More kinos like this?

I liked it but didn't love it. Maybe rate it in the higher 7s out of 10

the duelists 1977, one of the most underrated films ever

Deux Hommes en Colère (1984)

this sucked, the character was an annoying faggot, it's unfortunate that the good guy lost in the end.

>the other guy is being unreasonable
yea, so what was his fucking problem

>it was meant to be a serious historical drama.
And the writing simply wasn't strong enough for that to work. They could have made up for it by emphasizing the absurdity of situation, but they didn't, so it was just uninteresting.

>one of the most underrated films ever
Not really, it was underwhelming after seeing all the fucking praise Yas Forums throws at it. It looks nice and the fights are well choreographed. The premise of them meeting time and again is interesting. It's a good movie, but that's about it. It would have been better if it explored the characters and the themes more, as it is it ends up being shallow and pointless.

the last line in the film redeems it completely, atleast in my eyes, making it a 9

>says nothing specific about the movie
>calls it shallow and pointless
havin a joke, are we, user?

you didnt watch it, fuck off

Attached: 1587931047288.jpg (443x455, 31.71K)

"You have kept me at your beck and call for fifteen years. I shall never again do what you demand of me. By every rule of single combat, from this moment your life belongs to me. Is that not correct? Then I shall simply declare you dead. In all of your dealings with me, you'll do me the courtesy to conduct yourself as a dead man. I have submitted to your notions of honor long enough. You will now submit to mine."

>Where it's always double drill and no canteen;
>'E'll be squattin' on the coals,
>Givin' drink to poor damned souls,
>An' I'll get a swig in hell from Gunga Din!
>Yes, Din! Din! Din!
>You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!
>Though I've belted you and flayed you,
>By the living Gawd that made you,
>You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!

Alright. The motivation of Feraud is completely unexplained and unreasonable. Why is acting this way? No answer. That in itself isn't necessarily terrible writing, but nothing is done with it at all. As another user pointed out, they could have made something out of the absurdity of the situation, but the film just leaves it unexplained and unexplored. Is this not a flaw?

the l-line is tooo gooood oh ohmy god im gonna COOOOOOOOOOOM

Attached: maxresdefault (1).jpg (1280x720, 50.41K)

>no answer
he literally tells armand that he offended him by "arresting" him infront of the lady

Attached: computer-classes-1518467740.png (500x500, 206.48K)

If that is the true reason then the writing of his character is even worse and they just grabbed the first excuse they could so that the plot could happen. I assumed there was more to it, guess that's my fault.

thanks user
peché
interesting I'll check it out

i dont really blame you for it, but that was how dueling worked in 18th-19th century france. People were so afraid of loosing honor that they demanded satisfaction over minor offences

As it happens in other stories based on real events, human motives seem petty and illogical

The real life Feraud was way crazier than the movie Feraud

Calm down user. It's just fiction.

>Irish folk heroes are belligerent douchebags who went around spouting the old equivalent to "Meet me outside the bar" to everyone

NO NO NO ITS NOT I WANT TO BE A 19TH CENTURY GENTLEMAN

Attached: fingerears.jpg (849x521, 102.77K)

If I didn't watch it how do I know the Napoleonchad lost?

>napoleonchad
heh, rolling over minor german citystates and austria, what a chad

>the virgin stance vs the chad stance

Attached: 44366543.jpg (1017x572, 217.44K)