The WMB's 100 Best War Movies: #98 - The Duellists (1977)

                En garde!  “The Duellists” was director Ridley Scott’s (“Black Hawk Down”) feature film debut.  He started strong as the movie won the Best Debut Film award at Cannes.  Scott was tired of doing commercials and had to actively pursue the project.  He was given a budget of under $1 million and a choice of four actors for the leads.  He chose Keith Carradine and Harvey Keitel.   Keitel was available after Coppola dumped him from “Apocalypse Now”.  Carradine almost became unavailable due to his surprise #1 hit “I’m Easy”.  The  movie was based on Joseph Conrad’s short story “The Duel” which itself was based on two French officers who conducted a series of duels over decades.

                The movie opens in Strasbourg in 1800.  A French Hussar named Feraud (Keitel) skewers the mayor’s nephew in a duel.  The French general sends a staff officer named d’Hubert (Carradine) to inform Feraud that he is confined to quarters.  He catches Feraud at the wrong time and place which causes Feraud to challenge him to a duel.  Hey, don’t stab the messenger!  The movies second duel in ten minutes ends with d’Hubert victorious and thinking that’s the last time he will have to interact with this madman.  “He is most unreasonable” will turn out to be the understatement of the Napoleonic Wars.  Speaking of unreasonable, when he returns to headquarters the general is upset with d’Hubert!  It is unclear why – must be some French thing.

                Six months later the two meet up in Augsberg.  Their second duel features d’Hubert calling time-out to sneeze.  It ends unsatisfactorily.  The third is down and dirty with heavy sabers.  The fourth is in Lubeck in 1806.  This one is on horseback and is the joust equivalent of a duel.  Tres cool.  d’Hubert manages to stay out of Feraud’s path for the next six years until they are both in the detritus of the retreat from Moscow.  Even though they are freezing, duel #5 is on until interrupted by Cossacks.  Spoil sports!  After the exile of Napoleon, d’Hubert retires to a country estate and weds.  End of story, right?  Wrong.  There are still some unresolved issues as far as Feraud is concerned.  Plus, we in the audience demand closure!

ACTING:   A                        

ACTION:  N/A                     

ACCURACY:  A  (it is faithful to the novel)         

PLOT:  B                  

REALISM:   B         

CINEMATOGRAPHY:   A

SCORE:  B               

BEST SCENE:   the final duel

BEST QUOTE:   Feraud:  La!  (he says this at the end of each of his duels) 

            This is a very interesting movie.  And why wouldn’t it be when it is based on such an insane story? Joseph Conrad based his short story on the real life adventures of two French officers named Dupont and Fournier.  The series of 30 duels over nineteen years began in 1794 under similar circumstances to what is shown in the movie.  The last one also ended similar to in the movie.  Scott takes the fascinating story and adds excellent attention to detail.  The sets are authentic to the time period and are reminiscent of “Barry Lyndon” in their lighting with candles or fireplaces.  The set designer created some marvelous mise-en-scenes.  The uniforms and weapons are spot on for the Napoleonic army.  Look at those hussar uniforms and you’ll realize why they were chick magnets.   And we see a variety of weapons in the dueling scenes.  They are all authentic weapons and in some cases were quite valuable.  When Keitel insisted on tossing his last dueling pistol, Scott had to make sure it landed on a mattress.  Scott is careful not to be repetitive in the duels.  Most importantly, although you won’t learn much about the Napoleonic Wars from this movie (with the exception of the Moscow retreat scene which will have you cuddling under a blanket), you will be steeped in the minutiae of dueling etiquette.  For instance, years pass by because d’Hubert has been promoted above Feraud and only equal ranks could duel.

I’m not sure if Scott was shooting for the big takeaway that their concept of honor was ridiculous, but the movie seems to push that idea.  Feraud is border-line insane and d’Hubert may be worse because he realizes how insane things are, but risks his deserved happiness on these points of honor.  The duels are used as a metaphor for war.  By the end of the movie, Feraud can not even remember what started the feud

The movie is essentially a two-character affair.  Feraud is one of the great war movie villains and Keitel inhabits the part.  You get the distinct impression that he must have been an ass during the filming.  Carradine does some of his best work in a weaker part.  d’Hubert is too good to be true.  He has no flaws.  Although an extremely likeable character, the movie could have used a little less holiness.  This comes to an unrealistic head when d’Hubert prevents the execution of the man he most despises.  He also unnecessarily risks his future happiness to fight the last duel.  This does fit the age-old trope that military men will chose their profession over family.  Or in this case, honor over family.  D’Hubert is portrayed this way because the movie sets the characters up as exemplars of two types of nobility in the early 19^th Century.  Feraud is a man who lives by the code of honor and corrupts it to feed his addiction to dueling.  D’Hubert is the enlightened man who obeys the code because he refuses to have his honor questioned.  He is willing to die for a concept.

            If you like duels, this movie is for you.  It has quantity and quality.  It also has two fascinating characters and a story that flows from start to finish.  The best thing about the movie is that once it is obvious the two men will be fighting several duels over the years, there is great anticipation for the next one.  It is a movie that is best seen for the first time, but Scott’s directing and the cinematography make it a film that rewards repeat viewings.