D'Artagnan

The star of the show is Justin Chambers and he gets incidental billing which is ridiculous despite his lack of acting skills. More good and bad news:

BAD - Having a weak lead actor is not the way to have box-office success. Stupid dialog doesn't help either, along with the Rambo action mentality in which the good guy doesn't get hit from close range.

GOOD - Some of the action scenes were spectacular, the best swordplay I've ever seen. The ones at the beginning and the end of the film were the best, with some incredible stunt work. This is beautifully photographed, too. Tim Roth was a good villain, as usual, and the heroes - even if they couldn't act - were fun to watch. The language is tame in here and the film should be rated PG, not PG- 13.

I dissent from the negative comments based on comparisons to the novel, or earlier " Three Musketeer" movies. This movie has no pretense of remaking the novel, or earlier movie versions ( the Michael York/Raquel Welch version is a classic). It is, at most, a modest "prequel", designed to capture young action viewers, and romantics ( Justin Chambers/ Mena Suvari); dirty old men ( Mena Suvari); and Deneuve fans (as all men ought to be).

Mena Suvari is wooden and ornamental, but Chambers here is at least as good as Heath Ledger in "A Knight's Tale". Deneuve is excellent as always. Tim Roth is a definitional villain, although Stephen Rea is a weak Richeleau. Lesser knowns as the other musketeers , and the French actor as " Planche", add spice.

I am a sucker for swordfighting movies, so loved this one.

There are many worse choices in your video store.

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 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.

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.