फ्रांस, 1625: युवा डी'आर्टगैन, मस्कट में शामिल होने के लिए पेरिस जाते हैं, लेकिन दुष्ट कार्डिनल उन्हें भंग कर देते है - तीनो को बचाएं.फ्रांस, 1625: युवा डी'आर्टगैन, मस्कट में शामिल होने के लिए पेरिस जाते हैं, लेकिन दुष्ट कार्डिनल उन्हें भंग कर देते है - तीनो को बचाएं.फ्रांस, 1625: युवा डी'आर्टगैन, मस्कट में शामिल होने के लिए पेरिस जाते हैं, लेकिन दुष्ट कार्डिनल उन्हें भंग कर देते है - तीनो को बचाएं.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 2 जीत और कुल 3 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I not only liked this movie, but I feel a need to defend it and the Walt Disney company.
Walt Disney movies are notorious for plot changes. Almost no movie touched by them is safe from this process. From cartoon production to live action films, any adaptation by Disney is going to have plot changes to suit there vision of the final product. For example, their cartoon The Sword in the Stone bears almost no resemblance to the original story of King Arthur.
To say that Disney does not stick to the original plot is like saying an elephant does not ride a bicycle. It is obvious, even before you see it, that this is not going to happen. This is why they are adaptations. The definition of adaptation is "The condition of being made suitable to an end." Disney sets what they want the end product to be and adapt the story line to meet that goal. They did, however, remain close enough to the original story line that one who had not read the original might be intrigued enough to do so.
This movie was made for one reason... to entertain. Sure money was a motive, but if it does not entertain, it does not make money. And, as with most Disney adaptations, if you approach it with the understanding that liberties have been taken, it not only can entertain, but can be downright enjoyable as well. Disney will never fully stick to an original story line for any adaptation they produce. This is how they make it "theirs". This is how they give it that twist that a lot of people have come to expect from a Disney film. And once this IS expected going into the movie, you can watch it in the spirit in which it was released.
And remember this, the cast all had the opportunity to read the script BEFORE they agreed to make the movie. If they had any qualms about the quality of the writing, you can be assured they would not have put their reputations on the line.
Walt Disney movies are notorious for plot changes. Almost no movie touched by them is safe from this process. From cartoon production to live action films, any adaptation by Disney is going to have plot changes to suit there vision of the final product. For example, their cartoon The Sword in the Stone bears almost no resemblance to the original story of King Arthur.
To say that Disney does not stick to the original plot is like saying an elephant does not ride a bicycle. It is obvious, even before you see it, that this is not going to happen. This is why they are adaptations. The definition of adaptation is "The condition of being made suitable to an end." Disney sets what they want the end product to be and adapt the story line to meet that goal. They did, however, remain close enough to the original story line that one who had not read the original might be intrigued enough to do so.
This movie was made for one reason... to entertain. Sure money was a motive, but if it does not entertain, it does not make money. And, as with most Disney adaptations, if you approach it with the understanding that liberties have been taken, it not only can entertain, but can be downright enjoyable as well. Disney will never fully stick to an original story line for any adaptation they produce. This is how they make it "theirs". This is how they give it that twist that a lot of people have come to expect from a Disney film. And once this IS expected going into the movie, you can watch it in the spirit in which it was released.
And remember this, the cast all had the opportunity to read the script BEFORE they agreed to make the movie. If they had any qualms about the quality of the writing, you can be assured they would not have put their reputations on the line.
Just saw this film for the first time in 10 years and I still really enjoyed it. The characters are funny, the actors are perfect for the roles they were given and the story, as often as it has been told, was well executed. The three musketeers is a story I have grown up with. I've seen and read pretty much every version out there, but this is still one of the most enjoyable versions. It is a film that you can enjoy at any time of the day. It is not a popcorn kind of film and you don't have to pay endless amounts of attention either. It is not a brain teaser. Just kick back and enjoy. You will not regret watching it if you are looking for a light hearted comedy with a pinch of drama.
Lightheaded and lighthearted this is the definition of escapist entertainment and that is meant as a compliment. Something to watch when you want to relax and not have to think about the plot of the movie.
Chris O'Donnell is impish if a bit callow in the lead but the real show is musketeers anyway and there is where the movie excels. Keifer is suitably brooding as Athos and Charlie Sheen, before he became a surly twitchy mess, is a charming Aramis. The standout however is Oliver Platt going full on ham as Porthos giving a delightfully over the top performance and walking off with the picture whenever he is on screen.
