Genres

Visitors Review

mike hatton 2012-05-25 07:23:45

Pirates of the Parisian Sky

The 2011 film version of The Three Musketeers 3-D is not simply areboot of the popular Alexandre Dumas novel, rather it is a completere-fashioning of the original story that has a lot in common withPirates of the Caribbean. In fact, calling The Three Musketeers, ThePirates of the Parisian Sky would probably resonate more meaningfullywith younger audiences. At times, the looting of iconic scenes from thepast fifteen years of action- adventure cinema (e.g. The Matrix and300) pushes the film into the realm of parody.Purists are likely to despise the film for its liberties and yes,introducing exotic floating airships into the plot, un-tethers it fromits source material. Any logical historical links that The ThreeMusketeers once had are rendered as spurious details and rather, acampy Disney-esque tone infuses the film like the aforementionedPirates.The way to approach this film is to forget any nostalgia that you mayhave for its origins and rather, to enjoy it as a swashbucklingadventure story. On this level, it is entertaining and the swordplaybenefits from contemporary special effects and fighting styles,although, I have to say, Douglas Fairbanks is still my favorite masterduelist.These days, the athleticism and skill of the old stars are replaced byrapid editing that is impressionistic. One is left with a vague senseof unease having been hoodwinked into believing you saw something thatnever really happened.The plot is fairly simple. D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman), a young hothead,sets off for Paris in order to hook up with the legendary musketeers –Aramis (Luke Evans), Porthos (Ray Stevenson) and Athus (MatthewMacfadyen). Unbeknown to them, a beautiful double agent Milady deWinter (Milla Jovovich) and Richelieu (Christoph Waltz) are plotting tooverthrow the French royal family by plunging Europe into war. Thediabolical plan can only be averted if the musketeers retrieve theroyal family jewels. The setup is hokum but by the midway stage thefilm hits its groove, relying more on action set-pieces, than itsthreadbare humor. The 3-D presentation is well thought out, revealing the stunninglocations like Versailles (actually a Bavarian castle) in all theirViewfinder glory. This offsets to some degree the solid cast who areunable to transcend their simply written archetypes.This is no classic and Dumas fans should stay away. That said, loversof the Disney-esque swashbuckler are likely to find it fun.

blackmamba99971 2012-05-24 17:30:22

A great classic

Another instalment of the great classic film. This held a wonderfulcast to play the legendary three along with a fourth new comer,D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman). Athos, the leader of the four, must findclues as to who is a double agent against the crown of France. Yet amiddleman Lord Buckingham, (Orlando Bloom), a self centred ego maniacwho plans to have peace talks with King Louise XIII (Freddie Fox)tostop the endless cycle of war. Needless to say the cardinal of France(Christolph Waltz) does not like the idea of peace and decides to setup Lord Buckingham by the use of Milady D'winter (milla Jovovich) toplant a rare necklace in his vault in London Tower. This will providethe necessary means to kick start Louis to declare war against england,with the cardinal as king, provided that he makes Louis look like anidiot. It is a rare treat to see such movies make it to the theatresover what is becoming a mainstay of needless violence. I do like sci-fiand good thrillers. But todays movies are lacking something by means ofemotions. Most films now a days lack the lustre when shown, it is moreviolence and action that is overtaking the young minds. It's as if theysay who cares about a bravado film like the three musketeers? I wantblood, fire, destruction. The rest can sit on the back burner. Not so.I love this film, a good action film, with proper attitudes to life, nokind of ridiculous flash bang genre that is mainstream now. It has agreat story, and I like the idea that Milady De'Winter survived thefall, which should have killed her in the first place. It will be niceto see this instalment with a second film to follow up the adventure.

robert parker 2012-05-23 20:24:38

loved it

went expecting little , but it rattled along no dull moments or pausesthe interiors and costumes stunning. Orlando Bloom needs a medal forbeing able to wear outrageous costumes with such panache. the air shipcrash on notre dame show stopping , the final sequence a knockout. morefun than the last pirates, the cast looked fresh seemed to be enjoyingthemselves- loved this take on the three musketeers, hope there's asequel Buckingham's revenge perhaps. this never set out to please thecritics, 'im sick of Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan being shoved atus. we go the movies to be taken out of ourselves in troubled times andthis does it . for once the colour is strong and vibrant for a change,a feast for the eyes if not the intellect, but who cares sit back andenjoy.

