-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ridley Scott Pins ‘The Last Duel’ Bombing on Apathetic Millennials
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
I finally saw it and I really liked it. The one thing that was weird about it was for a movie that was very serious, it almost was a little bit satirical at times? Maybe satirical isn't the right word? Contemporary?
A lot of the dialogue used modern phrases and lingo for a film based in the 14th century. Found that an odd choice, but I'm not sure if it was a refreshing touch or not. I just found it weird. Not necessarily bad.
I thought the duel was done really well, and liked the 3 scenarios from different perspectives. Subtle differences.
I also liked how Matt Damon, Driver, and Affleck didn't speak in British accents. For the first time in feels like ages, a medieval movie where everyone doesn't have a British accent.
A lot of the dialogue used modern phrases and lingo for a film based in the 14th century. Found that an odd choice, but I'm not sure if it was a refreshing touch or not. I just found it weird. Not necessarily bad.
I thought the duel was done really well, and liked the 3 scenarios from different perspectives. Subtle differences.
I also liked how Matt Damon, Driver, and Affleck didn't speak in British accents. For the first time in feels like ages, a medieval movie where everyone doesn't have a British accent.
Xerographica
Neo Member
If you love a high quality steak you keep buying it. But if you love a high quality movie... are you going to keep buying it? Not usually. Usually you buy it once and keep watching it. Well, for me personally there's only a handful of movies I've watched more than once.
Netflix knows how many times you've watched one of their movies. The tricky part is that consumption and demand aren't the same thing. Sometimes on Netflix I'll watch something trashy, but this doesn't necessarily mean that I truly want more trashy content on Netflix. It just means that I ran of quality content to watch on Netflix.
And it's not like a thumbs up accurately quantifies and reflects my perception of quality. Therefore, Netflix should give us the opportunity to use our fees to indicate which type of content we truly want more of. If you truly want more sci-fi content, then you'd allocate your fees accordingly. You'd put your money where your mouth is. You'd walk the walk.
cheststrongwell
my cake, fuck off
I liked the movie and wish I had seen it in a theater, but I'll probably never watch it again. I didn't read much about it before watching, so the "he said, he said, she said" thing was different enough to keep me interested. Not surprised it bombed.
On a different note, I hope the wheel turns back around and we get more quality epics like Rob Roy, Braveheart, and Gladiator. I will always be sad that Mel lost his fucking mind and we never got that Viking movie.
On a different note, I hope the wheel turns back around and we get more quality epics like Rob Roy, Braveheart, and Gladiator. I will always be sad that Mel lost his fucking mind and we never got that Viking movie.
aries_71
Junior Member
Where in Europe? I don’t see it.
JusticeForAll
Gold Member
I thought it was an amazing film. Shame it bombed so hard. Didn't watch it in cinema, but on Disney+ (Belgium).
And you know what? If didn't read online about it being there and used the search engine, I wouldn't even have known it was there. So something is definitely of with the marketing there.
And you know what? If didn't read online about it being there and used the search engine, I wouldn't even have known it was there. So something is definitely of with the marketing there.
Last edited:
ManaByte
Member
Drizzlehell
Banned
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
You're in luck.
Ridley Scott's next two films are historical epics.
First up is Kitbag, which is a film based on Napoleon Bonaparte.
After that, Ridley is moving straight onto a sequel to Galidator.
Dural
Member
Me and my wife recently watched it and really enjoyed it, but my god was Matt Damon horrible to look at. Maybe that was the point, get you to root for the horribly ugly character?
eyesabitdull
Banned
Um, so I watched it, and this movie is a giant waste of time.
I love Ridley Scott to a healthy amount, and I was going into this thinking it would be akin to his caliber with "Kingdom of Heaven."
But nope, this movie is pretty god awful and at worst, a waste of time.
It's basically just 2 hours of us retreading the same story beats to see the story from a different perspective, except that all of it constantly being rushed to reach to where we we ended up in the first place.
Seriously, huge waste of time because you see the story unfolding from miles away and all sort of "gasps" are taken away because you see it coming.
And the ending? Wtf was that ending?
What kind of moral story am I supposed to take out of this? Its stupid, it tells me nothing new, and I dislike Ridley Scott a lot more after hearing his complaints about the audience over this movie.
It's a shit movie Scott, and no amount of well known actors can change the fact that they absolutely SUCK in acting in medieval era movie.
Ben Affleck with a forced tone of voice?
Matt Damon and a dumb mullet and beard?
Gtfo here. Horrible movie. Deserving of the criticism.
I love Ridley Scott to a healthy amount, and I was going into this thinking it would be akin to his caliber with "Kingdom of Heaven."
But nope, this movie is pretty god awful and at worst, a waste of time.
It's basically just 2 hours of us retreading the same story beats to see the story from a different perspective, except that all of it constantly being rushed to reach to where we we ended up in the first place.
Seriously, huge waste of time because you see the story unfolding from miles away and all sort of "gasps" are taken away because you see it coming.
And the ending? Wtf was that ending?
What kind of moral story am I supposed to take out of this? Its stupid, it tells me nothing new, and I dislike Ridley Scott a lot more after hearing his complaints about the audience over this movie.
It's a shit movie Scott, and no amount of well known actors can change the fact that they absolutely SUCK in acting in medieval era movie.
Ben Affleck with a forced tone of voice?
Matt Damon and a dumb mullet and beard?
Gtfo here. Horrible movie. Deserving of the criticism.
Pegasus Actual
Gold Member
Movie was just okay. The three perspectives thing wasn't that well executed. I did think Damon and Affleck were hilarious in a good way, and Adam Driver is always pretty good even with mediocre material.
