Les Trois Mousquetaires : D'Artagnan

Again an intrepid young D'Artagnan along with three legendary Musketeers have to fight Milady of Winter and villainous Cardinal Richelieu. Lavish scenarios , spectacular action , court intrigue and exciting swordplay . Last version based on Alexandre Dumas' classic yarn of intrigue at the 17th century French court . Entertaining and fun version based on the classic Dumas novel with spectacular swordplay in nifty style , this is a modern version of the classic Dumas novel set in 17th Century France . Alexandre Dumas's source for his novel was a book by 19th-century writer Courtils de Sandraz, which was purporting to be D'Artagnan's biography ; the Musketeers were actually real people, not fictional characters created by Dumas . Director Martin Bourboulon presents Dumas' exciting story of love and adventure , ¨The three musketeers¨ including a lot of sword-play, and overwhelming fights . For this French rendition is adapted in the greatest splendor , the complete romance , the historical characters, the full novel by Alexandre Dumas though including important changes . It is packed with comedy , derring-do , intrigue , a love story , action , drama and moving swordplay . An awesome casting and big-budgeted production shot in real locations make for a fairly amusement swashbuckler . This is the recent recounting of the Dumas's novel with a fine cast headed by handsome François Civil as Charles d'Artagnan, Vincent Cassel as Armand de Sillègue d'Athos d'Hauteville, Romain Duris as Aramis and Pio Marmaï : Stars hot-headed D'Artagnan in a brave role as a young and handsome soldier of fortune , a dashing , audacious lover and nimble athlete. Charles d'Artagnan and the three musketeers must defeat a beautiful double agent and her villainous employer from seizing the French throne and engulfing Europe in war. At the beginning of the movie, the map of Europe shows several states and kingdoms of that era . This delightful adaptation based on Alexandre Dumas classic novel starts with the youngster D'Artagnan who arrives in Paris to find Mister Treville , chief of Musketeers. But he meets with three two-fisted Musketeers , rollicking adventurers , fighting to live and living to love . DÁrtagnan to be aware they are Musketeers and is invited to unite them in their objective to struggle against guards of Cardinal Richelieu and the astute Milady De Winter who is lovely as a jewel, deadly as a dagger the wickedest woman in all Christendom . Meanwhile, D'Artagnan falls in love with a gorgeous young , Constance, she is a golden-haired beauty entangled in a web of treachery and intrigue. Furthermore , there is developed an intrigue between Luis XIII : Louis Garrel, Queen Anne of Austria : Vicky Krieps, dazzling as her gilded palace for her, men dared a thousand perils , and Duke of Buckingham, Jacob Fortune-Lloyd; and of course the nasty Richelieu: Eric Ruf , as evil as ever . The musketeers join forces for royal vengeance with the shout : ¨One for all and all for one¨. Then , the musketeers whose friendship has become a legend to stir the hearts of men and shouting their slogan set out to help the Queen . Straightforward as well as gallant D'Artagnan and the three musketeers scheme a plan to save her , clashing against a malicious Richelieu .

It's a nice rendition from the immortal novel with pretty budget and breathtaking scenarios. The picture contains rousing action , intrigue , romantic adventure , romance , treachery , mayhem and a lot of fence . Amusing swashbuckling with lavish production , glamorous gowns and luxurious sets . Furthermore , a vein of humour is evident here , though sometimes falling flat . For this movie itself , though , energetic and frantic are the best adjectives you could think of to describe its attraction. Charming, attractive François Civil in the title role who performed his own stunts, as he bounds and leaps , fights , hits and run. Francois executes athletic feats , moving fencing and spectacular fights. He is accompanied by a good cast as veterans as newcomers.

It contains adequate and colorful cinematography by Nicolas Bolduc stunningly showed on the splendorous images being filmed in Paris and surroundings . Thrilling as well as evocative musical score by composer Guillaume Roussel. Glamorous production design is well reflected on the luxurious interiors, impressive sets and exteriors stunningly filmed .The motion picture was professionally realized by Martin Bourboulon .This cool filmmaker provided visual style , comedy , fencing , drama , clangorous action in equal proportions . Director Martin Bourboulon watched several films for inspiration during preparation, including Cyrano de Bergerac (1990), Queen Margot (1994), The Duellists(1977). Shot back to back with its sequel Three Musketeers: Milady (2023) for a total shoot of 150 days that started in 2021 and wrapped in 2022.

This classy story is subsequently remade on several versions: the MGM classic version in musical style by George Sidney with Gene Kelly , Paul Lukas , Gig Young , Vincent Price , Frank Morgan and Lana Turner as Milady . The 3 Musketeers (1961) directed by Bernard Borderie and Vengeance of Milady (1961) with Gérard Barray and Mylene Demongeot . Bertrand Tavernier's 1994 film D'Artagnan's daughter with Sophie Marceau, Philippe Noiret . 1973 amusing version by Richard Lester with Michael York, Oliver Reed, Raquel Welch, Faye Dunaway, Christopher Lee, Frank Finlay. 1993 modern adaptation by Stephen Herek with Charlie Sheen , Kiefer Sutherland, Oliver Platt and Chris O'Donnell. 2001 rendition by Peter Hyams with Justin Chambers, Mena Suvari and Tim Roth. The three musketeers (2011) by Paul Anderson with Matthew Macfadyen, Milla Jovovich, Christian Oliver, Luke Evans, Ray Stevenson, Til Schweiger, Orlando Bloom. ¨Les trois mousquetaires: D'Artagnan¨ is an outstanding and entertaining adaptation of the famous novel that will appeal to the costumer genre buffs and it results to be acceptable adaptation with big budget based on the vintage tale.

