Movie Fight Review 1: The Duellists (1977) - Second Duel

[@althesmith]

I always thought that D'Hubert had been injured in the forearm and the wound was only recently stitched and liable to open easilly, hence the protection.

[@KorKhan89]

One manner in which that duel is more realistic than 99% of sword fights on film: It only lasts for a few seconds. Most of it is spent in guard position, with both duellists waiting for their opponent to either attack or make an opening that they can exploit. I really want to check out this film now.

[@KorKhan89]

Scawking That certainly applies to rapier/smallsword fencing. Although bear in mind that for medieval Japanese (katana) and European (longsword) fencing, going into a bind at close distance (known as tsuba-zeriai in Japanese) is a legitimate tactic.

[@KorKhan89]

Scawking Yeah, in the context of the scene in question, keeping a longer distance is absolutely appropriate. I'm just saying that for the many fight scenes set e.g. in medieval Europe, close distance can be realistic under the right circumstances.

[@KorKhan89]

Kenjutsu ("sword technique") is the term for historical schools of swordfighting. Kendo ("way of the sword") is a post-Meiji sport/martial art derived from kenjutsu, based around sparring with bamboo shinai and honing the mind and body in the process. through the kata, it does maintain a few techniques from historical duelling.

[@3daypriest]

KorKhan89 ... I fenced in college. My school had a ‘club’ rather than a team. We attended a sort of ‘sports day’ that covered many different competitive sports. My first match was against a guy from a real team at a large school. From en guarde the guy beat/lunged so quickly that I had no chance to even move. His foil was flexed against my chest and it was over. Lightning fast. So, yeah, if you aren’t ready, the duel would be over.

Great film.Beautifully shot.Reminds me of Kubrick's Barry Lyndon.Both films should have had British Actors for the lead roles though.Great films!

[@ContradictoryNature]

10:50 Matt's house just happens to have swords lying everywhere within arm's reach. For... educational purposes.

[@ironstarofmordian7098]

How a Brit does home defense.

[@Ζήνων-ζ1ι]

@@ironstarofmordian7098 Oy mate yo got o loicense foh that nife?

[@emeralddragongaming2930]

@@Ζήνων-ζ1ι now thats an interesting language 👍

[@quidestveritas659]

Love this movie. Joseph Conrad, who wrote the original story, based it on two real Napoleonic officers, Dupont and Fournier-Sarlovèze, who fought 30 duels over 19 years.

[@migkillerphantom]

Pretty shitty duellists, then, if it took 30 duels for someone to finally win

[@LeScandal]

migkillerphantom They were using the little-known Nerf sword.

[@TheBlackfall234]

@migkillerphantom how so ? If they are very good on an equal level it can take quite a bit to decide a final winner.

[@strangelyjamesly4078]

They kept getting interrupted.

[@ПавелКорешков-ь4г]

There is a fair chance that at some point they both had decided to exploit the case. The idea of ''reality shows" had been around for centuries, apparently. And they didn't had to fake it. A puncture isn't always lethal, as seen in the movie.

[@brainrunnethout]

The Duellists is one of my favorite films. Such a great movie.

[@wattlebough]

An absolute masterpiece. Has to be Scott’s greatest.

[@dj1NM3]

I think that I know why such a high guard was chosen: so that the actor's face and sword hand could be zoomed-in on tightly and have both in frame, rather than a more realistic lower guard position which would need a wider framing with more "dead space" around the duellists to get their weapon and face in the same shot.

[@larrymiller5253]

That's all. It's a movie and subject to the agency of not only the media format chosen, but the story. It's like arguing about the front sight post not being up on the machine gun at the radar station in the movie saving private Ryan, or a shoulder patch was incorrect, or it was the wrong Sherman variant. I can find several "mistakes" in the John wick movies and as far as lunge and recover, I bet Harvey Keitel never picked up a sword in his life. Enjoy the movie, enjoy their efforts and their art.

[@squamish4244]

@@larrymiller5253 Of course there is a bunch of other nonsense about SPR that ruins the movie for me because its job was to be an accurate war film and it messed that up. The Duellists' job wasn't to create an experience with that level of authenticity.

[@jamesmiddleton6464]

I always wondered if this scene was meant to show what it would look like if two military men who were trained in saber were to fight a duel with small swords. It would explain some of the oddities of their style like the wide swings that look like attempts to cut or the unusual guard positions. They seem somewhat unsure and unfamiliar with smallsword convention. Seems like they are feeling their way from a starting point of sabre fighting. What is your opinion of that idea.

[@DarthJeep]

I know this is an old video with a lot of responses, but I just wanted to (first) thank you for the video and (second) make an observation that this was their "2nd duel" ever in the story. The first was impromptu and pushed by Keitel's character on his opponent with no preparation. The second duel (presumably) was with at least (you would think) with some prep beforehand. I only mention this, not to say you are wrong (because I agree with you on all points), but to add that (when watching this scene) I always got the feeling that these two (the characters) really DON'T know what they are doing. I thought, "These two knuckleheads are cavalry men. They essentially ONLY have ever trained and fought with sabers and now they want to use these short dueling swords (probably "Gabriel's"/Keitel idea because he fancy's himself a gentleman) and they took a "crash course" in fighting with them and they JUST suck at it and (as you stated) just revert to what they know in a panic until Keitel's character gets lucky and suddenly remembers some "cool move" he was taught the day before or something." Much to the chagrin of Carradine's character. i just figured that these guys were busy doing "War business" and didn't have time to properly train in this style and just hodge-podged something together to survive the duel (explains Carradine's weird glove). I believe there was even a scene of Carradine taking lessons from someone prior to this wasn't there? That was my take away. lol.

