The Three Musketeers User Reviews

Taking a property that was originally published back in 1844 and using that as the base for a summer blockbuster in the 2000s isn't the easiest thing to do. The Three Musketeers have been used in 18 movies since 1920 and thats just counting the live action ones.Director Paul W. S. Anderson deserves some credit for at least coming up with a unique take on the trio.Everything else in the movie though makes Paul W. S. Anderson deserves nothing but ill will and shady looks.

Setting up the Three Musketeers as over the hill ex spies was a interesting twist on the generaly stoic nationlistic do gooders. Unfortunantly little is done to or explored in their characters.After a job goes south Athos is nothing mroe than a brooding deep voiced drunk that constantly reminded me of Ted Mosby. Pathos is unchanges continually the ladies man. Aramis continues to be the cool thought full one of the group.Athos tries to have a emotional scene explaining to D'Artagnan to fight for love country be damned but it isn't earned and out of place based on everything we see of him to that point.They have the personalities of a boy band screaming fans and all.

Even though they are ex spies the Musketeers still hold sway with the King and Queen who once again call them into services. Cardinal Richelieu is scheming to some how gain control of France...even though he is a Cardinal.Some of the Musketeers old enemies are involved including Milady and the Duke of Buckingham and the gang gets back together joined by D'Artagnan the biggest of Musketeer fans.

The paper thin plot offers one good thing. It gives cinematographer Glen MacPherson a chance to show 4 guys fighting 40 men at once. The action sequences are the best parts of the movie. It lacks epic tecnical one on one duels but makes up for it in bodies. Everything else in between the set pieces is forgettable unimaginably dull and poorly written. Writers Andrew Davies and Alex Litvak must have been told to write the next Pirates of the Caribbean by Disney. They didn't. You can argue over quality of Pirates 2 and 3 but they at least had snappy lines and were deliverd with a bit of life.

The Three Musketeers is overstuffed with needless characters. One of these needless characters is King Louis XIII. He is given far to much screen time in the middle of the film in some attempt to build tension or drama . In the end I was just bored, he is an effeminate boy that wouldn't look out of place in a Final Fantasy game.Why should I care that he dosen't know how to talk to his wife when its keeping me from seeing the Three Musketeers stab people.

Paul W. S. Anderson tries so hard to make this movie epic. He has the trio break into the tower of London and vaults in Italy.Has a slick editing style.And doesn't waste any oppurtunity to give a long shot of Paris in the 1700. They have FLYING SHIPS for crying out loud clearly he is aiming big. The scope isn't what kills the epic feel of the movie it's the shotty visual effects work that dose. Now he was only given $75 million for this but the CGI is poorly implemented and way to obvious on top of poorly done greenscreen. This is 2012 green screen shouldn't be obvious.

The acting as a whole is poor even for a popcorn movie. Ray Stevenson is underused as Pathos, the only character to be generally funny.

Paul W. S. Anderson continues to prove he is the director to go to if you want to make a cheap franchise film. Maybe if he had more money the overall quality of his movies might increase.This is a cheaply done movie that dose its best to hide it but fails. If you like a decent sword fight look them up on YouTube.