I will start by saying I'm a huge long time fan of Dumas and the books.

I have basically not liked any adaptations of it before.

I have loved this. It is a mix of exactly the book, and not the book at all. The atmosphere is dark, the action is excellent, I was never bored. It is easy to follow even if you don't know French history, but it is not dumbed down either.

The cast (as per real history and the novel) is FANTASTIC. The story is modernised and completely over the top which corresponds totally to the spirit of Dumas, if not to the actual book (it was way over the top for its time as well) .

You come out of there like you did as a child after watching a swashbuckling movie with Errol Flynn.

My brother cheered loudly like a child, a girl in the audience was crying, all in all, a roaring success in the vein of the very old action movies, but completely modernised with a certain dark steampunk flair.

Highly highly recommend. Especially with a good screen and sound which are worth it.

This film offers a respectable take on the classic tale with commendable performances and a certain charm. The cast brings energy and charisma to their roles, capturing the spirit of the legendary musketeers. The camaraderie between the leads is palpable and adds a lot of enjoyment to the film.

However, there are a few issues that hinder the overall experience. The cinematography, while ambitious, often leans towards being too dark, making some scenes difficult to see clearly. This choice detracts from the visual appeal and can be frustrating during key moments. Additionally, the pacing of the film is somewhat slow, with certain segments dragging on longer than necessary, which affects the film's momentum.

Despite these drawbacks, The Three Musketeers is an entertaining watch with solid performances and a faithful adaptation of the classic story. It may not be perfect, but it provides an enjoyable take on the swashbuckling adventures of the iconic trio.

I just finished the film. Perhaps I should say, "Je viens de regarder le film" but I think I'll write this review for an anglophone audience. There may be a version with English subtitles but the one I watched did not have that option. I had to pause and listen again a few times, but the dialogue is generally not too hard to follow if your French is not too rusty.

For purists, it may be a disappointment, but for me it was a delight. The film was not exactly faithful to the original story by Alexandre Dumas, although overall it followed the same trajectory. For example, when Athos told the story of his wife to D'Artagnan, they were not drunk and sprawled across a table at an inn, but in the forest where Athos had just mocked D'Artagnan with a bit of friendly swordplay. Also, D'Artagnan was buried alive in the original story, but he was in a coffin and it was Athos who dug him out of the ground. In this film he dug himself out of an open-pit grave coughing and wheezing.

D'Artagnan's letter of introduction to M. De Tréville from his father was particularly annoying. An important part of the story was that it was in his doublet when it was stolen in Meung.

Also, where were Grimaud, Bazin, Mousqueton, and Planchet? They figured large in the original story, but weren't even a footnote in the film.

But the introduction of D'Artagnan to the trio was perfectly faithful to the original, and delightfully amusing. Within an hour of his arrival in Paris, D'Artagnan had managed to rile Athos, Porthos, and Aramis and he had agreed to fight them in duels, one after the other. He paid his rent four weeks in advance (4 livres) "au cas où." The humor was morbid, dry, and subtle, and I think it was faithful to the description by Dumas.

The actors chosen for the parts represented interesting choices. Porthos was not as portly as he should have been, in my mind, nor Athos as taciturn, nor Aramis as refined and beautiful, nor Richelieu as commanding. And none of them had particularly long hair (except for Athos before they cut it in anticipation of slicing through his neck.) Moreover, the actors portraying the mousquetaires were all a bit long in the tooth.

Still, after a bit it all came together with credible performances. I'm not very familiar with French actors, but the actors in this film all carried their characters brilliantly. (Ils ont crevé l'écran, as the French say. They "crushed" it.) The actress chosen for Constance Bonacieux was perfect. She was charming and pretty and young, but not beautiful or refined, just as Dumas painstakingly described her in the book.

However, it was jarring was when Constance was stitching the wound of D'Artagnan and she said something like "Quelques centimètres" meaning that it was lucky the shot wasn't just a bit to the left. But anything set in that period would have used "puces" (inches) and "pieds" (feet). To be sure, the French got so upset with the clergy and the nobility that they changed the names of the months of the year, the days of the week, the units of measurement, and the position of the head relative to the shoulders of 17 thousand aristocrats, but that wouldn't happen till 165 years after this story was set. (Would be interesting to see if, in the versions subtitled in English, the translation given was "a few inches to the left". I know they often use different units in translations meant for US consumption. Pounds, miles, etc.)

I really appreciated it when the king said, near the end, "Messieurs, voici les fameux trois mousquetaires, qui sont désormais quatre" (or something like that), even though it wasn't in the book. The complete lack of political correctness was refreshing as well. If he had said "mesdames et messieurs..." it would have lacked historical authenticity.