I get that some of the hokeyness is because it's a historical story, but some of the obviously filled-in/guessed-at stuff is crap. I consider myself tail-end of Gen X but I guess by some standards I'm an old-ass millennial. Either way this wasn't that much better than a Marvel movie.
The Le Gris perspective of the rape was pretty stupid. He pretty clearly raped that woman, even by medieval standards. They wasted all that effort making him and Carrouges's wife have shit in common and flirt and all that when they first meet, and then... well he just shows up one day and gives her a rapin'. Then says something about "well she did the customary 'no' thing so as to not be a whore, but it was totally consensual".
What's the point of multiple perspectives if they are crystal clear on the woman's perspective being reality? Was it really a scene we needed twice?
And then poor Carrouges is just characterized as a dumb cunt for the whole movie. He's ruining his estate, he makes boneheaded tactical decisions at every turn in battle, doesn't listen to his smart wife and is all around just a jealous moron piece of shit.
Maybe partly done so that you'd cheer for the rapist and be like oh shit nvm he's a rapist? I think the main reason was just to make the woman more of a victim. And to give her shit to do like being way better at running the estate than her husband. And then they throw in Carrouges's mom with her "hey who doesn't get raped I didn't say anything don't rock the boat lady" just so we know that white men are always raping.
What's the point of multiple perspectives if they are crystal clear on the woman's perspective being reality? Was it really a scene we needed twice?
And then poor Carrouges is just characterized as a dumb cunt for the whole movie. He's ruining his estate, he makes boneheaded tactical decisions at every turn in battle, doesn't listen to his smart wife and is all around just a jealous moron piece of shit.
Maybe partly done so that you'd cheer for the rapist and be like oh shit nvm he's a rapist? I think the main reason was just to make the woman more of a victim. And to give her shit to do like being way better at running the estate than her husband. And then they throw in Carrouges's mom with her "hey who doesn't get raped I didn't say anything don't rock the boat lady" just so we know that white men are always raping.
Dural
Member
Can't say I disagree with any of this, but I still enjoyed it.
I'm sure it was done the way it was for dramatic effect, but the fight at the end seemed way too dragged out. Carrouges is a Knight and is shown to be pretty great in combat and is going to battle all the time for money but barely beats LeGris? A guy that has pretty much just been eating and fucking for years?
Pegasus Actual
Gold Member
That's the thing, the fight was apparently pretty tightly based on historical accounts.
The movie could have spent some time establishing that Le Gris was training his combat skills alongside his "I'm literate and know numbers" duties and fuckboy antics, keep Ben Affleck waiting a minute for his precious orgies.
The movie could have spent some time establishing that Le Gris was training his combat skills alongside his "I'm literate and know numbers" duties and fuckboy antics, keep Ben Affleck waiting a minute for his precious orgies.
Last edited:
Dural
Member
I went and read about it on Wikipedia after posting that, and yeah, surprising that the fight was pretty accurate.
cheststrongwell
my cake, fuck off
Excellent.
WFairfax89
Neo Member
The decisive rumble at the end between Carrouge and Le Grix was filmed realistically and brutally, it is not inferior even to the fight at the end of Gladiator, but this was more than two hours of a boring empty movie. Why was it necessary to repeat the scene of rape over and over, if everything was obvious from the first time? it's a quite predictable movie without any plot twists and deep thoughts, and I am very, very disappointed..
I thought the 3 versions were okay at first because they did show some subtle differences that were fun to find as a viewer. Yeah they were a little bit long and could have been consolidated/cut better, but I thought they served a purpose.... that is until my dumbass realized at the end that Marguerite going to Le Gris' room at night was just a fucking dream of his. This made me realize that his entire version was pretty much unnecessary except for him admitting his crime to Pierre. In hindsight it was stupid of me to not realize he was just fantasizing because it was odd for her to be able to get away from her husband late at night in a strange estate. So yeah I agree with you that it was needlessly long. t was especially difficult to watch the rape scene again and I just ended up skipping through it. They do use some cinematography techniques to make the rape look a lot worse in Marguerite's version, but it was already pretty fucking horrible the first time. I think this can be recut to be much better.
Giallo Corsa
Member
Hory shitu, a new Robert Eggers movie ? WHAT ? I wasn't even aware dammit !
Cinematography looks stunning as usual.
juliushandle
Member
is this worth the rental
JimmyRustler
Member
Finally got around to watch it and boy, that flick was legit. Found it a bit hard to follow at first but once I understood how it works I loved it. The final fight had a great choreography too. Only blonde Ben Affleck was a bit out of place.
Didn‘t deserve to bomb. Best movie Scott has made in years.
Didn‘t deserve to bomb. Best movie Scott has made in years.
cormack12
Gold Member
Saw this today, agree with above. I really liked it. I thought the account of Le Gris was going to add a bit more ambiguity into the equation. However, viewed through the lens of its time and the other scenes like the mother in law and women at the end of the contest, it's clear that it was 'a done thing'. In fact it pretty much mirrors the first scene where he nails the courtesan in the same way. Or I'm sure that's what his account is going for. Some sort of hedonistic, overpowered with lust encounter.
Part of me thinks it bombs because of the ambiguity. There's no one saying this is the one true version. Even Marguerite's account is quoted as "the truth". Historically based on the outcome of the duel I'm guessing. In this say and age of twitter telling people who is bad and good, the film doesn't. It just lets you digest the different points of view and make up your own mind. Which on current social media is not really a thing.
Part of me thinks it bombs because of the ambiguity. There's no one saying this is the one true version. Even Marguerite's account is quoted as "the truth". Historically based on the outcome of the duel I'm guessing. In this say and age of twitter telling people who is bad and good, the film doesn't. It just lets you digest the different points of view and make up your own mind. Which on current social media is not really a thing.
Last edited: