The final duel was epic


between edmond and fernand.
one of my favorite fights in cinema.

reply

Yes. It was very good. It made sense they were equally matched... well actually Edmond was slightly out matched.. But he had hatred and revenge as his motivation while Fernand was just evil.

reply

Naw Edmond was the better fighter in the end. He was trained by a solider and was much quicker and larger . He didn't just sword fight for sport

reply

Edmond was far better, his disadvantage was that Fernand started out on a horse.

reply

The final duel was both epic, and awful.

I say that because the fight choreography was really fantastic, and among the better examples you see onscreen -- except for one glaring error. And it's a big one. The swords they were using were totally wrong for the fight. It would have been almost perfect if they had been using sabers, but they weren't; they were using smallswords. People who know nothing about swords might not notice, but for those who do, this will take you right out of the movie.

Edmond and Fernand were fighting exactly as if they had been using sabers: occasionally thrusting, but mostly using their swords to cut and slash. It was fine for sabers. In fact, it was very good for sabers, with reasonably, economical movements, as opposed to wildly exaggerated swings that leave you wide open. But they weren't using sabers. They were using smallswords.

Smallswords were specialized duelling weapons. They weren't used in warfare. They were small, light, and deadly in the hands of an expert. But they were limited. They were dedicated thrusting swords. They could, at best -- make light, shallow cuts, meant to harass and goad an opponent. They were too light to make serious cuts, and the edge geometry was all wrong. So using them to slash, the way Edmond and Fernand do, was simply out.

Watch Ridley Scott's "The Duellists" to see something closer (not perfect, but closer) to how this kind of sword was actually used.

reply