[@wayneparker9331]

I think there is A LOT of validity to your assessment. Despite the existence of certain treatises, the reality is that swordsmanship and fencing training were not uniform at any point in European history (of for that matter anywhere else in the world). Young French men of the officer class in the Napoleonic era received their training wherever they could. As young officer candidates, they were taught small sword/rapier fencing training in school and unless they chose to practice it diligently afterward on their own time and at their own expense that was it. They might also be introduced to saber or other edged weapons in school but that would depend on the nature and purpose of the school. Once the received a commission in the French Revolutionary and later Imperial armies, they would be encouraged to train only with the edged weapon (in this instance a cavalry saber) they carried on campaign, not a small sword. And yes, your recollection is correct. There was a scene before the two protagonists had a later duel with sabers where Carradine's character is being trained by what looks like a senior NCO in saber fighting, and not the kind of saber fencing we'd see in a modern setting but the kind one would expect in a life-or-death duel or battle. At that point in the story, it's clear that the two characters are really trying to kill one another rather than just satisfy the requirements of the honor code.

[@crustyoldfart]

It's always a difficult thing to do to put oneself in the shoes of historical characters and imagine all the facets of experience and training which the duellists might have had. That said, it's always fun to try. Recall that duelling was still in vogue amongst their class at that time, so it would behoove them individually surely to acquire at least rudimentary skill in the art. Duelling with a cavalry sabre on the face of it is ridiculous, and one presumes that the first duel used sabres simply because they were the only weapons readily at hand. Subsequently the second duel, a formal one this time, was fought with more appropriate weapons. Regardless of the skill either might or might not have had with the weapon in use, I think we can be confident if we assume that both would be nervous and above all cautious. In the event [ second duel ] D'hubert is wounded as he appears to fall in a random manner onto the point of his opponent's blade which happens to be in the way. So really any speculation as to their proficiency with the weapon is academic : this encounter rapidly degenerated into a brawl performed by nervous men with conflicting emotions much in evidence.

[@ericdew2021]

They were fighting on grass in the morning, fresh with morning dew. I doubt anyone would want to consider lunging, because one sure ain't going to recover. They're probably wearing boots meant more for placing in the stirrups of a mount, and have zero traction on grass. The first duel, between Keitel's character and some minor character (I believe he was a mayor of a small village) did have some lunging. And having the blade pointing directly at the opponent is not necessarily a bad position. Epee fencers regularly hold their blades in such a position: any offensive motion by the opponent will trigger the fencer to extend the point and perhaps catch the wrist or arm. Having the blade held obliquely (angled up) would allow the opponent to easily beat or bind the blade. To defend against a thrust, pulling the point up to have the blade become oblique and then bringing the blade across to parry is not at all difficult. And given that the fencer could drop the point and make a circular parry, it adds to the uncertainty of what parry will occur, making it harder for the attacker to guess. Would the defender stick the blade out (a stop-hit)? Would the defender do a lateral parry? Would the defender do a circular parry?

[@GeorgeSaint666]

You could perhaps argue that since they are both calalvry men... they are not used to fight with small swords. Their standard weapon would have been a sabre.

[@jrogersdal]

That's what I was going to say, and maybe they wore small swords when in town as a matter of convenience?

[@GeorgeSaint666]

@@jrogersdal That would be reasonable. Most would probably have carried large daggers anyway. Like back in time in Italy, how they had the Cinquedea for self defence.

[@crustyoldfart]

You make an important point. Use of the sabre is completely different from the small sword. The sabre has a cutting edge and a point, so that both cuts and thrusts are effective. Cavalry sabres, as is well illustrated in the movie are curved, The purpose of the curved blade is to hit your opponent with one almighty sweeping moment so that the curved blade opens the wound in a slicing motion [ nasty ! ], It was never intended as a fencing weapon. It's probably also worthy of note that cavalrymen carried in the saddle a short sword as a spare, presumably for use when you get boxed in in a melee, and when there is only room for short stabbing motions. All of that notwithstanding as officers and gentlemen it would be reasonable to suppose that they would have received lessons in the use of the small sword which you would tend to use as a weapon of first defence while walking around, as well as here in a formal duel.

[@MrPanos2000]

@@GeorgeSaint666 all millitary academies had smallsword/foil lessons in the 18th and 19th century. You wouldnt so much as touch a sabre before at least some years of foil. Read old fencing manuals like Huttons "Cold Steel". The reason we never see lunges and thrusts in film and television are safety concerns regarding their choreography and nothing deeper than that really.

[@GeorgeSaint666]

@@MrPanos2000 I'll try to get my hand on that book. Thanks for the tip.

[@urseliusurgel4365]

If you think about the time period, and what preceded it, it may bring some light on the small-sword usage in the film. The period depicted came just after the societal upheaval of the French Revolution. It is inconceivable that such upper-class institutions as fencing schools survived this intact. The Keitel figure seems to be of non-gentlemanly origins, not unusual for French officers of the period, and probably had no formal training at all in small-sword fencing. Though his opponent is of a more upper-class origins, his ability to access formal fencing training in his youth would have been severely curtailed by the Revolution, however wealthy his parents may have been.

[@JanPospisilArt]

For the 5th point, I suppose we could excuse them for being cavalry officers mainly using sabres?

[@amadeusdebussy6736]

I'm pretty sure most rank and file hussars in Napoleonic times never even held a sword other than a saber, let alone trained with one, so I would guess the guys in the background at the start are just two troopers screwing around with swords they're not familiar with.

[@crustyoldfart]

This movie throughout is a triumph in putting together beautifully composed images, both static and dynamic, and if that is all it was it would still be great movie. I think we should perhaps interpret the long-shot of the " guys in the background ... just screwing around ... " as a brief foreshadow of the duel that is about to take place ... a well known dramatic technique borrowed from live theatre.

