D'Artagnan

I thought that the movie was an original version of the classic novel. It incorporated great fighting scenes that were out of this world. They looked as if they were some kind of asian/western/ fencing techniques all blended in with awesome stunt men. Also the story had a nice pace, the only problems were that the characters were underdeveloped. Mena Suvari had a great part and also great chemistry with Dartagnon (Justin Chambers) and I would have like to see more of the romance, but it was short and vauge. I would recommend this for a movie to watch at home or maybe on PPV, I don't know about spending more than that on it.

seems a well intended tribute to the original film , but lacked depth in my view. not enough time for depth i suppose when you are in the air slicing about with a sword every 3 minutes. if you like bruce willis style car chases shootem up films, then you'll like this, ( unless you are find it too "cultural" for yourself) :) Myself, i found my mind wandering during it to such things as " I wonder if my socks will match if i look down" and other more fascinating thoughts.

The Musketeer really did the novel it was based upon no justice what so ever. The movie had incredible stunts and great fights...if you were in the Matrix. These fights are the only reason I give this movie a rating of four.

There is no acting what so ever. Tim Roth, although he can play a great villain, he shows barely any emotion. Justin Chambers is the same way. I'm sure he didn't perform those stunts such as the ridiculous scene where he is pictured jumping from saddle to saddle across moving horses.

This movie brings nothing to the table except fancy martial arts. Keep in mind this takes place in old France. I don't recall the Musketeer's learning how to fight while rolling across wooden wine barrels.

If you are desperate for a fight scene, be my guest. There are certainly some good fights going on in this picture. Everything in between is just a joke. The Musketeer is not the worst movie ever made, but it's far from great.

I'm a huge Dumas fan and watch every one of the adaptations but I missed this one originally. Just caught it on netflix and it's nowhere near as bad as it's made out to be. Yes, the lead is a little off and there isn't much chemistry between him and Mena Suvari who isn't at her best either. The wire based fight scenes look dated and there are a few scene pacing problems.

But overall this was quite fun. There *is* chemistry between the Queen and D'artagnan thanks to Catherine Deneuve who exudes star quality in every scene she's in. There are some nice performances from most of the character actors, the original 3 musketeers are great, and the humor if not the plot is very in keeping with the book.

I first thought this was a made for TV movie because of the credits at the beginning so I wasn't really expecting much and this definitely beat my expectations. The movie looks good and aside from a few characters most of them seem fairly real, the balance between schtick and too- serious was handled well.

Overall, too many faults to be a classic but definitely enough class and fun to be very entertaining. Recommended for fans of period movies and the tongue in cheek dramedy.

This is a movie that really doesn't know what it is. For one thing, it seems to try and hang on to some parts of the story by Dumas, and yet it also is an entirely different story. Seemingly, the only real similarities are the names of the characters. This movie would be much more effective if it was entirely its own story, and not using the names of the famous characters. The reason? This movie totally dashes the names of those characters.

The most unsettling part for me was the fact that the Three Musketeers are nothing like themselves. Porthos is not the least bit arrogant or over-the-top. Aramis isn't religious at all. And Athos does not even remotely resemble the character in the book. Sadly, Justin Chambers makes a better d'Artagnan than Chris O' Donnell, but only because he doesn't do any acting at all, which is better than the profuse overacting of O' Donnell. And Stephen Rea is a good actor, but his character isn't remotely as menacing as Richelieu should be.

With all of that said, if you just view it as a movie, and try to block the actual story out of your mind, it can be entertaining. The fight scenes are very well done, and the pacing keeps the viewer interested. Perhaps this movie could have been really good if it was about the story of a musketeer NOT named d'Artagnan, and his unique adventure. But since it tries to be an interpretation of Dumas, it falls miserably short. As a movie, it is so-so, but as far as an interpretation of the famous story, it is absolutely terrible.