MovieChat Forums > The Duellists (1978) Discussion > This film was wasted with American actor...

This film was wasted with American actors!!!

posted 16 years ago by zen0x
39 replies | jump to latest

This film was in dire need of an all British cast. At the very least a cast which could put on an upper class British accent. Better still would have been a cast who had a good French accent or perhaps a French cast which spoke English.

The American accent ruins these period films completely it makes them seem cheap and tacky. I am wholly disappointed with this effort from Ridley Scott, thankfully he learned a valuable lesson from his premier film. I didn't think much of the actors either really, although Harvey Keitel's performance wasn't too bad other than the accent, but Carradine is possibly the most unbelievable landed gentry I have ever seen.

If American actors can't be bothered to learn the trade they shouldn't be offered parts which don't involve a car chase and shooting.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ContinentalOp 16 years ago

This film features two very brilliant American actors, Keitel and Carradine. I disagree about Carradine, his appearance and voice are very noble.

"Jai Guru Deva, Om"

[–] Gunslingerstud 16 years ago

I've read that originally Scott wanted Micheal York and Oliver Reed for the two roles, but was unable to get them.

As it is, I really do enjoy this movie and think it is highly underappreciated.

Ron Paul 09'

[–] pk_000 16 years ago

I think Keitel was alright but Carradine could've been replaced. He didn't look out of place, but he sure did sound like it.

[–] will-38 16 years ago

It originally was suppose to have Oliver Reed and Michael York.

I disagree with you about Keitel. He is all movement and angst while Carradine gives a nicely controlled performance.

And as for having an all English cast I agree but then I think that all these commonwealth actors who come here to work should be sent back home or only be allowed to play commonwealth characters and not Americans.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] deeveed 16 years ago

You know if we take the OP's suggestion to its logic then no American actors could play any Shakespeare. Keitel to me seemed to play the role 'simply' meaning no complication. He certainly came across as a "man of action" and not committed to much to some sort of intellectual analysis of his dueling.

[–] teacher_tom516 15 years ago

WTF is it about bloody accents? They're supposed to be Frenchmen in Napoleon's army speaking French, not Allo Allo. They speak English because it's a) a story by an American author and b) they're American actors performing for a primarily English speaking audience and communication is paramount.

"It is not enough to like a film. You must like it for the right reasons."
- Pierre Rissient

[–] zen0x 15 years ago

a) What does it matter who wrote the bloody thing? By that logic we should have any script not written by an American narrated in their home tongue and that would be an awful lot of non-english speaking films given how few scripts actually get written by "Americans".

b) They're American actors who couldn't be bothered to put on even an English accent let alone a French one. It's absurd seeing Carradine prancing around in full French regalia with a plane American accent. You can get away with an English accent in period films, but not with an American accent it makes the whole thing seem artificial.

The difference between a lot of American actors compared with commonwealth actors is that the commonwealth actors get paid a pittance comparatively and are EXPECTED to use accents. How absurd would it be for say Tim Roth in Reservoir Dogs to be talking in a North London accent?

[–] PoppyTransfusion 13 years ago

a) a story by an American author

It's by Joseph Conrad who was Polish and naturalised as a British citizen.

A man chases a woman until she catches him

[–] MovieBro 15 years ago

Complaining bout accents. Common now. A fantastic film in every sense and you are lost on it because actors don't speak in accents good enough for the likes of you. Zenox you might as well not watch films nowadays if tiny things like this are a bother. The new Sherlock Holmes must really piss you off with it's cast from all over the world. Your loss. Personally this is my favorite Ridley Scott film and he is a great director. Actors gaining American accents must really piss you off. Open your eyes and let your mind follow. Stop looking at film through a pigeonhole. You are missing out on the beautiful story, cinematography, acting and production value. As well as one of the best genre films.

Dori Lawrence: Let's build a kingdom with our suckiness.

[–] zen0x 15 years ago

Not at all, why are you defending laziness? Would you have accepted Tim Roth running around in Reservoir Dogs speaking in cockney, the answer is no because it's laughable. It is lazy and unprofessional and quite frankly there are thousands of actors all over the world who are prepared to work for their money.

I've not seen Sherlock Holmes, but I have to admit I wasn't that happy about one of the cornerstones of British literature being once again brought down by having a bankable American actor playing the lead. However, an important caveat of that being, Robert Downey Jr. can act and can put on a pretty good English accent so ultimately, no it didn't bother me at all because he's not some useless American actor who refuses to do a bit of voice couching.

If you can honestly tell me that this film couldn't have been better by the actors doing what they're supposed to do and actually act then you are a complete dimwit.

[–] Darren (1342) 4 years ago

Tim Roth speaking in Cockney would have been out of place because he's an English-speaking actor portraying an English-speaking character in an English-speaking country, in a film shot in English in its own country. Of course he had to affect an American accent in order not to destroy the illusion.