Jess H 2012-05-23 09:20:31

I don't care what people say... I really liked it!

OK... I know a lot of people on here really don't like the movie. Iunderstand that there were things that could have been changed aboutit, but for the most part I really enjoyed watching the movie. I lovethe steampunk feel to the movie and the slow motion in the fightscenes. I will say that the girl that played Constance could have donebetter. She was so unemotional and flat. The Three Musketeers andD'Artagnan were great! Great fighting and great humor. I would reallylike to see a sequel. Lastly, the costumes were AMAZING! The dresseswere so bright and colorful. The men looked GREAT! I have seen theDisney Musketeers movie and I hated the costumes from that movie. Imglad this film did such a good on the costumes.

thestormchaser319 2012-05-20 01:39:40

A somewhat cheesy, yet colorful movie

I am sort of torn about this movie. It would have been so much betterif the directors hadn't made it into a Pirates of The Caribbeanwanna-be. There were parts in the film that were done wonderfully, andothers were just plain cheesy. The Worst actor of the whole bunch wasOrlando Bloom in my opinion,mostly because his performance wasoverdone, forced, and totally unbelievable.Also, his hair and wardrobereminded me of a clown, as did some of the other clothes in worn by thenobility. The main character was likable enough. Stupid. butlikable.However his chemistry with Constance was practicallynonexistent, making the romance scenes a bit awkward. Although their characters were a bit underdeveloped,The other threemusketeers (I don't remember their names)were colorful enough to keepyou watching.If you were looking for a remake of the original Three Musketeers, thendon't watch this. It is nothing like the book and The producers shouldhave titled this, The Four musketeers since there are, of Course fourof them.If you were looking for something similar to Pirates of the Carribbean,Then this is your film. The music, the characters, and even bits of theplot are very similar to it.All in all, this was a cheesy, yet colorful movie, and if your lookingfor mindless entertainment, then by all means, watch this. But don'twatch it expecting it to be the best film of 2011, becauseunfortunately, its not.

Pkinyanjui91 2012-05-19 17:10:42

fun witty an a little bit cheesy

This movie was actually quite fun. The fight scenes were splendid, thejokes more or less funny and the acting spot on. For someone who hasn'tread the book I wasn't sure what I was in for but after watching it Ithink I might just get me a copy. Okay I have to admit there wasn'tmuch in terms of suspense but I think the acting saved themovie,Orlando bloom does a nice job as does Christoph waltz. Overallthis is just a fun movie about three men and theircamaraderie,everything thing else comes afterward. If you're lookingfor a fun way to spend an hour and a half or thereabout,I wouldrecommend this movie.

A Barros 2012-05-19 03:04:56

3 fools and a boy

The original story is a dense drama, with action - good action! Severalmovies have told the story, more or less successfully. This one noteven tried to tell the story. It just borrows the characters and themotto from the book and delivers brainless action. This is a sort ofteen musketeer version, with D'Artagnan looking 15, in love with afalse blonde. Then, airships. Nothing could look less XVII Century thanthis foolishness. A waste of a few good actors like Christoph Waltz,Til Schweiger and Milla Jovovich. Even if you like the approach, thebig problem with the movie is that there is no tension. You just knowthat everything will come to a happy and easy end. Use your time toread the book - the original thing.

Jered Markoff 2012-05-18 13:56:26

Really?

