I was so disappointed that they were attempting Gladiator 2. It was a great standalone film and did not need the risk of a sequel tarnishing it. Nor did it really need a sequel. If they were to do it, they should have struck while the iron was hot
Seeing how insane this is reminds me of the quote, "Any hussar who is not dead by the age of thirty is a blackguard." Attributed to General Lasalle who was killed at 34.
@@LoudaroundLincoln Many young men rose to senior command positions during war as such times offer quick promotion to talented and capable men (not only during Napoleonic wars). Look at Bonapartes own carier.
@@erfgtdsfsdf6993 Post-revolutionary France also had gotten rid of the old nobles in the officer class gumming up the works promoting their nephews. They had a lot of opportunities to advance, too, with all the military success they had as a citizen army fighting against frightened peasants.
Hussars were the punks of their era. They were the only soldiers who got away with acting out, being wild and crazy and subordinate. What reads as elegance today would have been understood as extravagance and excentrism in their time. The Hussars were modelled after eastern European cavalry like Hungarians or Kosacks, wich in turn had adopted the culture of horse people like Mongols and Turks. They originated on the eurasian steppe, where strict, western style military discipline couldn't be enforced. Instead, military units acted independently. Bravery and passion was a virtue, and the Hussars were used to carry out extra risky missions. It was a YOLO lifestyle that attracted many young men. The crazy Hussar uniform stems from some nomadic people's custom of always displaying their wealth. If you live a life constantly on the move, you own only what you can carry, and you wear the best that you can at all times. If you look splendid, it means you are the shit. It means you are capable of earning a fortune, -and defending it. In sedentary cultures, excessive spending and display of wealth reads as you are irresponsible with your finances and try to elevate your status above your peers. It is a source of conflict rather than trust.
For people commenting that the woman is Keitels' characters wife - not so. She represents one of the many female baggage train followers who would seek to attach themselves to a Soldier in the hopes of raising their lot in life. Very often these allainces were outside marriage and it was not uncommon for the men to have other women and other affairs. The relationship between Carradines character and the female love interest exemplifies this complex relationship ... only later in life does he marry.
They also served as excellent excuses for plot exposition, as our hero - an officer in the 37th Inniskilling Fusiliers - can take time a moment to explain to the young lady, unschooled in the ways of honor and combat, why the British are about to charge an artillery battery on horseback, a tactic which otherwise might not make sense to the audience.
Somewhere I suspect there's a staff officer with a sense of humour. "Let's send the new boy to apprehend the ape?" "Oh Monsieur, you are too cruel.. " "I do try."
Well that's the trick. All through the story it's clear that D'Hubert is every bit Feraud's equal at fighting. He's just a lot more pragmatic about it. Your point would be correct at Scott's desired casting, Michael York and Oliver Reed.
This film is one of the greatest films ever. The attention to detail is phenomenal. As the film progresses and time passes their uniforms always match the era they are depicting. Keitels character, is absolutely wonderful, he is by our standards indisputably insane but displays that so well, because his insanity is consistent within it's own context, as true insanity should be, it has it's own logic. His companions later in the film show remarkably how co-dependency works. Carradines character is, necessarily, far more bland as he is sane but is dragged into Keitel's world of self centred justification for his actions. A genius piece of cinematography. Watch the full film, but be warned, if you watch it "right" you'll watch it two or three times more.
Always found it fitting that the "sane" character was resolutely the better fighter. Yes, he lost the second rapier duel, but caught off guard in the first and caught on the back foot in the third, he nonetheless either triumphs or fights to a standstill. It's the same logic in combat sports; he who loses composure, loses the duel. Only in the very formal and restrictive rules of a duel could d'Hubert win, which shows what kind of man was the better soldier. By extension, it's also great praise for those of Napoleon's army who fought ingloriously, and won every time.
Yes and no. If you send one man to the arrest and he ends up with a sword in the gut, then you can send the dozen soldiers .. and hang the man. I suspect he wasn't supposed to apprehend him. :) They were at war. In wartime you need people who like the killing.
@@CognizantCheddar He was, I believe, from the ranks and was always being a 'try-hard' to try and make up for it. I've known a few of his kind in my time, they can be absolute nightmares.
@@cgavin1 that sentiment didn’t arise until a century later. Wars in those days were vanity projects of kings and field marshals, where the “civilised” officer class stood above the filth of the enlisted men...
Rather than a madman I think he is pettiness incarnate, if he was mad that would some sort of excuse about his conduct but he does all of this in a sound state of mind, that is a lot worse; great character though, the perfect foil for the likable D'Hubert, it is clear which one of them should gain the sympathy of the viewer but I have never felt this makes either of them simplistic.
D'Hubert is a touch arrogant in his interactions with Feraud. Not that it in any way justifies what D'Hubert suffers, mind you, but it probably didn't help matters.
D'Hubert is clearly a member of the old aristocracy who is cooperating with the new government to preserve their prestige, that's why Feraud despises him. Unlike D'Hubert, Feraud is clearly a self-made man from the lower classes who was raised to his position because of the new government. You can clearly see it near the last duel. After the restoration of the old monarchy, D'Hubert still remains a nobleman, and Feraud becomes a commoner again.
If he knew how much that little pain in the arse was going to haunt him, Carradines character should have killed both Kietel and his strumpet at the first duel. Love this movie BTW. Underrated classic.
Just imagine how many hundreds of men this man has tortured and killed by twisting situations into a duel to the death. It’s frightening. People like this ran rampant throughout the time. They tended to be absolute perfectionists in the art of killing and were matched by none. This both frustrated them and engaged them in more and more duels to satisfy their thirst for death. This gentlemen, is psychopathy.
Challenging people to duels, preferably overmatched people, was indeed a form of bullying at this time. The British general Isaac Brock, later a general with a distinguished career in Canada, was challenged by one of these characters to a duel with pistols. The other man was a good shot. But as the challenged party Brock could specify the distance and he said "handkerchief distance". Point-blank range. At that distance one or even both would almost certainly be shot, and Brock's challenger backed down and soon after left the regiment.
@@stevekaczynski3793 1000%%% General Brock chose the rules in order to intimidate the attacker, you Duel to win, he understood his challenger, GENIUS Dueling was used in a abusive manner, lets say I challenge someone to a duel over a woman, this guy stands no chance etc...... It was cherrypicked by assholes to bully people Great story appreciate it
This story comes from a book, itself coming from a real crazy story: The man was FOURNIER SARLOVEZE and his incredible life as a hussard through the Napoleonic era could make a serie with many seasons!
A Ridley Scott classic,a beautiful film,that really brings alive the Napoleonic era,the beautiful uniforms ,and it has Great combat scenes..I NEVER liked to to be disturbed when I’m watching it,phone off,and bask in the Glory of this film..
The part about Feraud being a "mad man" is most definitely true in more ways than one, I heard that his real historical counterpart would deliberately upset and offend his colleagues just so he could fight them! On top of that, he certainly wasn't known for his loyalty to Napoleon Bonaparte as the two were constantly getting into arguments over various matters, once, the Emperor got so disgusted with his insubordination towards him he had him arrested and sent to prison for a time!
@@edgaraquino2324 Totally, so nuts that the two officers' feud lasted for some years, the wacko just couldn't stay away and let the other man have peace.
@sethguest781 - He was mad, mad at the system. Ferrau was proabably from a much lower economic status that Dubert maybe even poor. He would have to fight all his life and struggle to move up and be recognized. Maybe fight to get into the service, definately fight to get into the calvary and be an officer. Then fighting the enemies of France, or the internal "snot nosed rich boys" that got promotions, the best calvary and cushy assginments like Dubert, fighting to be recognized in the social circles even if he did't understand it, or competing against other men in his regiment to be recongized and move up or even fighting agaist the cold of a russian retreat. His issue is that he couldn't or would not turn it off. It may have even been impossibe at a certain point in his life.Thats probably why he got himself on the executioners list...fighting to stay relevant. Napolean would have just been a good excuse as any. Though to be fair in the end what did he have? No family, no prospects, just a dead-end life drinking wine with aging war buddies, and collecting a meager pension under police survelliece till he died. That is why he started that last duel...finnaly he had something he could fight even if it was just to start some shit. Dubert had his family, money, rich estate, and got to marry a hottie from a good family
@@rongorden3985 Understandable, but no matter how mad one was at the "system", given how Napoleon was, it was important to stay in his good graces and pray that he didn't have you executed just because he felt you turned your back on him, but I suppose that Ferraud got off easy with a prison sentence possibly because of how fond Napoleon was of his soldiers since he was a grunt himself once and understood the man's frustration.
It's noted that both of these men gained renown from their duel's, it did their careers no harm. And this was a era where the sabre was the killing weapon, demostrating proficiency with that weapon or any other weapon, did you no harm whatsoever. War is about killing and these were killer's.
Harvey's character is like someone i knew at work. Man if you just looked at him, in what he thought was the wrong way, he would be ready to confront and fight you. One paranoid arsehole.
I really enjoyed it--watched it for the first time a couple of days ago. I read that the real duelists were cordial towards each other when not dueling and actually would go to dinner together, etc. I wish they would have put piece of duality in the film.
The tall palmtree (Trachycarpus Fortunei) standing in front of the farmhouse is a glaring anachronism: the specimen you see is at least 30 years old but the specie was brought to Europe from Japan only in 1830 ...... 🙂
I watched this film with my girlfriend when we were starting out our relationship, she wanted to watch Barbie Fairytopia (childhood favourite of hers). We decided it on rock paper scissors, and she was dismayed at first that she had to watch a film about napoleonic era french officers trying to kill one another. She loved the film though, really goes to show how much of a beautiful piece of art this is that even if you have zero interest in the source material, you can still thoroughly enjoy it. I think it did help that she kept making "they should just fuck already" jokes about their relationship.