[@althesmith]

Doubtful. Fencing in various styles was standard exercise and sport in French military (and British as well, I believe) right into the 1900's.

[@6reve]

I love that film. Such beautiful cinematography.

[@thomasb7464]

Could it be possible that the weird gauntlet of d'Hubert is a bandage or a cast for a wound on his left arm? Maybe that is the reason why they use the more "wieldy" though unfamiliar light swords instead of their usual Cavalry Sabres.

[@althesmith]

Or simply, he had an unhealed wound on his left arm which would open up too easily .

[@crustyoldfart]

It's hard to know why he would wear such a gauntlet which would not be very effective as a protection against a purely pointed weapon, although it would make some sense against a cutting edge. I suspect it was used in the movie as a focus for the viewer - a fetish-like prop to engage our attention and turn it away from the inexpert movements of the actors.

[@morallyambiguousnet]

I love this sort of analysis. Don't try it on the 2011 "Three Musketeers" movie, though, or you'll have an aneurysm. While Ms. Jovovich's decolletage is quite pleasant on screen, the sword fighting is truly laughable. One of the prime issues with sword fighting, in movies, is that actors (and even stunt men) don't really like to be hurt. For this reason fighting takes place at distances at which it's highly unlikely that either opponent could ever actually land a blow.

[@ChaoticNarrative]

Exactly so my friend, I too, tell people the 2011 Three Musketeers has the worst Swordplay in the history of the Musketeer movies, the 1921 Douglas Fairbanks one had better Swordplay, then again Fred Cavens was the Choreographer and Coach for that one but still; in the 21st century, there's not really any valid excuse for such poor quality, they should've employed Bill Hobbs or Bob Anderson for that one instead.

[@MariusThePaladin]

ChaoticNarrative It's even worse than movies where they do a mock swordfight like it's shakespear stage play or something ?

[@ironpirate8]

What's wrong with The Three Musketeers? The problem with the fights in The Duellists, is none of them ended with any realistic flair... not once did I see the classic "switch hands, 360 spin, reverse grip, behind the back thrust without even looking" combo.

[@ChaoticNarrative]

Nothing wrong with the Three Musketeers itself, it's more of the 2011 version, the swordplay sucked in it, the best versions for the swordplay are the 1935, '48, '73-89 Trilogy and the 1993 version where Bob Anderson himself had a speaking part as King Louis' personal Fencing instructor.

[@BrettOwen71]

+Iron Pirate And nobody ever said, "You killed my father. Prepare to die!" or even, "Ha, ha! I WILL kill you!" Not once! What a bunch of crap!!!

[@LeScandal]

Amazing knowledge. If I were directing a sword-fighting movie I could think of no one better to consult than this gentleman.

[@roybatty-]

The Duelists is clearly the most accurate sword fighting ever seen on screen.

[@vitorb.macarthy348]

I think deluge is a bit better. Not to much

[@adamfrisk956]

Alatriste

[@JeffPenaify]

Highlander

[@guypierson5754]

Not putting them in ranked order but: Alatriste series and The Deluge ( a polish Epic) both have very nice swordfights.

[@JGHan-eu6rr]

@@JeffPenaify ?

[@ilustradorel-javi5566]

he actually started to review movie fights with the duelist. very nice bro!

[@jhonas329]

I would love to hear your opinion of the short small-sword duel over a gambling debt from Barry Lyndon. To my untrained eyes this looked very authentic, although the actor portraying the other gambler actually appeared to be a more skilled swordsman than Ryan O'Neal

[@6reve]

Btw, I was a bit confused since I thought this was the third duel of the film. As far as I remember, it starts with a very nice long smallsword duel between Keitel's character and the nephew of the mayor (or whoever it was), then there's the impromptu sabre duel between the main protagonists, and then they duel with smallswords.

[@anatolib.suvarov6621]

Sir; Thank you for your discussion of this particular duel. I am no expert, by any stretch of the imagination, but I did take fencing from about age 8 into my mid teens. By "small sword", I assume (and yes I know what happens when one assumes) you are referring to what I was taught was a foil. I stumbled on this video quite by accident, and began to watch. As you introduced the topic, I stopped, jumped over to the movie clip you provided, watched it, then came back. Interestingly, I had many of the same reactions as you. I heard my instructors voice in my head, chastising me for many of the same mistakes made by the actors, especially the odd high guard. I do suspect that much of the grandiose movements are for theatrical purposes, not historic accuracy. Keep the audience interested. Standard foil fencing can be very boring to the uninitiated, as it is small, subtle movements, with sudden flashes of lunging, etc, but for a movie, they would want wild action to hold the attention of the audience. Again, thank you for your expertise!

[@genepozniak]

I don't think you've watched much Olympic fencing. There's as much or even more activity as in the movie.

[@saturn580]

Interestingly, the first duel of the film features far more historically accurate use of small swords. Lots of thrusting, focus on distance and a stark gap in skill between the two fighters.

[@opmdevil]

More important movie question is: Is the ending of the Rob Roy possible?

[@Ottuln]

Looks like you got your wish : D

[@ThePeacemaker848]

Ya I'm curious about that rob roy movie too.

[@MrRamazanLale2]

Only with Liam Neeson

[@carloparisi9945]

I have found a reference to that high quarte in Liancour, who says it's the Italian guard, oddly enough, he suggests to oppose it with the same. Mc Bane also suggests Italians used an high quarte, although we do not know really how high.

[@jasonyama333]

Anybody notice that at the beginning of duel 2, Carradine is practicing with his with member from his regiment, he uses that "odd glove" to slap/parry?

[@TheOhgodineedaname]

The engaging guard where they seem to keep a lot of distance and the shuffling seems like an attempt to convey a tense and nerve wrecking duel for both of them.