I actually expected this movie to be bad based on the previews, andafter the first 5 minutes, which were kind of entertaining, I thought"maybe this won't be so bad". But every attempt at humor is completelydry, and the story is told in the worst way possible. Aside from theopening scene, everything added to the story in an attempt to make itdifferent from the standard Three Musketeer plot is completely lame.And even Orlando Bloom acted like a rookie! I don't know how on earththis managed to get financed. If you want some real entertainment,watch the 1993 version, in which Tim Curry is the best evil Cardinalever!

goebel-c 2012-05-18 01:29:43

"Nuking the fridge" is harmless in comparison to what this film does

First of all I ought to note that I did not expect much of this film -and yet was left completely underwhelmed. There are some major issues regarding this film which I would like toaddress, they are the reason for my extraordinarily low ranking, whichwould have been even lower if I had not thought it disrespectful tothose actors who did their job very well (against all odds).One may argue that screen adaptations require some changes to be madeto the original material, and I wholeheartedly agree, but the changesmade to this particular adaption are so fundamental they might as wellnot have bothered to call it „The Three Musketeers". There is as goodas nothing left of the original plot in this movie, and what is left ofit is changed beyond recognition. I did expect it to be more actionladen than ultimately necessary, I expected it to deviate from theoriginal plot, but nothing could possibly have prepared me for thisshipwreck of a film. One might think that while a film shouldn't be required to follow thebook's plot word by word to qualify for bearing the title of a famousnovel - one should be able to tell it is supposed to be based on saidnovel, right? Apparently not. Apart from the title and the the names ofthe characters, there is but little that would betray it to be evenroughly based on Dumas' novel. Buckingham is turned from lover to evilLord, and Queen Anne into a blameless little lamb who fell prey to theCardinal's machinations. No such thing as the fleur-de-lis is evenmentioned. Constance doesn't only not die, she isn't even threatened byMilady. And that's just a selection. One might be led to think it was deliberately conceived as a parody ofremakes. After all, it has all the ingredients – a butchered plot,characters with any debt taken out of them (despite the fact that ifgiven the chance, most actors would have delivered an outstandingperformance, but the time usually assigned to character development isdevoured by „sexy" scenes featuring Milla Jovovich – who herself is awhole other problem), references to everything from the Matrix toMission Impossible, goodness – it even has airships. Airships. Not one, not two, but an entire armada of airships. Iunderstand that Rocheford's eye patch is tempting, but they might aswell have put a parrot on his shoulder, it would not have managed tomake it appear any more ridiculous. I was surprised they did notventure to release an air Kraken. If this film had had less Milla Jovovich, no airships and if anyone hadbothered to actually read "The Three Musketeers" beforehand, it mighthave been decent - and had they fixed some minor problems (like theannoyingly clean costumes and settings), it may even have been great.It certainly had the potential. It's a pity it nuked the fridge... orshould I say - flew the airship?

fc1914 2012-05-17 05:06:13

Worth killing 2 hours.... and that's all

At first when I heard about this movie, I thought that it will be a lotof fun. The fun was there, but in some strange course. Maybe it isbecause of my taste, maybe I like more intense and unpredictablemovies, but I expected a lot more. There were some really odd elements,which look like artificially added, in relation to the time of theaction, the dawn of XVII century, like the Da Vinci vault and how itwas made look like, also the flying war machines battle. Also the"shallow" ending, which showed even the blind people that there will bea sequel, could easily be replaced with three simple words - "to becontinued". I mean letting go the great conspirator, doesn't matterwhat the planned to do, even if he's the cardinal himself is a bitstrange to me. The story is good but the movie could have been made farmore deep and unpredictable. 5/10

Maggie Sarabi 2012-05-15 21:24:18

Entertainment only

Okay, first of all: this is not a faithful adaption of the book. Somemight say Alexandre Dumas was rotating in his grave, but I don't thinkso - after all, he wrote it for entertainment, and I think he wouldhave liked the ironic and a little respect-less approach.Secondly: Who would give their villain debut in a film together withMads Mikkelsen and Christoph Waltz, both playing villains, too? Theanswer is, of course, Orlando Bloom. And actually, he does better thanI would have expected. His character is not as calculating as Richelieuor as ruthless as Rochefort, but still, definitely a villain.It's entertainment. Nothing more, but definitely nothing less.

cb400 2012-05-15 06:58:21

Entertaining but...