Rebecca De Mornay also seems to be having a good time enacting the villainous Milady de Winter, she's sexy and silky. Lastly there is Tim Curry positively consuming the scenery as Cardinal Richelieu, in his flowing red robes he and Oliver Platt are in a dead heat for biggest scene stealer.
The production is high class with vibrant with color and beautiful settings, true it bears only a passing kinship with the source book but it is a fun time with lots of action and a carefree mood.
Chris O'Donnell is impish if a bit callow in the lead but the real show is musketeers anyway and there is where the movie excels. Keifer is suitably brooding as Athos and Charlie Sheen, before he became a surly twitchy mess, is a charming Aramis. The standout however is Oliver Platt going full on ham as Porthos giving a delightfully over the top performance and walking off with the picture whenever he is on screen.
Rebecca De Mornay also seems to be having a good time enacting the villainous Milady de Winter, she's sexy and silky. Lastly there is Tim Curry positively consuming the scenery as Cardinal Richelieu, in his flowing red robes he and Oliver Platt are in a dead heat for biggest scene stealer.
The production is high class with vibrant with color and beautiful settings, true it bears only a passing kinship with the source book but it is a fun time with lots of action and a carefree mood.
One thing people who write reviews about this movie are forgetting is that this is a family movie. I love this movie. Its fun to watch. It has cool sword fights and all that good stuff. In my opinion this is my favorite version of the movie. The soundtrack was awesome. I recommend this movie to anyone who loves the Three Musketeers or just a family movie.
Nope, it's by no means an accurate adaptation of Dumas' original work. Umm, does nanyone really care? Dumas' plot, while interesting in and of itself to many, is probably not one that many folks who think of "the Three Musketters" could actually _tell_ you.
This movie sets out to more or less capture the feel of such films, rather than the source material itself. In that regard, it's not too badly done. The characters are pretty broadly drawn, but adequate for the younger audience they're aimed at. Sutherland, Platt, and Sheen all seem way too young, but at least the first two are entertaining. Platt in particular manages to steal every scene he's in.
By the same token, Richelieu's character is simplified to "generic bad guy." The King and Queen seem too young as well (although they're represented age may be novelistically and/or historically accurate - again, could most folks really tell you, or care?).
Overall, I'd recommend the movie for some light entertainment, but don't take it too seriously.
This movie sets out to more or less capture the feel of such films, rather than the source material itself. In that regard, it's not too badly done. The characters are pretty broadly drawn, but adequate for the younger audience they're aimed at. Sutherland, Platt, and Sheen all seem way too young, but at least the first two are entertaining. Platt in particular manages to steal every scene he's in.
By the same token, Richelieu's character is simplified to "generic bad guy." The King and Queen seem too young as well (although they're represented age may be novelistically and/or historically accurate - again, could most folks really tell you, or care?).
Overall, I'd recommend the movie for some light entertainment, but don't take it too seriously.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाKiefer Sutherland, Chris O'Donnell, and Oliver Platt all endured six weeks of fencing and riding lessons. Charlie Sheen missed out on all of this, as he was then embroiled in the filming of Hot Shots! Part Deux (1993).
- गूफ़Aramis is shown quoting Genesis (the first chapter in the Bible) while presumably reading from a Bible, which is open in the middle. Given Aramis' reputation and the subsequent action, it is possible that he was quoting from memory and merely had a book open in front of him to give the impression of piety.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनTwo scenes were cut from the German cinema version to secure a "Not under 12" rating (The murder of the prisoner is cut completely (ca. 13 seconds) and the death of the bald headed man in the prison at the end is shortened (ca. 6 seconds).) Second DVD release is uncut ("Not under 16") and bears the note "Uncut version" on the sleeve.
- साउंडट्रैकAll For Love
Performed by Bryan Adams, Rod Stewart, and Sting
Written by Bryan Adams, Mutt Lange (as Robert John "Mutt" Lange), and Michael Kamen
Produced by Chris Thomas, Bryan Adams, and David Nicholas
Bryan Adams and Sting appear courtesy of A&M Records
Rod Stewart appears courtesy of Warner Bros. Records, Inc.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Three Musketeers?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Los tres mosqueteros
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Hofburg, वियना, ऑस्ट्रिया(palace interiors, birthday celebration, final fight scenes)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $3,00,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $5,38,98,845
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $1,06,21,992
- 14 नव॰ 1993
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $5,38,98,845
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 45 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें