User Reviews

For the past 2 decades Ridley Scott has been very hit or miss for me. My expectations have therefore become modest, but "The Last Duel" was a welcoming surprise.

I think the choice of using a "Rashamon-ish" narrative was a refreshing way to tell this story. Furthermore, I want to give praise to the editor Claire Simpson, who I will argue made the right choice to trim the scenes that are repeated - reducing the runtime to 155 minutes (which I find to be a long but fitting runtime for this story). I find it very fitting that the individual story lines end at the trial where people disagree on what is true while the audience (to some degree) knows.

Despite being refreshingly different and throughly entertaining, there were a few elements that took me out of the film. Firstly, the story is set in France but is told in English. If the names of people and places had been changed this would not had bothered me at all. Secondly, I found the make-up/costumes peculiar in many instances (especially Ben Affleck) while the actors were still very easy to recognize. If this was fantasy, I wouldn't have an issue with this. But since this is based on an actual event I would have preferred to see less eye-catching make-up/costumes.

For the 2022 Oscar's I am surprised there was much more campaign for Ridley Scott's other film "House of Gucci" (which I would rate as "Meh") instead of "The Last Duel", which I liked and would happily see a second time.

This is a story of the same events told through different viewpoints. And with each viewpoint, you're going to notice major differences, as well as subtle ones.

It's a perfect example of how unreliable people are when they tell their side of the story. How people both intentionally and unintentionally choose to change and omit important parts of it. How everyone remembers things differently.

Two things stand out in this period movie based on actual events. First, there was a time a medieval history when rape was not considered a crime against woman, but rather a crime against man as a violation of property rights! Second, the duel was not a contest of fighting skill but a process of trial and judgment. Upon losing, the loser's status changed devastatingly, from a knight and fighter to a detested criminal condemned by God, stripped naked, dragged behind a horse on the dirt, and finally hung up-side-down for display.

While the narrative borrows from Rashomon and the plotline of both include an alleged rape, "The last duel" is no "Rashomon". The events narrated by the three parties in TLD are far less conflicting than that in Rashomon. They differ not so much in details as in perception, whether it was rape, a charge brought in front of the King of France, or merely "adultery" as the accused claimed. Let me back up a little.

While both Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) and Jacques Le Gris (Adam Driver) were esquire to liege lord Pierre d'Alencon (Ben Afflect), their fortune were markedly different. Le Gris, slick and manipulating, was the clear favourite. Carrouges, unrefined and headstrong, was nobody's favourite, as well as "broke" and "need money" as he declared himself. While they started out as friends, with Carrouges saving Le Gris's life at the Battle of Limoges, relationship between the two deteriorated continuously, culminating in the Carrouges charging Le Gris of raping his wife Marguerite (Jodie Comer) while he was away. As always, the verdict boils down to whether there was consent. As no conclusive evidence emerged, an all but obsolete (but still in effect) law was evoked, duel in combat, for God to render judgment. The depiction of the movie, through the Rashomon mode as mentioned, quite clearly suggests that this was rape.

As easily surmised, this movie is dialogue-heavy. However, with credentials like "The Gladiator", Ridley Scott did not disappoint with the climactic, long duel finale. Acting, still, is the stuff this movie is made of. Affleck is miscast and wasted. Damon is solid and Driver continues to showcase his versatility and talent. It is Comer, however, who really shines. Elevated to wide recognition by "Killing Eve" and confirmed by "Free Guy", Comer is on her way to stardom.

***This review will contain details about this movie that some may consider spoilers. I've tried to keep them as brief and non-specific as possible.***

Usually after I've watched a movie for the first time, I can say definitively whether I liked it or not. The Last Duel is a rare exception whereby I couldn't (and to some degree still can't) decide how I feel about it, so I remain somewhat neutral. I don't hate the movie, but I don't absolutely love it either.

Nevertheless, I would still recommend giving it a watch simply because it's an interesting story in which the subject matter remains hugely relevant in modern times. It is also visually stunning (with the exception of Matt Damon's mullet) and the cinematography is breathtaking.

With that said, I will break down what I liked about this film and what I did not. Keep in mind, these are just my own thoughts and preferences that affect my personal enjoyment and appreciation of a film. I'll start with what I didn't like first so that I can end this review on a more positive note.

The first thing I found off-putting about the movie was that Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, and Adam Driver were in it. Not because they are bad actors (they are certainly not), but because casting American A-list actors in a period film ruins the immersion for me. Remember the time Game of Thrones gave Ed Sheeran a cameo appearance? It caused an immersion outrage! That's sort of what I experienced with the Last Duel. Instead of focusing on the story, I became fixated on judging the quality of Damon's, Affleck's, and Driver's British Accents.

To be fair, I do this with EVERY actor who modifies their regular accent for a film role. If it's less than perfect (which it often is) I find it to be a distraction. Christian Bale is one of the few actors that I feel does accents perfectly. Matt Damon's British accent is (to my ears anyway) embarrassingly bad. Adam Driver's was surprisingly not bad, and Ben Affleck's was okay (though more Irish sounding). The point is, I don't want to be thinking about this while watching a movie, but I can't help it. It makes me wonder if actors also find themselves distracted by it, perhaps focusing more on getting their accent right instead of acting out the scene right.

Having one American actor may have been less of a big deal for me, but putting three in lead roles was just too much of a distraction for me. Their acting was just "okay" in this movie. Damon and Affleck are both brilliant actors, but in The Last Duel, not so much. Either way, their presence in a medieval-themed period drama was an immersion killer. I probably would have liked the movie more if they had cast lesser-known, British actors (or even French which would have been even better).

Now for what I liked: basically everything else. I disagree that the movie was too long. I think it's as long as it needed to be to tell the story in a meaningful, coherent way. There are three different perspectives being told of the same story, so it makes sense that they should all get equal screen time. And it's those perspectives which I found the most fascinating, because they made sense psychologically.

There are two types of truths: there is your truth and the actual, objective truth. And when it comes to personal experiences, the truth is largely subjective. The way you see yourself is subjective. The way you perceive your actions is subjective. You may see yourself as a loving, caring husband. You may see yourself as having committed an act that you felt was not a crime, and therefore proclaim your innocence. But then there is the ACTUAL truth. What REALLY happened, and who was affected by those actions.

In a way, all three perspectives are the "truth", because no one seems to be deliberately lying; no one believes they've done anything wrong. Rather, two of the three stories are a distorted version of reality with mitigating details. All three believe they are the true victim: one believes they have committed no crime and has been wrongfully accused, one believes they are the victim of (essentially) "property damage", and one believes they are the victim of sexual assault. Nonetheless, each version of the story seems to confirm that the act was definitely not consensual. Instead, the accused perceived the frequent use of the words "no" and "stop" to be synonymous with a "customary protest". What a time to be alive!

In conclusion, it's a fascinating story that is only enhanced by its attention to detail. The variations in each recounting of events can be easily missed if you're not looking for them, but they are all important to the story. Every scene, every detail, and every word served a purpose and was worth paying attention to. To be sure, this is not a fast paced action packed story, and will be appreciated most by those who love epic narratives and historical period films. That is, as long as you're not distracted by the A-listers and accents. :)