Entertaining but when I got out of the theater, I already forgot allabout it.I still wonder, it has great cast, great costumes, and it's 3D.As I said, the cast is great, but even among the musketeers you can'tfeel the rapport well enough.Well, the 3D is a little disappointing. I think it would be still thesame even if it was only in 2D.I think the problem is in the story. And that is... I already forgot.It felt like I was just following without thinking what is being fed tome on the screen.I usually base my rating on entertainment but this film left me a bitconfused rather than entertained so I am giving it a 6.

capone666 2012-05-14 21:06:13

The Vidiot Reviews...

The Three MusketeersAt long last, Hollywood's crafted a film starring the 3 hottestMouseketeers: Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears and Annette Funicello.Oops! Apparently, this action movie is about France's royal guard - andnot pre-teens in mouse ears.Determined to follow in his father's footsteps by serving the King ofFrance alongside the Musketeers, D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman) heads toParis to enlist.Upon arriving he learns of the guard's disbandment. Fortunately, fatealigns him with former members, Athos (Matthew Macfadyen), Porthos (RayStevenson) and Aramis (Luke Evans).After proving his parry, D'Artagnan joins the ex-Musketeers as they setout to save the queen from being framed by a treacherous cardinal(Christoph Waltz) and his assistant (Milla Jovovich).Featuring fast-paced fencing matches, airship dogfights and slow-moexplosions, this bombastic adaptation is as far removed from AlexandreDumas' novel as possible.Besides, we all know that after retirement the Musketeers didn't sailaround in a flying boat, they invented a chocolate bar. (Red Light)vidiotreviews.blogspot.com

max-tvs 2012-05-14 07:30:34

Very Enjoyable, Pure Entertainment

After seeing this film twice I can honestly say that you would be hardpressed to find something more entertaining in 2011. The movie containsaction that rivals Micheal Bay films mixed with a swashbuckling tongueand cheek mood in order to create a quite unique and amazing actionmovie. Whilst at some points the dialogue and acting can feel awkwardthe visuals in this movie a nothing short of stunning. That is not tosay it's something of Zack Snyder type film (300, Watchmen and SuckerPunch) as this film actually has likable characters that aren't simplyone dimensional caricatures. The set pieces, costume and setting havebeen carefully crafted allowing you the luxury of suspending your senseof disbelief in even the most ridiculous scenes. 3D cinema has had somemajor issues since day one. The Three Musketeers' 3D isn't free fromproblems but it is definitely head and shoulders above anything else todate. In my opinion The Three Musketeers is the first movie where 3D isactually beneficial to the experience. This is not a film were youshould expect swords to pop out on screen screen and stab you in theface,but a film that using 3D technology adds depth and is moreimmersive. Needless to say this is an exceptionally fun movie which acouple difficulties in the script and some misplaced American accentscan't ruin. This movie does not take itself too seriously and norshould you. Definitely don't miss this one! Enjoy

Tiw Lado 2012-05-13 21:07:04

Assassin's Creed IV: The Musketeers

...This is most suitable title for this movie and if there are peoplereading this review, who are also familiar with the mentioned game,they will totally agree with me.Forget all about history, Alexander Dumas, Elementary logic and anybelievability. Just sit back and watch for well-shot fight scenes (Mixof Antonio Banderas' Zorro's and said above Assassin's Creed) and someimaginary pre-steam-punk period France... with little bit of Englandtoo.Cardinal is the bad guy. Lady De Winter is double-faced spy andMusketeers kick ass - That's enough story for you to enjoy mindlessaction.With this cast, acting could be better. Music is nothing exceptionaland true lovers of classic will be highly insulted.3 Stars for the stupid movie + 1 star for Mila being hot as always...

ultimate_desire2 2012-05-13 05:34:43

One of the better versions!