The fighting scenes were particularly stunning. There was plenty of violence and blood, just as in the novel, and the réalisateur chose to go with that quirky NYPD Blue-style camera angle, which I think gave it a gritty reality often missing from films set in the early 17th century. Combatants in close quarters do not have a drone's-eye view, and this is reflected in scenes of more recent battles (e.g., Thin Red Line). It was refreshing to see that treatment in a depiction of more ancient battles.

The locations were real, or so it seemed. The white cliffs of Dover are hard to simulate, and the château de Vincennes is probably also hard to replicate. I'd guess that all the places were filmed in situ.

Overall I can recommend it to--well, I'm going to borrow a Spanish word here because we don't have this one in English (nor, as far as I know, in French)--to aficionados of Les Trois Mousquetaires. Just keep an open mind regarding the small details, which will be different from the book.

Note that this film corresponds to Tome I of Les Trois Mousquetaires, roughly the first 30 chapters. Hopefully they'll make sequel. That was hinted after the credits with a small "à suivre" teaser featuring Milady and le Cardinal Richelieu in which she referenced "les mousquetaires".

For those who have not recently read the book and who might want to reference it, The Gutenberg Project has several versions in its excellent and free collection.

I have been a fan of Alexandre Dumas since childhood and know his musketeer trilogy almost by heart. Naturally, I have been looking forward to the new French (!) screen version of the first book for the last several months, especially as this winter I also watched (and enjoyed) the BBC TV series The Musketeers for the first time and was curious how the two will compare. Otherwise, my ideal screen version is the Russian (Soviet) TV film of 1979, as, despite its general naiveté it captured the spirit of the book: youthful friendships, unconditional loyalty, boundless belief in one's strength, humour and fearlessness. But I am always open to new interpretations of the material.

Unfortunately, the new French movie proved to be disappointing for me. Yes, one should give credit where it's due: the iconic locations such as the Louvre, Fontainebleau, Les Invalides, Chantilly will make the heart of any Dumas' fan melt, especially after many low-budget substitutions we saw in other productions. The costumes also deserve nothing but praise: the luxury, the ornaments, multiple layers, abundance of the smallest details, the worn-off effect - even an untrained eye can see how much hard work and skill went into these. The masquerade ball at Duke Buckingham's palace is where this work culminates: I would be ready to rewatch the film just to be able to once again admire the Duke and Milady's costumes as well as those of other guests.

And yet, despite all of this splendour, the movie seems to have completely missed the spirit of the book. It happens, however, not because the filmmakers preferred form over substance, but because the script writers happened to be too smart for their own good. Whether to demonstrate their creative potential or to make the movie more exciting for those who remember the source material, they started to gild the lily. As a result, in addition to the original diamonds adventure the film follows an even more complicated plot line: a Protestant conspiracy against the King. Both arcs are filled with insignificant scenes built in in order to keep the viewer entertained (for example, Athos' attempt to frighten d'Artagnan in the woods). As a consequence, the screen time of all key figures is spread thin between many different events, and they barely have time to say and do things required to pack all the plot milestones into the allotted film length, while their characters and relationship to one another remains un(der)developed. Unfortunately, the musketeers themselves are the first to fall victim to this problem. The friendship and true affection binding four very different people, each with a distinct persona of his own, are the cornerstones of the novel. And yet in the movie we hardly see them together at all: multiple events demand that the group splits between different plot lines in order to tick all the plot boxes. Neither do they get a chance to express themselves properly and demonstrate their signature traits we know from the books: Athos' aristocratic attitudes, d'Artagnan's cleverness and shrewdness, Porthos' good nature & vanity, Aramis' finesse and piety. Coupled with the casting choices that made the characters so much older than their prototypes, it makes it even more difficult for the viewer to believe in their friendship, as older people rarely bond as closely as the musketeers did in the novel.

Supporting characters find themselves in a similar situation: the omnipotent Cardinal Richelieu only shows up in a few scenes, and his true goals remain unknown. It is never explained why he is an enemy to the Queen: neither unrequited romantic feelings nor political agenda are mentioned (obviously disgracing the Queen is not the only way to start a war with England, if we assume that this is his ultimate goal). Louis XIII is simply badly written, what a waste of Louis Garrel's acting talent: his character doesn't come off as either comical or tragic or as having much intelligence. Vicky Krieps as the Queen is more lucky as she is given at least two dramatic scenes in which to shine and be remembered. Eva Green as Milady is good, but not surprising, for the actress has been playing similar roles for many years. I was somewhat perplexed by the story of her relationship with Athos (as far as it was touched upon in the first installment) being largely borrowed from BBC's The Musketeers, including the role Athos' brother plays in identifying her as a criminal.

As I said in the beginning, I think that the lack of character development is a result of the overloaded script and not due to subpar acting. Yes, the film does surprise even those well familiar with the book, but it comes at a very big expense, as none of the characters resonates with the viewer emotionally. One hopes that they will make a better job of it in the second installment to be released in December. In the meantime, given the sumptuous locations and wonderful costumes and the benefit of doubt, I'll give the film 6 starts out of 10.