@@redhussar1436 lol not even close, just stop with the hatful nonsense as basically ALL of Ridley Scott’s movies looks fantastic and beautiful to see. Nowhere near “tHe pErFEcT oPpOsiTE oF aLl wHat yOu clAIm iT iS” lol NOT even close. You have a problem with the script, NOT the masterfully directed movie that it was!
@@Gadget-Walkmen you do realize putting some words in caps, putting the other sides areguments in quotation marks and saying something the opposite of what the other is saying, doesnt actually make your opinions into facts, right?
@@redhussar1436 You do realize, NOTHING that which you're saying is true at all. I'm mocking and breaking down the nonsense that which you're saying, it doesn't make what I say into facts, it highlights just how wrong what you're saying actually is.
No, because neither side agreed to submit. The man who "lost" can easily say the "duel" was "interrupted" by the woman, and so they have to settle things later.
There was no winner here; the law had banned duelling for the better part of two centuries in the kingdom/country so only custom and peer / social pressure regulated the proper procedure of a duel, with no law and no (competent) third party involved here given the rushed nature of the encounter only them, D'Hubert and Ferraud, could decide if the matter was closed. Ferraud did not surrender so was free to pursue this petty rivalry another day and D'Hubert had no resource to declare the matter settled here regardless of who had the advantage when they were interrupted.
@@TheChuckfuc I read it was more like 30 duels. It's true that the real person d'Hubert is based on was happy to continue dueling the person Feraud is based on, right up until the former got married -- only at that point did he finally want it to stop.
While these are (obviously) actors, they are portraying French Hussars and fighting with sabre's was, at least initially, their bread and butter. The sword was designed to be primarily used from horseback against enemies on foot.
You got to love their dumbassery that is Keitel’s character. He is under arrest for dueling and he decides to double down by forcing another duel with the person arresting him. One has to wonder what was his logic and more importantly: what was his plan if he had killed Carradine’s character? It goes to show how much of a sociopath the guy was.
At that time Oscars did mean something aside from social justice and insertion, but this was clearly a low-ish budget, smaller scale film. The 1977 Oscar went to Rocky, which is understandable in comparison between the two (although All the president's men were better lol)
An exquisitely filmed under appreciated mini masterpiece, unkindly described at the time as 'offcuts from Kubrick's Barry Lyndon'. Obviously it had a good script-having been adapted from a Joseph Conrad novella. Ridley's first 3 movies all had literate scripts-something which went AWOL in most of his later movies where he went for superficial, noisy filmic bombast over substance.
Just imagine what this movie would be like had Scott got his first choice of casting, Michael York for d'Hubert and Oliver Reed for Feraud. But the American backers insist on American cast for the lead, and while they're wonder, I would really like to see that original choice.
That could have been a great pairing between two fine actors but it would have been just three years after they were together in the Four Musketeers where the relationship had a student/mentor dynamic which risked confusing audiences - something I think the underwriters probably considered, plus Reed was already then known as a production risk. I also think Michael York was probably unavailable as he did two movies and a television series in 1976 and another two films in 1977. But, I think you're right about the backers wanting American leads.
It wasn't his wife, more likely his mistress, and it would probably just enrage Feraud further. In fact he probably thought that the woman's intervention saved D'Hubert, not him. Feraud has that kind of personality.
Mistress in the book, and the entire duel was much more humorous, including said mistress defacing D'Hubert with her nails and Feraud lying peacefully on the ground with D'Hubert trying to find him a doctor
That guy wanted "beef" no matter what, BUT....I would not have tried to arrest him at a whorehouse. More prudent to wait until he came back. But honestly, some guys just want beef with everyone and you ultimately will have to fight one.
I like that at first the madman got the upperhand over the young and less experienced D'Hubert, but once he threw him into a dark corner, D'Hubert use the darkness to his advantage
@@toddjohnson271 lol just stop. Star Wars and Alien are NOTHING alike as sci-fi stories in the slightest. They can't be compared as they're NOTHING alike except having ships in space but even THAT isn't very comparable as HOW their ships operate is entirely different. NOR is alien better than star wars AT ALL. Not even close. And I love Alien and I'm an alien fan of the series but it's really NOT better than star wars or it's film series at all.
You can already see the advanced filmmaking going on here. This film looks like it was made in the 80's. Just like Alien looks like it was made in the 90's
*_{Alternate cut}_* Feraud: "Draw your sword." Armand: [Throws hat at him.] Armand: [Draws sword while he's fumbling with the hat, and points it at him.] Armand: "Hands up!"
I can't get over how subtle and tasteful and wonderfully specific this movie is
It's timeless.
@@frostyrobot7689The exquisite costumes really give one a feeling for the period… dude with the shiniest helmet and prettiest feathers wins.😂
it's certainly one of the best directorial debuts IMO.
Jep, Ten times better than the trash he puts out now.
damn, that woman tackled him so hard he turned into a pear
genius
Aaaaaa...that's what they mean when they say: "things went pear-shaped!"
That sounds fruitty and gey
Lmao
*A-pear-ently.*
"you are under arrest for duelling"
"DUEL ME"
Yeah there is a pattern forming. I see it now.
Napoleon banned duelling because he was losing his best commanders..
@@peterroberts7684 Even then it wasn't properly enforced.
@@peterroberts7684 yea. Imma need you both to keep talking.
Sounds like worst commanders
Incredible to think that the man who made this masterpiece also made the ahistorical trash heap that is Napoleon (2023).
dementia
Gladiator 2 is gonna suck so bad
I was so disappointed that they were attempting Gladiator 2. It was a great standalone film and did not need the risk of a sequel tarnishing it. Nor did it really need a sequel. If they were to do it, they should have struck while the iron was hot
You guys could suck ass all the time. Fuck you all! BASTARDS!!
You could all go to hell, this man is a genius!
Always loved the fearlessness in his voice “you will chase me no where.”
that was uttered in an unsure voice....
@@cheeseandonions9558 No. It wasn't.
@@cheeseandonions9558 i think you wrong you ape
@@cheeseandonions9558 Who ends up in a pool of his own blood only saved by a harlot?
Well, it would be social death for D'Hubert to let someone like Feraud bully him, so he stands up to him.
"What if I just, duel the police?"
"Hmm. That might work, that might work."
Seeing how insane this is reminds me of the quote, "Any hussar who is not dead by the age of thirty is a blackguard." Attributed to General Lasalle who was killed at 34.
A 34 year old General? Must of been a talented soldier or in a regiment with a high possibility of promotion.
@@LoudaroundLincoln Many young men rose to senior command positions during war as such times offer quick promotion to talented and capable men (not only during Napoleonic wars). Look at Bonapartes own carier.
@@erfgtdsfsdf6993 Post-revolutionary France also had gotten rid of the old nobles in the officer class gumming up the works promoting their nephews. They had a lot of opportunities to advance, too, with all the military success they had as a citizen army fighting against frightened peasants.
Appropriate since Feraud is supposed to serve in the 7th Hussars, who were part of Lasalle's famous "Brigade Infernale."
@@LoudaroundLincoln he was extremly talented. And his senior officers died young.
"You got a duel addiction!"
"I will handle this ... WITH A DUEL!"
There is something incredibly fascinating about the combination of sophistication and elegance and brutal violence
Hussars were the punks of their era. They were the only soldiers who got away with acting out, being wild and crazy and subordinate.
What reads as elegance today would have been understood as extravagance and excentrism in their time.
The Hussars were modelled after eastern European cavalry like Hungarians or Kosacks, wich in turn had adopted the culture of horse people like Mongols and Turks. They originated on the eurasian steppe, where strict, western style military discipline couldn't be enforced. Instead, military units acted independently. Bravery and passion was a virtue, and the Hussars were used to carry out extra risky missions. It was a YOLO lifestyle that attracted many young men.
The crazy Hussar uniform stems from some nomadic people's custom of always displaying their wealth. If you live a life constantly on the move, you own only what you can carry, and you wear the best that you can at all times.
If you look splendid, it means you are the shit. It means you are capable of earning a fortune, -and defending it.
In sedentary cultures, excessive spending and display of wealth reads as you are irresponsible with your finances and try to elevate your status above your peers. It is a source of conflict rather than trust.
For people commenting that the woman is Keitels' characters wife - not so. She represents one of the many female baggage train followers who would seek to attach themselves to a Soldier in the hopes of raising their lot in life. Very often these allainces were outside marriage and it was not uncommon for the men to have other women and other affairs. The relationship between Carradines character and the female love interest exemplifies this complex relationship ... only later in life does he marry.
You're damn shakespearean
They also served as excellent excuses for plot exposition, as our hero - an officer in the 37th Inniskilling Fusiliers - can take time a moment to explain to the young lady, unschooled in the ways of honor and combat, why the British are about to charge an artillery battery on horseback, a tactic which otherwise might not make sense to the audience.
Basically groupies
That very mindset is still alive and well in todays day and age and brings the term “you had me at Tricare” to mind
Soooooo a hoe
Somewhere I suspect there's a staff officer with a sense of humour.
"Let's send the new boy to apprehend the ape?"
"Oh Monsieur, you are too cruel.. "
"I do try."
🍷😆😆 Considerably!
Well that's the trick. All through the story it's clear that D'Hubert is every bit Feraud's equal at fighting. He's just a lot more pragmatic about it. Your point would be correct at Scott's desired casting, Michael York and Oliver Reed.
@@steveparadis2978 hes his equal because they both flail around like morons. this movie has the worst sword fights ive ever seen.
This film is one of the greatest films ever.
The attention to detail is phenomenal.
As the film progresses and time passes their uniforms always match the era they are depicting.
Keitels character, is absolutely wonderful, he is by our standards indisputably insane but displays that so well, because his insanity is consistent within it's own context, as true insanity should be, it has it's own logic. His companions later in the film show remarkably how co-dependency works.
Carradines character is, necessarily, far more bland as he is sane but is dragged into Keitel's world of self centred justification for his actions.
A genius piece of cinematography.
Watch the full film, but be warned, if you watch it "right" you'll watch it two or three times more.
The 2nd duel had a crazy glove though. And they swished rapiers.
i wonder what is considered sane today that will be considered insane, sane and insane definitions change with the times.
Как бы эти черти рубились с Баклановым? Никак, он бы их пошинковал.
Umm the accents are wayyyy off buddy
Always found it fitting that the "sane" character was resolutely the better fighter. Yes, he lost the second rapier duel, but caught off guard in the first and caught on the back foot in the third, he nonetheless either triumphs or fights to a standstill. It's the same logic in combat sports; he who loses composure, loses the duel. Only in the very formal and restrictive rules of a duel could d'Hubert win, which shows what kind of man was the better soldier. By extension, it's also great praise for those of Napoleon's army who fought ingloriously, and won every time.
That was incredibly stupid from generals side to send a single man to arrest a duelist in stead of a dozen soldiers.
Yes and no. If you send one man to the arrest and he ends up with a sword in the gut, then you can send the dozen soldiers .. and hang the man.
I suspect he wasn't supposed to apprehend him. :) They were at war. In wartime you need people who like the killing.
Hussars were recruited from the aristocracy, and thus they were expected to behave like gentlemen. Feraud here is an anomoly.
@@CognizantCheddar He was, I believe, from the ranks and was always being a 'try-hard' to try and make up for it. I've known a few of his kind in my time, they can be absolute nightmares.
@@cgavin1 that sentiment didn’t arise until a century later. Wars in those days were vanity projects of kings and field marshals, where the “civilised” officer class stood above the filth of the enlisted men...
@@M1tjakaramazov An astute and piquant comment. I salute you, sir!
I still find it hard to believe the same man who made Prometheus and Covenent directed this masterpiece.
Bladerunner is awesome
The same man who directed this, directed Napoleon 2023
@@manuelpanisse5991 yep
LoL, I actually really liked Prometheus and I absolutely loved covenant. Watch both at the cinema.
@@DougMickeyI'll back you up on Prometheus but I just can't defend Covenant, you're on your own there buddy.
Ridley Scott's greatest film, no question.
D'Hubert (Keith Carradine) is such a decent human being while Harvey Keitel's character is an utter madman.
Rather than a madman I think he is pettiness incarnate, if he was mad that would some sort of excuse about his conduct but he does all of this in a sound state of mind, that is a lot worse; great character though, the perfect foil for the likable D'Hubert, it is clear which one of them should gain the sympathy of the viewer but I have never felt this makes either of them simplistic.
carradine is joel kinnamans real dad. the resemblance is spot on.
D'Hubert is a touch arrogant in his interactions with Feraud. Not that it in any way justifies what D'Hubert suffers, mind you, but it probably didn't help matters.
@@orboobleck5366 I found neither character likeable. It did not detract from the film.
D'Hubert is clearly a member of the old aristocracy who is cooperating with the new government to preserve their prestige, that's why Feraud despises him. Unlike D'Hubert, Feraud is clearly a self-made man from the lower classes who was raised to his position because of the new government. You can clearly see it near the last duel. After the restoration of the old monarchy, D'Hubert still remains a nobleman, and Feraud becomes a commoner again.
ridley and the actors, this team is a gift from heaven
If he knew how much that little pain in the arse was going to haunt him, Carradines character should have killed both Kietel and his strumpet at the first duel. Love this movie BTW. Underrated classic.
He was trying.
Why would he murder Keitel's mistress??
Strumpet 😂
@@legion999Self defence is bot murder.
@@legion999because she interfered in the first duel?
Just imagine how many hundreds of men this man has tortured and killed by twisting situations into a duel to the death.
It’s frightening. People like this ran rampant throughout the time. They tended to be absolute perfectionists in the art of killing and were matched by none. This both frustrated them and engaged them in more and more duels to satisfy their thirst for death.
This gentlemen, is psychopathy.
Simply fix, ambush him.
Challenging people to duels, preferably overmatched people, was indeed a form of bullying at this time. The British general Isaac Brock, later a general with a distinguished career in Canada, was challenged by one of these characters to a duel with pistols. The other man was a good shot. But as the challenged party Brock could specify the distance and he said "handkerchief distance". Point-blank range. At that distance one or even both would almost certainly be shot, and Brock's challenger backed down and soon after left the regiment.
@@stevekaczynski3793 1000%%%
General Brock chose the rules in order to intimidate the attacker, you Duel to win, he understood his challenger, GENIUS
Dueling was used in a abusive manner, lets say I challenge someone to a duel over a woman, this guy stands no chance etc......
It was cherrypicked by assholes to bully people
Great story appreciate it
The weak should fear the strong.
Duelling was hardly bullying, you're a modern and have no idea what you're talking about
This is such a great film. I can watch it over and over.
I watched it for the first time the other night and keep coming back to these short clips. I will watch it again--I can assure you.
This story comes from a book, itself coming from a real crazy story: The man was FOURNIER SARLOVEZE and his incredible life as a hussard through the Napoleonic era could make a serie with many seasons!
