not one of them.
By far one of the best movies ever made. Every duel just got better and better throughout the movie. The attention to period detail, also amazing. From the evolution of uniforms & hairs styles of officers and the social dichotomy of these 2 Napoleonic officers. The class struggle that is exemplified by antagonist and protagonist.
Best part, it is based on actual events, filmed on location where the story took place.
I have had to replace worn out VHS tapes and non returned loaned out DVD's over the years since I bought my first copy in the late 80s.
Much like Easy Rider, Back in 1977, this was an Independent full feature backed by a studio and Ridley Scott's first full length feature. I would rate as one of the best Historical Docudramas ever made.
It was just a flesh wound.
waibhav krishna Chandra I've had worse!
@Zac Hawkins Let's call it a draw then
waibhav krishna Chandra 😂
Walk it off
W Chandra “ i’ve faced mud crabs that do more damage than you do you!”
This was an extremely realistic duel between swordsman. The pastoral setting, the mooing of cows, The quietness of the fight. The serious look of each swordsman thinking. this was the most realistic Duel of swords I have ever seen in a movie
I’d be curious to see this same thing with different weapon types, like how would a fight with a couple two handed weapons go, or sword and shield (But i doubt hollywood would do such a thing realistically any time soon).
Cool scene!
Have you watched the entire movie? They dual with all sorts of periodic weaponry. Altough two handed swords and sword and shield is too medieval for this. For that i would recommend the movie The King
There was also an old I think 70s Polish movie where there was a pretty good fight with earlyer swords, but not sure if two-handed
@@user-ft3jq5vi2l is this the one you mean ruclips.net/video/MkYjdPCyYjk/видео.html
@@EgrevPurtslu yes it is
Check out Sellsword Arts, they did a very good longsword duel to a MacBeth scene.
I've seen a few comments of some people guessing and some wanting to know the cause of the duel; so here it is;
The Mayor's son(the Balding guy who get's ran through) wiped his muddy boots on Feraud(Harvey Keitel, The Officer with the pigtails)'s Uniform, naturally Feraud took that as an insult and in which; Challeneged the Mayor's son to a duel.
This is a damn good fighting scene I wish there was more stuff like this. A medieval fight would be cool as well. A realistic ship fight in the golden pirate age too and maybe a samurai fight as well.
The film (beautifully filmed and gorgeous on BR) has a couple of more scenes like that... including an especially gory one involving sabers. The film's epee dueling seems closer to competition dueling where opponents carefully size each other up and then explode for each attack.
That still shot in the thumbnail is INSANE!!!
Finding a good thumbnail is half the battle before posting an edited video.
The human fear is what makes this scene so authentic.
properly displaying how dangerous a sword fight is makes it way more tense and really gets you on the edge of your seat, if the main character slashes through enemies with slow and sloppy strikes you dont realy feel anything but a stresfull and skillful fight really makes the character look cooler and cinematic.
This has to be one of the greatest movies I've ever seen! I wish i knew why Harvey's character was dueling that man in the beginning of the film though, from what I gathered he was easily offended and egotistical. Very well made film!
When he was called out for duelling later in the film, Feraud says something to the effect of ”would you let some kraut wipe his boots on the Emperor?” which tells us the reason for this duel was that his opponent had insulted Napoleon.
@@greenman4946 I don't think Napoleon was Emperor yet, in 1800. Still First Consul.
Superb scene, superb film. The story, costumes, fights, light, music, overall atmosphere and acting. Keitel deserved an Oscar!
I remember when I used to play fight with toy swords with my friends. The thing I always remember happening is that we’d always smash each other’s hands that always was a thing.
Holy shit, that is soo true.
Hands are the most vulnerable part of a fighters body, man the bruises and scrapes I'd get on my hand
We were dueling with bamboo poles once when very young. I wound up with nine stitches and a circular scar on my forehead for about fifty years.
Me and my brothers. Same story, always someone's finger or hand getting hit. Really painful stuff.
So true. But in all honesty, it makes me wonder how many nicks, punctures and lacerations these gentlemen would obtain just in their training over a couple of decades.
As a fencer i can verify that this is actually pretty realistic. The form and movement is there and the stillness while the opponents wait for the other to make a move. This can be seen in tournaments after an initial attack has failed and the attacker is trying to keep the defender at bay (assuming there's no riposte by the defender) by extending his sword out as seen in the movie. While defining who is attacking is moot in a real fight, the same tactics are easily applied.
Is there a reason for the off hand placement? Do they intend to use it to deflect a sharp sword?
@@datipadisdick2462 are you talking about when they're just standing there and pointing their swords at each other? Usually this is to create some distance--if both men extend their swords neither one can lunge and reach the other. Or it can be used to encourage the user's opponent to hit the sword and close the distance--if the user is ready, they can avoid the blade and hit them instead. In tournaments it's there to create priority as the attacker.
@@tticusFinch He's talking about the motions the moustache man is making with his left hand.
@@ecartht5858 ah i see. I'm not familiar with that technique--most fencers today are taught to keep their left hands away from their chests as they create a larger target space. I would guess it has to do with the technique taught during that time.
My favorite part of the comment sections of videos like this one is not the sudden appearance of hundreds of experts in swordfighting (because a video like this is sure to attract a lot of people actually interested in the topic, just like a video about, say, fighting games is sure to attract a lot of avid fighting game players), but all the people feeling themselves in the comments
Apparently enjoying a more grounded approach to swordsmanship makes you superior to the rest of the human population
One of the most interesting films I have ever seen. It does not feel like Hollywood, it has energy, the narration style has beauty, it is not demanding.
If you’ve ever sword sparred anyone in your life this is way more terrifying
So elegant, so brutal.
Love the way he just throws his hands up at the end. Like he was disgusted about the whole thing.
Right like not even a challenge 😂
I love how he tossed up his hands: "Yeah, keep it.... Now, where's my horse at?" [Leaves].
I love this scene. They communicate so much just off of body language.You can really see what’s going through Ferauds head from start to finish. Great acting and even better fencing.
1:38 I feel like the little AH he does to try get the opponent to possibly jump or flinch would genuinely work because I flitched so hard when he did it probably because I was so invested in the scene
Lol yea. In boxing, when someone's carefully walking you down, Guys will back straight up, carefully waiting for the opponent to commit & make his move.. then, real quick, guy backing up will give a grunt and just a fast tiny shoulder fake and a foot stomp which fools the guy coming in and makes him commit and throw a punch... And if you know when a guy is going to throw, and a good idea what he's throwing... You can pretty easily slip and counter. Just like Josh Taylor did in his last fight. (possibly 2nd to last, idk)
Feraud's hairstyle is so cool
Seriously.... If men can wear "man buns" they should be be free to wear "braids" once again
@@cheeseandonions9558 I’m sure in some cultures, men still wear braids. But yes! This should be normalized!
It was a braided hair style called cadenettes, adopted by Napoleon's Hussar Cavalry. Some grew their hair long and others used braided extensions. If a Hussar was killed his cadenettes were sent to his relatives.
@@maxbrazil3712 cool! I’ll look into it more!
I actually grew out my hair and wore cadenettes a couple of times, it is surprisingly "functional" - your hair stays firmly out of your eyes, and of course looks "dashing" by the time's standards :D
Another reported function was putting sticks of wood or thin metal sticks though the center of the cadenettes (braids), and as they hung across the side of your face or neck and a blow from a sabre fell upon it that could potentially save your life.
I also found it interesting how similar the fashion was to the braids and moustaches of the ancient celts of the same regions.
Remains to date, the most accurate description of a dueling sword-fight in a movie. I fence small-sword and everything they do seems pretty realistic from a technical perspective. Harvey Keitel's character is more experienced, and knows this, so he is playing with his prey, trying to draw him out by beating on his blade etc. He even opens himself up for attack to entice his opponent. The other man goes in for a sword grab and is thus wounded by the sword's sharp edge, this enrages him and makes him charge. This is the most foolish thing you can do in small-sword, as you're completely open for a thrust. And this happens. The scene is beautiful.
I like how this scene is mostly quiet, because real fights are one of those cases when silence is loud.
The bald guy is me when fight a boss in Dark Souls btw this is much more tense than those Hollywood movies
Best and most realistic film ever !
The sound design is what sells this to me. The swords seem to have weigh and actually sound dangerous when they hit each other.
The sound when he tried to grab the sword and got cut was so gross, in a good way
there is no sword design. they did this fight with blunt swords and were trying to hit each other. at the end theres a cut because theyre switching to plastic swords for the stab. thats why you cant see the sword whilst the stab actually happens.
I like the silence. No shouting, no laughing, no puns or similar.