[@adampossin1127]

If they are cavalry officers, an officer that uses and train with a saber. Wouldnt mussel memory take over? Like yes they are using of small swords but they're cavalry officers used to sabers more then a small sword. To me that make sense for the big cutting moves.

[@ArizonaAirspace]

I also thought the engagement guard looked silly. Why hold the saber so high with the cutting-edge held up? Very accurate assessment about the silliness of big wide motions. It would wear you out quickly. I agree the tips of sabers in small quick smooth movements would be more deadly not leave yourself wide open by swinging widely.

[@The_Hussar]

Very interesting analisys! What can you say about the fourth duel? The one on horseback.

[@slgarrett]

I thought it was interesting that you took issue with the idea that they fought using a saber style with small swords. The main characters were both hussars. It would not necessarily be out of character for cavalry officers to revert to their saber training, even if they were using their weapons less effectively. I think it's a mistake to assume every weapon is always used optimally by master swordsman, or that all fighters are equally well trained with all weapons. My suspicion is that most duels were not fought by master swordsmen but by people who'd had some training, perhaps not of the best quality, either acquired in the course of their academic education or military service. In that sense, it may sometimes be more "correct" to be less correct.

[@SnickerzBars]

@scholagladiatoria I have no idea if this was the intention, but the en garde position they take seems to be a "point in line" from foil (sport) fencing. I don't know the historical context for this, but establishing a point in line gives you right of way in sport fencing. In my very limited experience, it can slow down hyper-aggressive fencers and help prevent things like fleche attacks. When you said Will Hobbs was a modern fencing instructor, I'm not sure if you meant sport fencing or not. If so this is perhaps one reason he made the actors start the fight in the curious en garde.

[@AKBerryz]

The problem with almost every movie sword fight I've seen is that they're performed by actors. Even when you get a fight choreographer that understands historical fencing (rare) and they really push to represent historical details (rarer still) at the end of the day it's being acted out by complete amateurs. It takes years to develop good fencing form, I've seen good fencers spend years training out bad habits or training in good ones. The poor actors have to jam that into a few weeks of training and choreography. Even Actors that do many roles that involve fencing are not doing it in between films. Then we have the problem of directors not understanding historical techniques and thus not knowing how to represent them or how to bring out what is actually happening to a lay audience. What we need are more good historical fencers making their way to Hollywood... Hmm... maybe I should move XD

[@TheBlackfall234]

considering that the fights in "The Duellists" are even more impressive to me

[@OKOK-hm2is]

Whll yes, but they are not doing REAL fight in movies. It's choreographed dance, which can be learned more quickly.

[@Loosehead]

It is said that Danny Kaye, in the film The Court Jester, was such a good mimic he was able to emulate an experienced sword fighter very well.

[@Mr.56Goldtop]

There have been actors who were expert fencers, even world class. Just not many.

[@someguy3186]

While I’m not a fencer, I have a similar problem with boxing movies. It’s very rare that an actor actually moves convincingly. Sometimes camera tricks, choreography, and editing can make up for it, but sometimes they have an actor just go at a heavy bag, and my god, is it always ugly.

[@cheeseandonions9558]

I was always under the impression that rapiers had cutting tips and in this particular duel the loser got cut under his armpit, presumably causing major bleeding. (also the weird glove is a falconer's glove)

[@whereandbackagain7059]

After watching the film, the "weird glove" that he wears appears to be the rain cover from his shako, worn in the previous scene. No idea why that would be used, just an observation :)

[@EmperorBonaparte]

I can't speak for smallsword because I've never really done that before, but I have done longsword and arming sword exchanges on many types of grass like in the movie [more than a few times on wet, rainy grass], and I can say that particularly if the boots lack an aggressive tread, yes, I have lunged before, and yes, you will slip and fall and what not, and that is to be avoided if you're being martial about the bout. In that same train of thought, [I'm a Fiorist mostly, with lots of nods to Liechtenauer and Agrippa], I did find myself shuffle-stepping a lot since I couldn't concentrate on the uneven terrain or where spots were flat or slippery. I've also done multiple controlled exchanges with minimal gear [no masks or helms], and I can honestly say from all the relatively safe exchanges I've done in play outside of that whether in or out of the salle, it creates a much more terrifying dynamic to swordplay even the simulated idea of it being real. I and the person I was fighting with were far more cautionary in that frame than any other time we ever fought, and it does create a kind of lull in and after going into crosses, because it feels so much more dangerous. No, it is not martially sound to leave long pauses in the fight but at the same time, if you really have skin in the game, you fight more doggedly, with a kind of opportunism of wanting to perform actions that will upturn the opponent completely while keeping yourself as safe as possible. Still: I found myself overbearing into some crosses knowing full well the timidity I felt in my opponent, and would often risk threat of danger because the cost-benefit of being ambitious led to my performing successful actions out of my opponent's fear and self-preservation. It is interesting because in play it is always just that: play. And if it isn't to the death, if it isn't serious, if it's feders and blunt edges, it's really, really not the same as if it were otherwise. But as I said: just something [very dangerous] like not wearing a mask gave me a deep insight into the nature of fighting that I would not have ever otherwise of felt in the relatively modern idea of always performing a thing mired under the great emphasis of safety. Sword fighting is a deadly art, I've found. Even in play, it will always be dangerous. The best kind of armour, is the kind you don't ever take off.

[@jayrob5270]

When they are practicing I don't see them making cutting swings but more deflecting the others blade in a swinging motion, now this may be the incorrect way to deflect but it's definitely not them going for some slicing attack to their opponent.

[@JimBCameron]

It's a big ask, but possibly the fact that they're cavalry officers would account for some bad habits in the dual? (clutching at straws :D) And it certainly is an excellent film.

[@j1gsaw]

I agree, they would have fought with sabres in combat and used the edge more than than point. But I'm happy to be corrected

[@dextrodemon]

is actually the third duel, there's the one vs. the mayor's son in a field. one in close quarters and then the one you're talking about. but i suppose it is the 2nd duel between the principal players.

[@scholagladiatoria]

Indeed - this refers to their second duel with each other. But it is ambiguous titling I agree.

[@dextrodemon]

no great matter i assure you. i also have a theory as to their having that odd guard. i think it's to show they're cavalry officers as it's similar to the one they use while charging on horseback. forgive me if i'm entirely off the mark, it's far from my area.

[@scribblerjohn1]

Torc Handsomeson Technically, the first fight between Keitel and Carradine isn't a duel, but a "rencontre." There is no challenge isued or accepted, no seconds, no official witnesses, etc. The duel had a very specific legal status and both parties in a rencontre were liable to prosecution if they survived.

[@ericdew2021]

The on guard position is actually quite typical of illustrations from that period: hand held high, point slightly below the guard, leaning on the rear leg. A number of fencing treatises with illustration from the 1800s shows such position. Now, whether they actually stood in such a position, not sure. The few photographs from the 1800s that I've seen have them weighed on their front leg. But those were sport fencers, not actual duelists, so getting stabbed only cost a point, and not one's life.

[@ericdew2021]

The background fencers were master and student. The "big" flailing actions are by the master and are beat-coupés: beat the blade, then let the momentum of the beat go over the tip of student's blade (to get to another line). It would be acceptable action for training as well as action thrust-based fencing. Of course, the master is making them bigger and slower because he's training the student.

[@masterof1]

The glove always looked like some sort of falconry type to me, but maybe a am wrong. As to the way they move can it be said that it is possible that the two combatants are used to fighting with sabres and therefore move incorrectly due to that alone? I am not sure but am interested in knowing what would drive someone to use incorrect form. That is if we look at this scene as if it were an actual historical account.

I thought that the movements in the previous-practice fight were kind of a warm up excersise. If not, which were the common warm up excersises for those type of duels? Thanks.

[@MichaelMcQuown]

I would guess that the large movements were used to give the audience a better view of the action.

[@n.w.1803]

For fans of Bill Hobbs's choreography, don't forget 'Rob Roy' with Liam Neeson and Tim Roth's even more direct contrast of smallsword with broadsword. Plus the witty repartee: "If I wanted to slaughter a ox, your claymore would be my first choice, Sir.."

[@mattpiersma7355]

I think I figured out the black glove. The guy wearing it did see the first duel, standing at a distance near the girl and her geese. He saw the loser get his hand sliced, loose his cool and then get stabbed, so he came up with a little fix to try to keep the same thing from happening to him.*edit* It wasn't him in the first scene, but maybe he heard about the mishap with the first opponents hand from a witness.

[@salomo12345]

Are there some historical manulas considering the use of Flails? I mean from my point of view it is obvious that using this kind of weapons is very difficult to fight with and also to defend against.

[@Dhomazhir]

Not as of yet.

[@jefffromclapham]

Duellists - wonderful film. Appreciate the insights here from an expert. Shame a clip wasn’t included. Interestingly I knew an academic who advised Ridley Scott on his later epic about the Crusades. He had to tell the director that at one point his use of Christian and Moslem imagery was completely wrong - it would never have been used in that way, he told Ridley. The Director thanked him, considered and went ahead anyway because it looked visually effective in the film. So it wouldn’t surprise me if the judgements made about duelling weren’t from ignorance but just a choice about what looked effective on screen. It’s interesting because I know Ridley Scott was a big fan of Stanley Kubrick whether Kubrick would have made a similar decision. Have you written about the duels in Barry Lyndon?

[@StridVarge]

Hi, Matt. I was just wondering if you'd seen a film called "Alatriste"? It's a spanish film starring Viggo Mortensen set in 1623ish. The fight choreography was done by Bob Anderson. I think it's quite a good film as well as having some good fight scenes with rapier/main gauche.

[@OwariNeko]

Just out of curiosity, aren't afterblows a pretty dangerous thing if you 'lay down' and do a stop thrust as was done here? Does the fact that it is an honourable duel mean that afterblows aren't allowed or what's the deal?

[@timeforsuchaword]

OwariNeko I believe the risk is more in the initial action because a stop thrust is a dodge and counterattack rather than a parry, so it's highly probable that one person or the other is going to be struck and end the exchange, or the attacker is going to parry and retreat. Assuming that doesn't happen it's not a great position to be in as you can't advance/retreat until you recover, but the recovery time is surprisingly short (just push off the ground with your left arm while swinging your left leg back in line. It's a quick movement because you never actually touch your leg to the ground) and your sword arm is free to parry throughout the move. Additionally in an honorable duel your opponent is unlikely to take advantage of your position to poke you in your exposed arm or leg because if they incapacitate you without killing you, like what happens in the movie, the duel ends. I do not know however if the etiquette would be to let the duelist recover from the stop thrust position before continuing the fight.

[@jeffbenefiel180]

It could be argued that the larger movements were beat attacks, knock your opponents point so far out of line that your attack is back on point before they can recover. Which brings up the second point, the use of cross over foot movement. It isn't orthodox but it does cover ground faster. If you want super historical dueling, while a bit later, the schlagger duel between Oliver Reed and Malcolm McDowell in Royal Flash was spot on, down to the those silly suits you have to wear that make you look like a dog attack trainer.

[@nutyyyy]

The Smallsword and Rapier seems to quite often be portrayed as cutting and often whippy like a foil, which I always find quite entertaining.

