9 Reviews from the Land of JBU Cinema: "The Duellists"

Written for various prompts in and out of my Cinema classes at John Brown this past semester, these reviews/analyses seemed to warrant inclusion here. 

It’s interesting to watch “A Good Year,” a later and less conventional Ridley Scott film, and then turn around to see “The Duellists,” where Scott was largely still perfecting his style. They are both classic examples of his framing, camera motion, and devotion to careful lighting. “The Duellists,” however, is (expectedly) less refined. This may sound like a strange diagnosis, because Scott so carefully builds every scene and painstakingly composes every shot, every frame. But I say that it is a less mature work from a technical standpoint simply because it is so heavily structured. We might not mind it, because it fits the subject matter of military regimentation very well (I’ll even give Scott the benefit of the doubt and assume that this is what he meant it for). But it feels rigid, almost as if he’s confident in the theory and style he’s found but has yet to really experiment with them. Or maybe that’s just me.

Let’s talk about some things that make this film distinctively Scott. The lighting is indeed spectacular, not simply because there seems to be so little practical or motivated light use throughout. The majority of the film takes place outdoors, at the magic hour, and it gives the whole production a very painterly, poised feeling (almost mimicking the neo-classical paintings of the Napoleonic period). But the real wonder, for me, was that Scott was able to make use of such great light in his interior scenes, as well. There was only one scene in the entire film that I felt was obviously made possible by motivated light (when d’Hubert meets with the doctor late at night, and he lights two candles on the desk). Otherwise, either little to no practical light was necessary, or it was so well disguised that I took no notice.

Another Scott trademark is his use of push-ins or move-ins. Often, in this film, he’ll start with a sweeping, tableau-like establishing shot and then focus on a part of it. At one point he does the opposite, starting close on what looks like a still life setting for a painter and moving out to include the entire room in the shot.  It’s a good idea, because it allows us to experience the idealization of the period as if we were viewing a piece of fine artwork, and then focuses us in on the key actions and players in the scene. It is also, in my opinion, overused here, and seemingly done not with a dolly or crane but a simple zoom lens. It often feels flat and cheesy (although the flatness might contribute to the concept of the “living painting”), and I’m glad Scott decided to use it less in his later films (the degree to which he uses them in films like “A Good Year” is less distracting and more of a recognizable element of personal style).