By the Sword

By the Sword has depth to it that I seldom see in film. It also displays a morality play, skillfully embedded in the story that make this one of my all time favorites. I recognize that By the Sword will not be for everyone. It was not made with the cookie cutter approach.

I thought this movie was very good for several reasons. The first was that the plot was woven very well around a sport that does not receive much attention, fencing. I know very little about fencing but this was a good introduction. It is almost an artform, and the aura of the training school added another dimension. Having novices being taught fencing allowed the viewer to pick up on the basics.

Secondly was the casting. Eric Roberts in my opinion is one of the best actors going around and pairing him up with F. Murray Abraham, you really can't go wrong acting wise. The supporting cast was merely there to add to the plot and to help develop some atmosphere.

Without giving too much away, this is a movie about revenge that chips away at the start through flashbacks but builds to an inevitable but pulsing showdown. Eric Roberts plays the part of an egotistical past fencing champion and present training supremo. F Murray Abraham is a man with a hidden past, linked to fencing that you feel must come out sooner or later.

The action scenes involving fencing were admirable and while people take acting for granted, for both the afore mentioned actors to handle foils as they did would indicate they had some previous understanding of the sport.

I don't think I am giving too much away by saying F. Murray Abrahams character Max, in addition to attempting to break in as a fencing instructor is also taking cautious steps in trying to establish relationship ties after being incarcerated for a very long period.

All in all a very pleasing time filler, that also exhibited the hustle and bustle of the city it was filmed in, despite most of the action taking place inside the training school for aspiring fencers.

I too Fence, and I teach Historical rapier fighting as well. No, the film was not representative of Olympic sport-fencing, now or then, but it was never promoted as, or intended to be a "How to Fence" movie. If that's what you're looking for, go read DiGrassi. The film itself is a great story, it moves quickly, and has plenty of little quirks to make you say "Oh..." It was never 'predictable,' and the plot developed at a satisfying pace. Go to Blockbuster, rent it, decide for yourself. Then, go check eBay... =-)

Hey, so the fencing is a bit hokey. The movie is "not" about fencing, if it were we would all be asleep in 10 minutes. I have fenced on and off for over 30 years so I know a little bit about it. I would rather watch something like this than any fencing bout ever put on. So all you purists out there, lighten up. Like the movie for what it is, don't dis-like it for what it isn't. The story was not about fencing, the fencing was only a backdrop to the story.

There is not blood in this movie. The title of my comment has to do with the fact that, were it not for the blood, any contemporary Olympic style fencer could beat the tar out of a 16th or 17th Century duellist. The skills of a contemporary fencer are unmatchable; but the will to kill is something you cannot pick up in a fencing salle.

This difference plays a role in the story, as characters come to grips with their personal traumas and inner demons. The original movie One-Sheet is informative for the Spartan purity of its text:

.......By The Sword......

Live by it ..... Die by it .....

The folks who pule and whine about the "safety" issues in this film are as confoundingly ignorant of the definition of "metaphor" as are the historical purists who insist on mewling about the Russian roulette sequence in "Deer Hunter." This is not a documentary, so it simply beggars the imagination why anyone would be so ruthlessly misguided as to hold it up to documentary standards of factual accuracy.

This movie is a classic morality tale -- and a nicely crafted one at that -- told within the strictures of a fencing salle. Abrams and Roberts give fine performances, while Mia Sara, Chris Rydell, Elaine Kagan and others provide good support. The movie, for all of its obvious mythological framework, offers some nice insights into the reality of fencing. For example, when was the last time you saw an Errol Flynn movie devote so much attention to the *footwork* of sword play? (And for you non-fencers out there, here is a clue: fencing is *ALL* in the footwork; the sword is just there to let the other person know that they lost the bout.) At the level of world-class competition, the differences between life/death and win/lose engagements blur; personal trauma can blur them even more. It is only in confronting our demons that the distinctions return to us, and the genuinely meaningful things in life can be regained. That is why this film is a morality tale.

Filmatically, the cinematography bears some attention: so many subtle hues of brown that pop out rather than disappear under the surface. Bill Conti's score, particularly as it emphasizes classical guitar, is a joy all by itself. The images of stair-cases and the allegory of Jacob's Ladder appear throughout.