[@asiansensation622]

Potential ideas for more reviews: Alatriste, The Princess Bride, Ironclad, Lord of the Rings, Barry Lyndon, Count of Monte Cristo

[@jeffk464]

Man its all about having the skill and confidence. Can you imagine a duel where you thought the other person was more skilled than you. In sport fencing you don't have the debilitating fear that you would have in a situation like that.

[@jameshickman5299]

How about an video on the fighting in Richard Lester’s “Three Musketeers” and “Four Musketeers”. I know they are flamboyant movie fights, but they had a powerful impact on me at the time.

[@edi9892]

I think the last official duell in Europe was in France in the 1960s. There two politicians duelled to the first blood. In Germany they were declared illgal (the surviver was shot!) during WWI, because it claimed too many officers lives.

[@Cyclonus5]

The point in line cocked wrist position I've heard called the "Italian" guard by my french fencing teacher. The Italian fencers I've known, on the other hand, don't do it. They will be point in line, but they keep the pommel in line with the wrist and use circles from that position without moving the wrist or move the wrist and don't move the point. Both say theirs is the "original" Italian fencing. My french fencing teacher, however, did note that the Italian Guard was foil unique and that it would just get you hit in Epee, and that the foil rules and method stems from the use of foiled blades used to train small sword fencing, so It's possible that the Italian guard is a French invention for small sword training attributed to misunderstanding of Italian guards, and thus would be historically accurate in a weird obtuse way. Just a thought.

[@timeforsuchaword]

Cyclonus5 My foil master also called this position an Italian on guard when he was demonstrating other on guard positions I may see other fencers use against me.

[@Cyclonus5]

timeforsuchaword were they a french fencer? all the times I've seen this "Italian" guard is in the french lineage.

[@timeforsuchaword]

Cyclonus5 I know that he studied under Istvan Danosi and Charles Selberg among others so his training isn't entirely french (although that's primarily what he taught me), but I'm not certain whether what he said is coming from his training in the french school or elsewhere.

[@Cyclonus5]

timeforsuchaword well my understanding is that Selberg was heavily french if not entirely, but I'll look into it.

[@grimmriffer]

I've been aware of the idea of fighting with sword and cloak, so when I watched the film and saw the "big black glove" I assumed it was some sort of evolution of a "dueling cloak" that had got so specialised it was now almost a glove. It seems to reach past his elbow and stretch across the angle of his bent arm. No one's heard of such a thing..?

[@pradanap.m.3195]

Oddly enough, I don't see much (if any) emphasis on the post-lunge recovery in modern electric fencing. Probably because there's much less concern about getting a return touch (afterblow) after the scoring touch -- which would have been lethal in a real duel and considered a bad form early on, but has become much more acceptable these days.

[@TheDirle]

I cant for the life of me find the pictures now, but i have seen pictures of drawings from the 18th century where both duellists had their jacket wrapped around their left hand. If this was commonplace it is not that far a leap to having specialised fencing gloves.

[@KorKhan89]

Using ones cloak as a makeshift shield and to obscure the movements of the sword seems to have been a technique since the Middle Ages. I also can't find any pictures of it from the 18th century, though, only from the 16th-17th centuries.

[@NymeriaMeliae]

been a long time since I've seen this film but wasn't the strange 'glove' not an arm brace for his injured arm?

[@screwtape2713]

It might have been something like that, but if it was meant to show the second duel was soon enough that the injuries from the first "rencontre" in the garden with the sabres still hadn't healed, then the wrong guy was wearing it. It was Ferraud (Harvey Keitel) who lost that first sabre brawl rather decisively, first being cut on the forearm of his sword arm and then being punched in the jaw with his opponent's knuckleguard.

[@ironpirate8]

screwtape2713 I haven't seen the film, only the clip, but I assumed it was some kind of wound dressing. I don't think one person would be able to have any advantage in equipment during a duel.

[@ironpirate8]

Nymeria Meliae I was wrong. Just watched that clip again, and at the beginning, when we see D'hubert practicing in the background, he uses the glove to push aside his opponent's blade on two occasions.

[@Kanut2]

First saber duell was what disturb me in that movie the most. Movements of both protagonist where unduly (dont know if I used correct word). They both were swinging like they would like to cut opponent in half. And yes I also love that movie :)

[@TheManfromNibiru]

Your right ! Have to cover your hands ,arms , chest , legs , neck , head .

[@IcEye89]

Any chance of a similar video about the Princess Bride? That is quite simply the best duel ever put on the big screen.

[@soultraveller5027]

It was reported during the fight scenes that Keith Carradine became very concerned with fellow actor (Harvey Keitel ) who was fully into his character with his wild uncontrolled Heavy Sabre blows banging and clanging into Carradine sword during the filming and complained to the director Ridley Scott about Harvey theses weapons were actual authentic Napoleon era French sabres having been blunted obviously but still deliver a massive blow to the body if misjudged during the choreographer and could quite easily break bones apparently it never bothered Harvey Keitel that much when the weapons were switched from sabres to dueling pistols ( a much relieved Keith Carradine)which were again (authentic )from that time period and with the owner's nervously watching in the background in case they were accidentally dropped the pistols were to be discarded once used by throwing them away however they were throw on to a padded ground to cushion the impact again according to Ridley Scott were worth thousands and thousands as was their french Hussar's unform which was commissioned by a company in Italy that specialises in Napoleonic atire to make the exact uniform of that particular regiment of french Hussar's

[@szepi79]

I really like your videos :) (BTW I'm from Hungary and I used to fence about 20 years ago) I must add a comment the 3rd point of yours about the initial guard. (But please be aware of that it was a long time ago that I practiced this, so I'm only relying on my memories.) That was in fact a thing (cant recall the name of it) holding the blade that high. BUT! It was an aggressive move and you needed to keep advancing towards your opponent. By doing this you created pressure and forced the opponent to back off. (Kind of like in Rob Roy's final duel. I think that was the only accurate moment of that duel.) If the opponent tries to parry, you can evade his blade with yours and thrust. But it was not very common, you were only doing this, if you were a better fighter or you were super aggressive. But there is no point having the blade that high and not moting at all. Also the actors in the movie weren't holding the sword right (for this move), it would have been too easy to knock the blade out of their hands. The place of the left hand is definetaly wrong, you need to hold it behind your back. You are not going to touch the enemy's blade anyways, so why risk your left hand taking a hit? They were also leaning back too much. Of course you needed to protect your torso, but footwork and parrying was the key. Also, if you are that leaned back already, you can't really lean _more_ back. (Sorry for the phrasing, English is not my 1st language. But I hope you get my point.) But I liked your point about lunging and retreating, we had to practice it for countless hours :) Keep up the good work! :)

[@mauriciomelo3555]

Matt, greetings, would you review and comment on Scaramouch and Prince Valiante duels and sowrd play with Stuart Granger and Robert Wagner respectively?

[@jasperrasper2392]

They appear to be cutting at the sword ( sabres) and not the man ?

[@ClergetMusic]

I think l’Abbat actually gives tierce as the standard en garde position for smallsword.

[@rasnac]

You should analyze final duel of the movie Rob Roy. It is considered as the best sword fight scene in modern cinema by so many critics.

[@crustyoldfart]

You have presented an accurate account of the difference between duelling for theatrical purposes and formal fencing for sport. As those who practice the latter well know, sport fencing as a spectator sport is a real bust ; it being next to impossible for spectators to see the small very rapid movements. As a guide for the layman to understanding any en guard position I would think it is necessary to understand that the fundamental process in fencing is LEVERAGE. The way this works is that the part of the blade close to the hand has superior leverage against the extended point of your opponent's blade. So the game consists of deflecting your opponents attack with the lower part of your blade in such a manner that your blade is also in an advantageous position to attack your opponent, This parry-riposte process is parodied when little boys try fencing with wooden swords, in a process in which they simply bash each others blade sideways, typically making no attempt to attack. In taking up any guard position it should be understood that in that position you are effectively protecting a part of yourself making that part un-hittable, but having done so all other points are open. SO your choice of the ' en guard ' position is actually an invitation to your opponent to attack another unguarded position. In the dual scenes the apparently unconventional en guard positions adopted should maybe be seen as provocations by the duellist to his opponent. En guard high - attack me low ! You rightly comment on the process of lunge and recover. Application of this movement is not one you're likely to witness in a duel situation with sharp weapons which can kill you, irrespective of the condition of the ground. The closest that fencing comes to simulating a duel is in modern epee where deep lunges are a poor strategy. The commonest epee movements are pecking away at your opponent's forearm. This is in contrast to foil fencing in which the only way of scoring is to land the point of your weapon on the torso of your opponent which is next to impossible unless one of you has lunged, thereby having considerably shortened the distance between the formal targets. I hope at least some of this helps in understanding the duelling sequences which are the nub of this wonderful film.

[@armynyus9123]

After pistol dueling dueling in general died out? Let me guess the reason...

[@edwardrichardson8254]

The best part of that duel is the sneeze. The clearly taller character played by Keith would exploit his reach advantage and NOT close distance like that, the shorter man would and the taller man would exploit that knowing it. We have at least one record I know of where a taller man challenged to a duel and given choice of arms selected swords specifically for his reach advantage (Former President Abraham Lincoln, 6’4”, the challenger backed down. Andrew Jackson is the only known president to have killed a man in a duel). My most realistic sword duel goes to Kyûzô’s duel at the beginning of “The Seven Samurai” and I imagine that’s how they were: nasty, brutish, and short. For a movie that balances the cinematic parrying “dance” aspect and brutal, ugly reality have to go with Poland’s “The Deluge” which is like that duel (one guy clearly overmatched) but the superior swordsman is toying with him for spectacle. “Barry Lyndon” up there too because of the cool setup, and I think a good swordsman is going to be controlling the setups. And if I remember, Lyndon is bleeding after that setup - rather like a knife fight: everyone gets cut in a knife fight. The late great British historian Paul Johnson wrote about the scourge of dueling in “The Birth of the Modern” and why it had to be outlawed. These were societies of massive drinking, constant wars where fighting was bayonet and cavalry largely, and highly politicized journalism (things haven’t changed there). Jackson killed a man in his duel for simply saying Jackson married a woman who had not been legally divorced (Utterly true). Men were killing each other over nothing. Vladimir Nabokov has an account in “Speak Memory” of his father being challenged to a duel over something written about him, the challenger backed down, but not until the last moment and the young Nabokov in the memoir is horrified the day the duel is set to go down.

[@kamuelalee]

Great video and analysis! Love The Duellists...beautiful and fantastic film despite the historical/fencing inaccuracies.

[@BaronBoy100]

This gentleman is ignoring the fact that Harvey Keitel had never used a sword of any kind before he appeared in this film and there was only a limited time to teach him to use the real swords that the director thought necessary before filming began. It is perhaps to the credit of both the main actors and William Hobbs that neither suffered any injury from the sword fighting they portrayed. In fact the only injury suffered at all was a fall from a horse by Keith Carradine in the last scene filmed.

[@willfreedo]

Yessss! This series is exactly what I was waiting for, and I didn't even know it. Hope to see one on Alatriste in the future, fingers crossed

[@morganjones4281]

The stop thrust looks convincing except that you can actually see his sword is clearly thrust behind the opponent instead of into his armpit.

[@dewfall56]

A movie I have always liked. Very nice to know the fights are more or less realistic.

