Les trois mousquetaires

Let me begin by expressing how refreshing it feels to watch a series of action scenes without wretched shaky cam! After seeing Guardians of the Galaxy and the new Ninja Turtles movies at the cinema recently, I had almost forgotten what it was like to have a comprehensible fight sequence.

This 1973 version of The Three Musketeers is the best version of the story I have ever seen, even better than the over-praised Gene Kelly adaptation. It's athletic, earthy, and light-hearted, paired with one of the most perfect casts ever brought together for a movie and Michel Legrand's amazing score which proves adventurous and heart-achingly romantic in equal turns.

If you love action and comedy, then I cannot recommend this enough. I never wanted it to end and cannot wait to watch the sequel.

Richard Lester did what no one before or since has been able to do: tell Dumas' story as magnificently as it deserves to be told. This tale gets told again and again in Hollywood, but leave it to a European to do it right. The cinematography, sets, and costumes are all fantastic, but they aren't all clean and impossibly perfect like the 1948 Gene Kelly or 1993 Kiefer Sutherland versions. Lester infuses this familiar story with an energy and tone that made his work with the Beatles successful. Yes, "The Three Musketeers" is an intriguing adventure, but the humor in their friendship, that's what draws me in again and again. And what an amazing cast he had to work with: all the Musketeers are perfect, especially big Oliver Reed, who can be silly, witty, and scary all in the same scene. The supporting cast is full of great actors, including Charlton Heston (having fun at being evil here), Christopher Lee (gets to mix deadpan humor in with his menace), Raquel Welch (cast as beautiful but clumsy, really enabling her to be a character and not just a live mannequin), Spike Milligan (doing what he does best), and most wonderfully Faye Dunaway (seductively evil: my favorite kind!). And, of course, holding it all together as D'Artagnan is Michael York, who never found a greater role.

Besides handling the shifts in tone well, Richard Lester also had the great rare luxury of breaking Dumas' large novel into two seperate movies which he filmed simultaneously. This really allows for greater character development and a truly epic scale. All of the other film versions try to cram all of that plot into 120 minutes. Not only is it impossible (in the 1993 version they simply change it completely using only the basic idea of Dumas' book), but it makes this huge complicated story with many threads seem contrived and ridiculous (the 1948 version has such dramatic and sudden shifts of tone - from wacky comedy, to romance, to heavy drama - that it can confuse and lose the audience).

This is great moviemaking.

I must admit that I was a fan of the Disney-fied version of "The Three Musketeers" in my misspent youth. The first time I saw it, I was a wide-eyed 12-year-old who thought that Kiefer Sutherland's Athos was IT as far as the character was concerned - that is, until I stumbled across this version of the much-done movie on cable last year. It was then that I watched Oliver Reed breathe a whole new life into the character of Athos with the help of a magnificent supporting cast. I have to say, I never fell off the couch laughing at the Disney version the way I did during the scene at the inn where Porthos and Aramis are attempting to pull Athos out of the well. Moreover, I never felt as though I understood the characters very well until I watched Lester's interpretation and compared it with the text of Dumas. He could not have chosen a finer cast of actors for his movie - Reed is superb as the quiet, thoughtful leader, Finlay is outlandish as Porthos, Chamberlain brings a flair to Aramis, and York seems completely immersed in D'Artangan. Yet great casting aside, the movie would be nothing if Lester had not incorporated the reality of life at court during the Musketeers' time period - the laziness and sheer excess (dogs as chess pieces on the palace lawn, wine fountains, and palace games). The fight scenes are also to be commended. They are not the overly-choreographed dances of Disney's "The Three Musketeers," but rather have a harsh reality to them. (Reed's fighting style is particularly all-out - he uses his entire body as a weapon.) In short, this movie has completely replaced the Disney version for me - as has its "sequel," "The Four Musketeers" (a must-see if you want to get the whole story and watch Porthos find "a new way to disarm himself").

This film, and its sequel (filmed concurrently) is by far the best movie version of the Dumas novel ever produced. The cast is excellent. The sets and costumes are marvelous. The swordplay (and there is much) is possible some of the most realistic ever filmed. And it's the only Musketeer movie I am aware of in which the Musketeers actually use muskets. Authenticity seems to have been very important to the producers, as well as staying true to the novel.

Sadly a film like this wouldn't be made these days. First off the fighting would be "punched-up" with a lot of wire work. And of course Hollywood would change the story to eliminate much of the "sleeping around" characters do (today's movie heroes in this type of movie aren't usually sexually active). They would also provide some creative story editing so that a certain character who dies in the novel would survive so as to supply the requisite happy ending. Fortunately for us this version does not suffer that kind of revisionism.

If you're a fan of Dumas or just looking for a fun film with lots of realistic sword fighting then you won't want to miss this.

Alexandre Dumas would more than likely applaud this particular version of his fantastic novel. I remember when I was a kid and first saw the movie in the theater... I was stunned at the cinematography (yeah, a film buff even at 12). After leaving the theater, I went to a nearby bookstore and bought my first copy of the novel. Wow, how impressed was I when I realized that Richard Lester and George MacDonald Fraser stuck to the concept of the novel. The novel, incase you haven't read it, is funny and fun. The first half of the book... kept me at edge of my seat. When I recently re-read the novel, my wife would tell me that I would wake her up sword fighting in my sleep. Anyway, back to the movie. Michael York as D'Artagnan was fabulous. He embodied the dweeb that we all now and love as the future Commander of the King's Musketeers. Oliver Reed gave the best performance of his life as Athos. Richard Chamberlain as Aramis... the Musketeer who wants to be a priest was entertaining, and a delight. And Frank Finley as Porthos (and later came to realize that he was also O'Reilly... Buckingham's jeweler) was tremendous. Richard Lester should have been nominated for an Academy award for his direction of this masterpiece, numerous members of the cast (including Christopher Lee as Compte Rochefort, Charlton Heston as Cardinal Richelieu, Raquel Welch as Constance Bonaciuex, Spike Milligan as Monsieur Bonacieux, Roy Kinnear as Planchet, Simon Ward as the Duke of Buckingham, Faye Dunaway as Milady de Winter, and of course Jean-Pierre Cassel as Louis XIII) should have been nominated for some kind of award. The casts portrayals were direct from the Dumas novel. The sword play in the movie is the best that I have ever seen in a movie. There is none better, with the possible exception of the Four Musketeers... the rest of the novel.

If you have never seen the movie... go and get it. Watch it. Wait for it on TCM or FCM and tape it. Once you see it, you'll want to add it to your collection... or check out e-bay if your local stores don't carry it. I bought mine on e-bay and watch it at least 3 times a year. :D