Was he a prick in real life too?
From what i learn from Flashman, hussars tend to be pretentious pricks
A Ridley Scott classic,a beautiful film,that really brings alive the Napoleonic era,the beautiful uniforms ,and it has Great combat scenes..I NEVER liked to to be disturbed when I’m watching it,phone off,and bask in the Glory of this film..
The part about Feraud being a "mad man" is most definitely true in more ways than one, I heard that his real historical counterpart would deliberately upset and offend his colleagues just so he could fight them! On top of that, he certainly wasn't known for his loyalty to Napoleon Bonaparte as the two were constantly getting into arguments over various matters, once, the Emperor got so disgusted with his insubordination towards him he had him arrested and sent to prison for a time!
Yes, Feraud was a psychopath...totally obsessed & completely bonkers...as was his "real historical counterpart"...
@@edgaraquino2324 Totally, so nuts that the two officers' feud lasted for some years, the wacko just couldn't stay away and let the other man have peace.
@sethguest781 - He was mad, mad at the system. Ferrau was proabably from a much lower economic status that Dubert maybe even poor. He would have to fight all his life and struggle to move up and be recognized. Maybe fight to get into the service, definately fight to get into the calvary and be an officer. Then fighting the enemies of France, or the internal "snot nosed rich boys" that got promotions, the best calvary and cushy assginments like Dubert, fighting to be recognized in the social circles even if he did't understand it, or competing against other men in his regiment to be recongized and move up or even fighting agaist the cold of a russian retreat. His issue is that he couldn't or would not turn it off. It may have even been impossibe at a certain point in his life.Thats probably why he got himself on the executioners list...fighting to stay relevant. Napolean would have just been a good excuse as any.
Though to be fair in the end what did he have? No family, no prospects, just a dead-end life drinking wine with aging war buddies, and collecting a meager pension under police survelliece till he died. That is why he started that last duel...finnaly he had something he could fight even if it was just to start some shit. Dubert had his family, money, rich estate, and got to marry a hottie from a good family
@@rongorden3985 Understandable, but no matter how mad one was at the "system", given how Napoleon was, it was important to stay in his good graces and pray that he didn't have you executed just because he felt you turned your back on him, but I suppose that Ferraud got off easy with a prison sentence possibly because of how fond Napoleon was of his soldiers since he was a grunt himself once and understood the man's frustration.
Scott’s first and best movie
It's noted that both of these men gained renown from their duel's, it did their careers no harm. And this was a era where the sabre was the killing weapon, demostrating proficiency with that weapon or any other weapon, did you no harm whatsoever. War is about killing and these were killer's.
Absolutely fantastic film !!
Harvey's character is like someone i knew at work. Man if you just looked at him, in what he thought was the wrong way, he would be ready to confront and fight you. One paranoid arsehole.
Yes it's paranoidism but they (paranoids) are interesting in général if we understand them like a surgeon who study a frog.
he might ask you for a duel one day
Still my favourite R Scott film.
Just superb!
I really enjoyed it--watched it for the first time a couple of days ago. I read that the real duelists were cordial towards each other when not dueling and actually would go to dinner together, etc. I wish they would have put piece of duality in the film.
me too!
The tall palmtree (Trachycarpus Fortunei) standing in front of the farmhouse is a glaring anachronism: the specimen you see is at least 30 years old but the specie was brought to Europe from Japan only in 1830 ...... 🙂
Oh the horror
Nerd.
Get over yourself.
yup, it is glaring as hell :D
2:54 Too bad he couldn't finish Gabriel Féraud at this point. Féraud was ashamed to be saved by his mistress, and compensated for 15 years.
I appreciate how they run the gamut from calvary sabers to pistols. the fourth duel is of itself a masterpiece
He should have never made that "pistols next time" comment, cant imagine a more scary experience.
I've been walking around my house telling my wife she has INSULTED ME for the past week. Forgot about this classic.
Just don't go all the way and challenge her to a duel. We saw how it turned out between D'Hubert vs Kietel's woman lol.
that's crazy how keith carradine look like joel kinnaman when he was young !
Thought the same thing
i was thinking kinnaman was aging really well
thats his real dad for sure
Hivemind
Had the exact same thought
"You are under arrest-"
"We fight NOW."
"-for DUELING, you ape!"
Favorite delivery right here. David Carridine sounds SO done with Kietel lmao
I loved this film from the first time I viewed it!
I watched this film with my girlfriend when we were starting out our relationship, she wanted to watch Barbie Fairytopia (childhood favourite of hers). We decided it on rock paper scissors, and she was dismayed at first that she had to watch a film about napoleonic era french officers trying to kill one another.
She loved the film though, really goes to show how much of a beautiful piece of art this is that even if you have zero interest in the source material, you can still thoroughly enjoy it. I think it did help that she kept making "they should just fuck already" jokes about their relationship.
Back when Riddley didnt think that making a historically accurate movie would make it boring
MASSIVELY disagree, the new Napoleon movie had issue but it was FAR from "bORIng" AT ALL as it was a masterfully directed movie and beautifully made!