[@FellVoice]

Hi there. I have a question concerning the expression "La" at different points in the movie. Can you please explain? Thanks.

[@amadeusdebussy6736]

He's just saying là or "there!" in French. So, kind of like saying "there you go" or "there you have it", it's just an interjection.

[@peterblood50]

"Not so deep as a well, nor so wide as a church door, but it is enough. If you ask for me tomorrow, you will find me a grave man."

[@lancerd4934]

This is a cool idea for a video. I remember my high school history teacher used to be fond of telling people that the 1996 film _Dragonheart_ was the most historically accurate movie around in terms of medieval combat. I'm not entirely convinced of that myself, but it is an interesting thought...

[@vmangani]

Question to the experts: Was the real thing more glamorous than what we see in modern Olympic fencing? Or to restate my question: Why is Olympic fencing so boring?

[@observationsfromthebunker9639]

I must watch this movie again after your thoughtful remarks on it. I remember the saber duels better than the smallsword duel though. :) Could you review a fight from the RIchard Lester Musketeer movies sometime?

They fight a pistol duel in the film don't they?

[@thatdutchguy2882]

Harvey Keitel, Keith Carridine and Edward Fox......big names m8.

[@kranjcalan]

Hi scholagladiatoria. If you played Medieval 2 Total war, can you review different units and there weapons and armor?

[@437cosimo]

Can't hurt the actors. The insurance is a killer.

[@dashcammer4322]

They probably wanted to get the face, hand, and blade in the frame.

[@joec.6780]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to have recognized how strange their guards were in the second duel but I have always interpreted both men as being uncomfortable with the small sword. Both are middle class (although D'hubert is "upper" middle class) and both serve as Hussars employing cavalry sabers from horseback, plus all of their other engagements with one another employ sabers. The next thing I have may be a legitimately dumb question because I'm not really all that familiar with the Code Duello or anything but given what you said about the small sword being used to thrust and the weird cloth not being widely used: If it doesn't confer any advantage to D'hubert why wouldn't they permit it? For instance if I spar with someone and they say to me "I want to wear a long sleeve shirt" I don't really care because it doesn't help them to do so.

[@watcher314159]

+GI JoJo I was just going to note something similar, actually. The first duel in the film is with sabers, and their sabers are obviously their preferred sidearms, so it makes sense that if neither of them was familiar with smallsword that they would default to saber movements. Now this leads to the question of why they would both agree to a duel with a weapon they don't know, and the only speculation I can offer is that perhaps the duel was initially meant to be performed with sabers and all the choreography was done for saber and then for some reason it got changed to smallswords at the last minute. The finishing blow would be a bit strange in that case and reduces the probability of my speculation significantly, but it's what I have to offer.

[@賴志偉-d7h]

They are actors, not "cavalry officers" or members of "the middle class", upper or otherwise. Any oddities would have to be explained with cinematographic reasons. I'm sure the director didn't intent these historical/socialogical psychologies. That's over-interpretation.

[@MichaelMcQuown]

This film was highly regarded for the accuracy of wardrobe, especially since it showed the changes over time. Ironically, Scott toned down the original story, where more than 20 duels were fought, and the two combatants were not that different in character. Instead Scott sought to create a moral fable.

[@jhonas329]

Great job on this. I always assumed their stances were authentic precisely because they were so odd looking. Now I learn they were just odd for the sake of looking odd. Still one of my favorite films.

[@davebanks1239]

Are you going to do 'The Court Jester' with Danny Kaye and Basil Rathbone?

[@Spectans1]

Hey there. Can you, please, review the sabre duel from movie Deluge?

[@traccas01]

Your onscreen confidence has defo come a long way from here. 😎

[@BountyFlamor]

are the soldier's hairqueues seen in the movie historically accurate?

[@deecoe372]

Both antagonists in "The Duellists" were hussars. The Hussar was a cavalry type, light, fast and based primarily on an Eastern European cavalry style. There were the "Polish Winged Hussars" but they were not true hussars in that they were essentially heavily armored lance carrying cavalry. The traditional "hussar" sprang primarily from Hungary and the areas near there. Now they were very flashy and during the Napoleanic period a lot of cavalry went for "flashy;" it has even been described as the Wars of the Military Tailor. Those cavalry units which copied the Hungarian hussar, at least early in the Napoleanic Wars, incorporated a lot of the style of the eastern cavalry. They almost always wore mustaches (some units mandated the wearing of the mustache!), and they did copy the multiple braids worn primarily in front of the ears. As the wars progressed, these touches fell out of favor. French styles of hair, with curls and such slowly pushed the traditional eastern styles aside. In addition, the braids could get in the way, were a bit of a pain to maintain (you couldn't really do it yourself; you needed someone to help with the braid) and in combat they could actually distract your attention and peripheral vision. So...yes, the hairstyles in the film (as well as the uniform changes, etc.) were historically accurate.

[@amadeusdebussy6736]

Yes, the front braids were called 'cadenettes'

[@southpawmoose]

the guard they are in reminds me of snake style Kung fu..

[@MariusThePaladin]

Watched it. I don't know if I just dumb, or is that movie really feels like Napoleonic Michael bay plus accuracy in small sword fight and minus explosion.

[@blakewinter1657]

May I say one good thing about this fight is, it doesn't last a very long time. As far as I know, real fights rarely lasted the incredibly long time that people seem to expect them to. Or if they did, it was because of both sides looking for openings, not the fifty exchanges of blows that some films portray! (But please take my statement with a grain of salt, as I'm not an historical expert on duelling)

[@dallesamllhals9161]

Will we ever get more reviews from this?

[@TriggerTimeTV]

Love your videos and channels but you should have cut videos segments or demos of what your talking about, I had trouble visualizing what your talking about