The Musketeer

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.

Dártagnan (Justin Chambers) undergoes a revenge against the man dressed in black (Tim Roth) who murdered his father . Fourteen years later he goes out from Gascogne along with Planchet (Jean Pierre Castaldi) and confronting plunders and bandits on the trip to Paris . He meets for the first time worthless three musketeers , Athos (Kemp) , Porthos (Steve Speirs) and Aramis (Nick Moran) and get their swords crossed up . DÁrtagnan and the three Musketeers cross swords with the lackeys of scheming cardinal Richelieu (Stephen Rea) and first Mister Treville (Michael Byrne) , head of the Musketeers . They try to help king Louis XIII (Mesguich) who is negotiating a treatise with Duke of Buckinghan (Jeremy Clyde). Meanwhile , Queen Anna (Catherine Deneuve) and Francesca (Mena Suvari) are kidnapped by Febre and closed in his castle .

Mediocre version of the classic swashbuckler by Alexandre Dumas whose novel has been adapted a dozen times approximately . Attractive costumes , haunting french locations , fast paced and contains scrumptious action scenes with bounds and leaps in 'Matrix' style . This is primarily and middling made due to some blatant miscasting . Justin Chambers as Dártagnan and his co-star acting as the Queen's seamstress are never convincing as French citizens during the reign of Louis XIII . D'Artagnan did really exist , his name was Charles de Batz and was called D'Artagnan when he arrived in Paris probably because he was coming from the south-west of France where the movie was partly shot and where is the little city of Artagnan . Lively musical score by David Arnold , habitual in James Bond films . Dark photography by Peter Hyams , usually cameraman and filmmaker ; being filmed in south-west of France on location in Castle , Cassaigne, Gers, Castle Miramont-Latour, Gers, Midi-Pyrénées, and Auch, Gers, France . The motion picture was regularly directed by Peter Hyams . He's an irregular director with hits (Relic, Outland , Capricorn one , Timecop , Sudden death) and flops (Sound and thunder , End of days).

Other versions about this classic are the followings : 1921 mute rendition by Fred Niblo with Douglas Fairbanks ; 1935 adaptation by Rowland V Lee with Walter Abel and Paul Lukas ; 1948 the classic version by George Sidney with Gene Kelly , June Allyson , Van Heflin , Paul Lukas and Lana Turner ; 1973 amusing version by Richard Lester with Michael York , Oliver Reed and Raquel Welch ; 1993 modern adaptation by Stephen Herek with Charlie Shen, Kiefer Sutherland, Oliver Platt and Chris O'Donnell , among others .

If you are a fan of swashbuckling, this is not a film to miss, as long as you are able to overlook the bad acting and the obvious Asian influences in the fighting.

I have seen worse films. Most definitely. The rating of 4.2 is much too low for this movie, I think a 5.5 to 6 is more appropriate. It's not a great movie by any means, but it does have it's moments.

The opening swordfight in the resturaunt is the best in the movie. At least it was the most believable with the exception of the barrels. I found the ladders and some of the ropeplay in the Versailles to be much more unrealistic. However I tend to like movie due to the sophistication of the choreography, because I am involved in fighting choreography too.

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.

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.