But this is a story shot in English about events from more than a century earlier, in another country that has a different language. The rules are a little different. Unless they were going to cast it with French actors, film it in French, and subtitle it, then the actors are simply, inevitably going to have the wrong accent -- so it really doesn't matter a damn what wrong accent that is, now does it?

The makers of HBO's Chernobyl miniseries faced much the same situation, and resolved it in exactly the same way: they had the actors speak in their own natural voices, regardless of where they came from, rather than affect a phony accent that might come across as unintentionally comical and be distracting. Since the actors aren't speaking the original language the characters would have spoken in real life, it really doesn't matter, and you can accept it.

[–] CremersAlex 12 years ago

Well said, MovieBro.

[–] efa-3 15 years ago

The movie is about two french officers, so what in the hell does it need an all british cast?

[–] zen0x 15 years ago

It needs a French cast that's the point or at the very least actors willing to put on an accent you tit.

[–] archer1812 15 years ago

So you want them to speak English with a French accent? What would be the point of that?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

"It needs a French cast that´s the point or at the very least actors willing to put on an accent".

No it doesn´t. In fact, since ALL characters are French, such a demand really makes no sense at all. All I see is a nit picky film viewer with no ability to suspend disbelief whatsoever.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] swaneer 15 years ago

Why do French soldiers need an upper class British accent? Perhaps the op is British? It really is a moronic post about a beautiful film.

[–] archer1812 15 years ago

It really is. And his other proposal of having them speak with a French accent is just as moronic... He'd have them all running around sounding like Inspector Clouseau!

[–] simonkevnorris 13 years ago

I agree that there is no real need for actors to use the correct accent in films.

After all, in this movie they should all be speaking French with English sub-titles. I'm sure if they attempted to speak French many people would point out how bad they were at doing so - or even if they did not have the correct dialects.

Both American actors did a fine job in this movie. Even if apparently they were induced to join the cast as a means to eat French cuisine.

[–] SuperDevilDoctor 12 years ago

The American accent ruins these period films completely it makes them seem cheap and tacky.

Utter balderdash! Keitel and Carradine are fine.

Luxuriate in the eclectic...
http://www.eccentric-cinema.com

[–] Cracklight 12 years ago

It is curious that so many people on imdb expect English speaking actors playing "foreign" characters to speak in English but adopt the accent for the nationality of their character. It does sound silly and can detract.The English language version of Christian Clavier's Napoleon (2002) is a case in point with Clavier speaking in a heavily accented, Clouseau style english, Depardieu is almost unitelligible, while other actors speak English in a variety of accents - more American from the Italian actor Claudio Armendola (Murat) or British from another Italian Ennio Fantastichini (Joseph Bonaparte). More important is consistency and I have mentioned in another post the problems I have had with the inconsistencies in Amadeus (1984). I am sure it was not intentional for Scott to cast American actors in the leads, and that he was merely getting the best actors he could afford. But perhaps it has allowed a fortunate lucky circumstance (and so many of the great scenes seemed to have happened by chance - such as the horses nuzzling at the same time as D'Hubert proposes). With the leads having American accents they seem different from everyone around them and highlights their crazy life and obsession. I think it works and the two leads are superb in this film. Is this justification, was it intended by Ridley Scott, or do others agree?

[–] cthulhulurks 12 years ago

The casting is great, the both actors did their job very well, it couldn't be done any better. Definitely not a weakness of the film.

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

[–] Reephaman 12 years ago

How on earth does it matter if everyone is supposed to be French anyway? I don't think that Keitel and Carradine's accents jar at all. At least nobody speaks like Inspector Clousseau. It really ruins a film when non-Anglophones are depicted speaking their own language in accented English; it insults the audience. Defiance and Schindler's List were almost ruined by this conceit.

[–] BooksArsenal 11 years ago

I think it works and the two leads are superb in this film. Is this justification, was it intended by Ridley Scott, or do others agree?

I absolutely agree. I don't know whether it was intentional or not, but I think it works as a sort of "bond" that unites the two characters and sets them apart.

So Ridley Scott was hoping to get Michael York and Oliver Reed instead?

It would have seemed like a re-tread of the Three/Four Musketeers. Those films had just been released a few years before this one, so I am surprised why others are so obsessed with the issue of "redundancy."

The York/Reed casting might have highlighted redundancy in a way not even considered by the OP.

[–] snorfinn 12 years ago

This film was in dire need of an all British cast. At the very least a cast which could put on an upper class British accent. Better still would have been a cast who had a good French accent or perhaps a French cast which spoke English.

You're a moron.

[–] JaneDanton 11 years ago

racist