@@Gadget-Walkmen it was the perfect opposite of all what you claim it was.
@@redhussar1436 lol not even close, just stop with the hatful nonsense as basically ALL of Ridley Scott’s movies looks fantastic and beautiful to see. Nowhere near “tHe pErFEcT oPpOsiTE oF aLl wHat yOu clAIm iT iS” lol NOT even close. You have a problem with the script, NOT the masterfully directed movie that it was!
@@Gadget-Walkmen you do realize putting some words in caps, putting the other sides areguments in quotation marks and saying something the opposite of what the other is saying, doesnt actually make your opinions into facts, right?
@@redhussar1436 You do realize, NOTHING that which you're saying is true at all. I'm mocking and breaking down the nonsense that which you're saying, it doesn't make what I say into facts, it highlights just how wrong what you're saying actually is.
Cadenettes were used to protect their necks from sword blows. Sometimes a stick was used inside the braids to protect further more.
Where did you read that?
Seems a little implausible. Especially since I've never heard that anywhere.
Google “Cadenettes” and read away...
Wow cool fact of the day, thanks mate.
I wouldn't think that, but it's a neat fact I did not know!
Should have run harvey through when you had the chance
"Your a madman sir"
"1v1 me then ya noob ill rek you!!"
After he won this first duel, shouldn’t that have been the end of it? Wouldn’t it be dishonorable to fight a second time after losing once already
No, because neither side agreed to submit. The man who "lost" can easily say the "duel" was "interrupted" by the woman, and so they have to settle things later.
If you look up the true story of what happened it makes more sense. They fought in 20 duels and both were quite happy to do so.
There was no winner here; the law had banned duelling for the better part of two centuries in the kingdom/country so only custom and peer / social pressure regulated the proper procedure of a duel, with no law and no (competent) third party involved here given the rushed nature of the encounter only them, D'Hubert and Ferraud, could decide if the matter was closed. Ferraud did not surrender so was free to pursue this petty rivalry another day and D'Hubert had no resource to declare the matter settled here regardless of who had the advantage when they were interrupted.
@@TheChuckfuc I read it was more like 30 duels.
It's true that the real person d'Hubert is based on was happy to continue dueling the person Feraud is based on, right up until the former got married -- only at that point did he finally want it to stop.
Keitel must be a remainer.
I'm amazed that this was Ridley Scott's directorial debut.
A few minutes can alter an entire lifetime❤
While these are (obviously) actors, they are portraying French Hussars and fighting with sabre's was, at least initially, their bread and butter.
The sword was designed to be primarily used from horseback against enemies on foot.
That’s the woman from Barry Lyndon...thought I recognised her.
You got to love their dumbassery that is Keitel’s character. He is under arrest for dueling and he decides to double down by forcing another duel with the person arresting him. One has to wonder what was his logic and more importantly: what was his plan if he had killed Carradine’s character? It goes to show how much of a sociopath the guy was.
この映画で ハーベイ カイテル のファンになりました。 彼の演技に対する真剣さ 上手さ なんとも言えない魅力に魅せられました。
Well.. I saw this movie about a month ago and it is _great_. More please.
amazing movie! its duel masterpiece! idk why i only now see this movie and why this masterpiece not have oscar in 77 ? why? its masterpiece...
andriyko oscars don't mean anything.
I don’t remember movies that get oscars unless I wanted them to
Who beat this movie for the oscar and were people in disagreement?
At that time Oscars did mean something aside from social justice and insertion, but this was clearly a low-ish budget, smaller scale film. The 1977 Oscar went to Rocky, which is understandable in comparison between the two (although All the president's men were better lol)
This entire film is the very definition of sublime.
Un film meraviglioso, affascinante pieno di risvolti psicologici un capolavoro.
An exquisitely filmed under appreciated mini masterpiece, unkindly described at the time as 'offcuts from Kubrick's Barry Lyndon'. Obviously it had a good script-having been adapted from a Joseph Conrad novella. Ridley's first 3 movies all had literate scripts-something which went AWOL in most of his later movies where he went for superficial, noisy filmic bombast over substance.
Agree, a masterpiece on a smaller scale, and this was his first!
2:13 such a cool stance
He binged it when he said that he "was really quite mad". Jeez, the guy was just looking for a reason. Kind of like driving on the roads these days.
There's always that one guy who always wants "beef" with people. They have inner demons and sometimes you gotta fight'em whether you want to or not.
That flute at the end was just.......perfect
Just imagine what this movie would be like had Scott got his first choice of casting, Michael York for d'Hubert and Oliver Reed for Feraud. But the American backers insist on American cast for the lead, and while they're wonder, I would really like to see that original choice.
That could have been a great pairing between two fine actors but it would have been just three years after they were together in the Four Musketeers where the relationship had a student/mentor dynamic which risked confusing audiences - something I think the underwriters probably considered, plus Reed was already then known as a production risk. I also think Michael York was probably unavailable as he did two movies and a television series in 1976 and another two films in 1977. But, I think you're right about the backers wanting American leads.