I'm sure many of us out there would at least have watched one of theremakes of Alexander Dumas' famous novel. To me this has got to be oneof the best! Firstly, all the cast were perfect to a T! Right up toyounger casts of the show. (Luke Evans actually looks a bit like HeathLedger in this role). Matthew's Arthos, Ray's Porthos and Luke's Aramisactually give the 3 musketeers a fresh breathe of life. The bad guysare also perfect (I won't tell you who they are). But I've alwaysenjoyed Christoph Waltz' baddie characters. I can't help but think ofKenneth Branagh's Wild Wild West (with Will smith), where newcontraptions, ideas are brought into an old classic. The costumes aresplendid! You can imagine how France is back in the 18th century withall the fashionistas around! I so adore King Louis. He looks like amixture of the Willie Wonka and the Mad Hatter. Although the sets canbe slightly a bit 'plastic-ky'. All in all, I enjoyed it truly andwould be expecting a Part II! I would think this is a good effort forsomething that's not coming from Hollywood (I assume?)

leonard_basic 2012-05-13 15:52:07

The most shallow movie I have ever seen

This is by far the most shallow and the most boring "A"-movie I haveever seen. This is not a movie, this plot is not even a plot... and Ihave seen a lot of movies... This is so awful... this is notentertainment -this is torture ! If you want to see fun and beentertained go watch the first movie of the "Pirates of the Caribbean"...for the 100-time And I do not know why they even filmed thismovie... This is lowest point in the history of filmmaking.. Withoutfantasy, without any depth..(a 3d-movie without depth :-)) Even thejokes are not funny.. It feels like watching a bad stunt report..Choreography of the fights is funny and silly in a bad way. Music is sotypical that is irritating, Actors look and act like puppets (mostlybecause the screenplay is so terrible -it hurts!!) And what aboutdirector ? Mostly the movie was filmed on impressive locations...believe me - It would be better if they created the whole movie withcomputer (the actors, the sets, the music..) There is no suspensebecause the characters are non-existing. I do not see how anybody wouldgive this movie a positive review (a 4!!) One star for "funny" king aone star for the nice horse !

Teh_Doc 2012-05-13 07:27:21

Save Your Money

With Paul W.S. Anderson at the helm, I had moderate expectations thatwe would be presented with a fresh version of this classic tale.Unfortunately, that is not the case.Anybody who saw the 1993 version is well aware that Oliver Platt andTim Curry absolutely stole the show; witty sarcasm & dryevil...perfectly delivered.In this version, the script remains either unchanged or changed for theworse. Even more surprising...the acting is just plain bad.Rochefort, played by Mads Mikklesen, is terribly underwritten for a guythat plays such a wonderful bad guy.Christof Waltz is also held back by the lackluster script...and we allknow how chilling he can be (Basterds).Matthew Macfayden...wow, he seems absolutely bored to death in thisrole and you can tell that he can't wait to take off his costume.In short, this version provides absolutely nothing new and what isdelivered, is done so with minimal effort.You'll leave the theater saying "Meh".

Gordon-11 2012-05-12 08:27:07

A very entertaining film

This film is about three musketeers joined by a budding young fighter,who embark on a journey that will save France from war with England.When I visited Germany in 2010, I was lucky enough to visit the palacewhile they were shooting "The Three Musketeers". As a result, I havebeen wanting to watch this film. I think "The Three Musketeers" isworth months of waiting. The story is clear, the sets are amazing andthe costumes are lavish. The action scenes are very good, they areintense and exciting. The sword fight on the cathedral rooftop made meso nervous that my palms became sweaty! I think "The Three Musketeers"is a very entertaining film.

danielmooncalf 2012-05-11 20:37:28

Absolute crap.

Rent/download the 20 year old Disney one, instead.Who read this script and thought it was worth making? It opens withAthos assassinating a guard, as they break into some weird SteampunkishDavinci museum. Then some woman in full court dress somehow outrunsprojectile traps, and is able to help the musketeers steal some plansfor a super weapon. It's a stupid scene, and it only gets worse fromthere.D'Artagnan is an ugly little asshole. The special effects are garbage.It was like watching a little kid play a bad video game. Porthos wasthe only entertaining one, but would you dig through dog poop to findan unwrapped Hershey's kiss? If you would, then you should watch thismovie.