First off, this is my first ever article here on CBM. I've been reading for a couple of years and even joined last year, but haven't gotten around to post something until now. So please be gentle.
When I heard that they were making a new The Three Musketeers movie, I had my reserves. I grew up with the classic Disney flick starring the now infamous Charlie Sheen, Kiefer Sutherland, and Chris O'Donnell among others. In my mind, these men
were the three (four) musketeers.
But I decided to take a look anyways. When the first trailer hit and I saw the various slow-motion shots and flying ships, I went nuts. I was so mad. This was not the three musketeers, this was France with some crazy Pirates magic thrown in. But as I saw trailer after trailer, I stopped looking at it like a three musketeers film, and more as a Hollywood film. With that being said, lets get right into the review.
First off, lets take a look at the story. Now I'm only familiar with the 1993 version, so I might be a little biased. Anyway, here we have your basic Hollywood formula. Boy wants to be in club. Club rejects boy. Boy helps club so club lets boy in. It's pretty cut and dry here. Basically, D'Artagnan goes to Paris to join the musketeers only to find out that they've been disbanded. Here's where my first big problem with the film is. In the 93 version, it is very obvious and known that the musketeers were disbanded and are no longer of use, but in this movie, it's really never even said. The only indications are some comments (mostly from Athos) that the musketeers are no longer needed and that all they do is drink and fight. So this revelation is largely underplayed. After this, D'Artagnan helps the musketeers defeat the Cardinal's guards. In a strange turn of events, the four are called to the King to be punished, but instead leave with new suits and a budding friendship with him. After that, there wasn't much wrong with it as far as the story itself goes. Unfortunately, there are still some problems with it. For example, at the beginning of the film, the musketeers find Da'Vinci's plans for a flying machine. In the trailer, you see it. It's just a ship with a giant balloon over it like a blimp. I know it's a movie, but I found this highly overplayed and (impossible) stupid for the time period. Later, this ship lifts a carriage into the air with cables, like we're watching some sort of spy movie. So I guess the biggest problem with the story is the fact that they tried to modernize it too much. Too much stylized "machinery" (for lack of a better term), too much slow-mo, too much of what we see every year.
Story rating: 2.5 out of 5. But enough of that, let's get onto the acting. I'll be honest, when the movie first started, I cringed. Something just seemed OFF and the only thing I can pinpoint for this is the acting. The opening scene with Athos and Milady just felt too dry.
There wasn't enough time to react, just like it was "Say this, oh now you say this as soon as she's done" kind of thing. I will say that after the beginning however, it got better. Matthew Macfadyen delivered (mostly) a bearable performance as Athos with only a few scenes with the lightning-quick responses. Ray Stevenson (as usual) played a perfect role of Porthos. His ability to completely immerse himself in each role always amazes me. Now he's no Heath Ledger, but he's pretty good. Luke Evans, who i'm not familiar with, also delivered a delightful role as Aramis with his wit and charm. Lastly, Logan Lerman performed okay. Unfortunately, as a whole, his performance did not stand out and is not as good as his other works (Percy Jackson), but is mostly bearable. Everyone else played their roles to the tee. Especially those of Milla Jovovich and Freddie Fox who play Milady de Winter and King Louis XIII respectively. But the most shining star in this film is actor Orlando Bloom. Despite his strange appearance, he completely blew me away with his natural ability to
become the character. He was the only one in the whole film who I loved watching on the screen. And his last minute return sets up for a sequel of epic proportions, much akin to his other franchise, Pirates.
Acting rating: 2.5 out of 5. Lastly, the whole look of the film in terms of CGI, style, and new visuals. Overall the visuals in this film are amazing. Although a bit out of place, the enhanced "machinery" of the time creates something never seen before in a movie like this. It creates interest with its innovative execution and performance. The CGI was good and everything was just great. I have no complaints about how this movie was filmed. Very stylistic and impressive.
Visuals rating: 3.5 out of 5. Overall, this movie is watchable. With the amazing original story to use as a source and the great cast, this movie should've (and might still be) been the next Pirates franchise. Unfortunately, the stale acting and awkward "advanced machinery" drag this film down. If you're a die-hard Musketeers fan or a constant movie-goer, check it out if there's nothing left to see. But for everyone else, I suggest waiting for it on Red Box or whatever movie vendor you prefer.
Overall, I give this movie two and a half Popcorn points out of five. Give it a little more effort next time Hollywood.
All for One! And One For All!