What I love about this movie is how much of a dick Keitell's character is throughout it and how it propels the plot forward.
Love the sounds that the sabres make....not the tinny sounds like the 1950s movies.
The character played by Harvey Keitel is a complete psychopath. An absolute nutcase.
Just a duel hungry cocky officer, he wasn't deranged or a sociopath
@williet.3058 Explaining his motive does not justify his nutty behaviour.
You’d think the shame of having his wife interfere and save him would have settled the matter.
It wasn't his wife, more likely his mistress, and it would probably just enrage Feraud further. In fact he probably thought that the woman's intervention saved D'Hubert, not him. Feraud has that kind of personality.
Mistress in the book, and the entire duel was much more humorous, including said mistress defacing D'Hubert with her nails and Feraud lying peacefully on the ground with D'Hubert trying to find him a doctor
Mad lads dueling with cavalry sabers.
The sabers were clashing so hard, truly scary. These hussars are not joking.
Keitel's Brooklyn accent only adds to this film's already amazing authenticity.
If I'm being curt with you, it is only because time is of the essence....so pretty please, with sugar ontop.
it works, that's all that matters.
@@plasticweapon If you say so, Harvey.
@@ScotchIrishTarheel my name is josh.
@@plasticweapon Harvey Josh Keitel? Or Josh Harvey Keitel?
I love this senseless combat. YOU'VE INSULTED ME!!
You fight NOW
d'Hubert should've said "cope".
@@whosaidiwantedahandle indeed
A masterpiece
Always loved this movie
It would seem Sebastian's apartment in Blade Runner is as much a homage to The Duelists as it was to Barry Lyndon.
It's one of Conrad's best but most miss the meta - the inner spiritual duel - the greatest battle - and just as deadly.
The summary of this film:
FIGHT ME!!!
I’d rather not....
FIGHT ME!!!!!
So be it then......
So, this is how it is to be a hummingbird in spring?
I watched so many scenes since I’m into fencing and classics I think I must watch the full movie
dang these 1v1s are crazy back then
0:31 Never noticed the food and bottle hung up to stop the rodents from getting it.
How come women even random ones in the 70's are just more attractive than any modern ones...
Guys what the heck is going on ?!!!!
That guy's great great grandson works for Marcellus Wallace.
That Ridley Scott should make more films.
Yeah, I think a film about aliens or gladiators might work.
Anytime. Anywhere. You can even name the weapon. I am proficient in all. Equally.
This is why arrest should be performed by a group of guards with proper weaponry. To avoid unexpected incidents.
That guy wanted "beef" no matter what, BUT....I would not have tried to arrest him at a whorehouse. More prudent to wait until he came back. But honestly, some guys just want beef with everyone and you ultimately will have to fight one.
@@juniorjames7076 I bet he wouldn't "beef" against four rifles with bayonets. But if he tried - it would be fun.
Brutal duels! Hacking away at each other with giant cleavers! Amazing film
I saw this first run film in our local theater just I studied Olympic saber fencing. Cool.
Exquisite "nature morte" at 3:01
Still life, stilleben👍
Great editing
Every shot is an oil painting.
I like that at first the madman got the upperhand over the young and less experienced D'Hubert, but once he threw him into a dark corner, D'Hubert use the darkness to his advantage
I'm shocked that Ridley Scott didn't directed a Star Wars movie before. I'm sure he would have been fantastic at it!
He did......and better. It was called Alien
@@toddjohnson271 lol just stop. Star Wars and Alien are NOTHING alike as sci-fi stories in the slightest. They can't be compared as they're NOTHING alike except having ships in space but even THAT isn't very comparable as HOW their ships operate is entirely different. NOR is alien better than star wars AT ALL. Not even close. And I love Alien and I'm an alien fan of the series but it's really NOT better than star wars or it's film series at all.
The real guys this is based on were even crazier
Great movie like a lost treasure.
The name is Cadenettes in French, even for men in the French hussards or Grenadiers.
I really must watch this movie.
CREDITS:
TM & ©️ Paramount (1977)
Cast:
Screenwriter: Gerald Vaughan-Hughes
Director: Ridley Scott
1:17 notice the slight change in facial expression of Keitel's character... Yep, he's a psychopath and he knows it.
I like their Jedi braids
You can already see the advanced filmmaking going on here. This film looks like it was made in the 80's. Just like Alien looks like it was made in the 90's
Hellish quart brought me here
Full plate armor and maces that’s my kind of dule
Wut? Why did that woman interfere? DUEL HER!
Unless I am mistaken, Carradine is wearing 3rd Hussars uniform and Keitel 7th Hussars.
Touchez pas au grisbi
@@cheeseandonions9558 right
wonderful movie
Keitel was so damned young here.
*_{Alternate cut}_*
Feraud: "Draw your sword."
Armand: [Throws hat at him.]
Armand: [Draws sword while he's fumbling with the hat, and points it at him.]
Armand: "Hands up!"
Gotta watch out for that handle guard move!