UnowPriceless hyped garbage

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

FlorianSchirner First things, I find this one of the best movies about the great story of Alexandre Dumas, and luckily it sticks quite true. Quite, but not totally. I understand minor changes like Porthos not being the shallow, large framed guy described in the book (I always will love Depardieu from Man in the iron mask in this role) or d'Artagnan witnessing the hanging of Mylady de Winter, even the "with a rowboat across the channel" thing, but.....WHY ON EARTH DID THEY HAVE TO PUT DEMONS IN IT?I think Mylady de Winter would be as interesting and rewarding role to get? Why does she suddenly have to have Superpowers? This is the only real issue I have with this movie.The rest of the movie is splendid. Except for Porthos, who's actor does a fine job after all, all the cast is close enough to the book as possible. Especially Elbaz plays d'Artagnan with that vibe and risk-loving panache he appears to have in the book. This is one of the few movies which does not alter or skip the musketeers' dealings with Buckingham, in fact it sticks to the novel with the sole exception mentioned above.As to the ongoing discussion of Beart being too old: a) She looks gorgeous as ever. b) Mylady de Winter is described in the book as a Lady in her late thirties...so why the fuzz. After all, she married athos at age 20, got hanged after a year, became the Cardinal's (a great Karyo) top spy in the meantime, married Winter's brother, killed him ....you see she was quite busy all the time.So I can sum up: A great rendition of the musketeers' legend with just a bitter pinch of story liberty.8/10

xtoph00 they turn milady into a ninja sorceress, for no apparent reason. the ensuing special effects are lame. lackluster wirework, sword fights few and far between. some of the actors are pretty (boys and girls, with character) but there is no real chemistry nor, alas--and this is the real kicker--any 'panache'. a long, humorless, horribly misguided waste. there really isn't anything more to say of any importance. they retain much of the outline of dumas' story, but it is perfunctory, and disposed of as quickly as possible in order to move on to pointless development of the devil sorceress "plot". also, us DVD release of this movie is dubbed, badly, with no option to view with original soundtrack.

FromBookstoFilm This film along with Milady with Arielle Dombasle are the two best musketeer movies of the Millennium. I'm so glad there was so much more to offer in the way of Musketeer films especially since I wasted money going to see that horrible loosely based adaptation of The Three Musketeers called the Musketeer (2001). The acting performances were topnotch in this production. Vincent Elbaz was a fine D'Artagnan the right physical type just a little too tall and a little too mature but he gave an excellent performance.D'Artagnan in the novel was very polite,sensitive but brave and would not back down from any duel. When D'Artagnan met Rochefort character in the novel (a character not in this version of the story) he was mad at Rochefort for making insulting comments about his horse.Vincent Elbaz D'Artagnan unfortunately was a little on the obnoxious side.Porthos was a little too short but he pulled the part off just fine. Emmanuelle Beart's Milady de Winter gave a fine performance but I only wish they would have made this film ten to fifteen years before. I mean she was pushing 40 but she did look great and Arielle Dombasle who was in her late 40's also looked pretty good in the rival production Milady. I guess there is some truth to 40 being the new thirty and 50 being the new 40. Emmanuelle Beart was Milady who had to be reckoned with. She had the Devil in her alright. Heino Ferch's Athos was true to the Athos character and I appreciated that this film showed Athos hanging her which is accurate in the book. What I didn't care for about the production was young D'Artagnan seeing the episode in the woods. In the book Athos and D'Artagnan first saw each other in Monsieur de Treville's office and also in the book D'Artagnan was a Gascon (Basque) from the Southern part of France and Athos,the Count de le Fere came from a region not far from Paris. Karyo's Cardinal Richelieu is in tune with the character. German Actress Diana Amft is good Constance Bonancieux but not great. The Actor playing Aramis turned in a fine performance as did the actress playing Anne of Austria.The Duke of Buckingham was as in the novel a goodlooking man but by no means mild mannered.Buckingham had a temper was a womanizer,socialclimber and ambitious and by no means a coward. I also appreciate that this film retained many of the minor characters in the book.Great sets and scenery. Some of the problems with this version are:There is no Chevalier or Count de Rochefort and no Lord de Winter a big mistake as far as the character of Rochefort goes. Milady in this had no fleur-de-lis instead she has a serpentine Mark of the Devil which appeared on her skin after the Devil resurrected her after Athos had hanged her. Milady and Athos did not have a child together and she did not sacrifice her child to the Devil in exchange for her soul. Milady's son was by her marriage to her second husband Lord de Winter and his name was John de Winter aka Mordaunt and a "worthy" descendant of Milady de Winter he was an assassin and spy also and had his mother's appetite for revenge especially against his Uncle,his mother's executioner and the 4 Musketeers for depriving him of a mother.For more on Mordaunt read the novel and sequel The Twenty Years After and try to get a decent movie version of the novel.French and Russian versions of the Twenty Years After are the best and so is the BBC version.Richard Lester gave the Mordaunt character a sex change in his version and the Italian version is very loosely based.D'Artagnan was the shortest of the Musketeers and was olive skinned read the very first chapter of the novel and he was eighteen years old Aramis and Porthos were in their 20's and Athos in his early thirties. For physical descriptions of the Musketeers they were fair and handsome men read the first part of the novel and the chapter the Antechamber of Monsieur de Treville. Milady de Winter was 16 years old not twenty when she married Athos and Athos was 25 read the chapter in the novel Three Musketeers called the wife of Athos. When D'Artagnan first sees Milady in the beginning of the novel which started in the year 1625 and ended in 1628 Milady was twenty to twenty two years old and towards the end of the novel Athos in the chapter called How Athos found his outfit Athos when he finds out that his wife is still alive describes her as beautiful,tall,well-made,blue-eyed with a strange look to them (which might have inspired the screenwriter of this adaptation to make it appear that Milady was a demon possessed secret Satanist) and blonde who would be 26 to 28 years of age. Milady de Winter was not some small framed delicate little woman like Emmanuelle Beart or even Faye Dunaway who by far at least to movie critics and Dumas fans alike gave the best performance of the character to date in the 1973/1974 Richard Lester films,followed in the best performance categories Mary Peach of the 1966 BBC version and Mylene Demongeot of the French 1961 and not to forget Lana Turner in the 1948 MGM version. In my opinion this version is good but in no way compares with the more faithful versions of The Three Musketeers : Milady (2004),D'Artagnan and the Three Musketeers (1978) Russian film, The Three Musketeers (1999) video stage play,Bernard Borderie's 1961 2 pt Franco-Italian production,The 1966 BBC Production,1953 Andre Hunebelle version and the 1948 MGM production. A film that should be owned by any Musketeer fan and I can only hope that the new Three Musketeers trilogy which includes a prequel on the Musketeers and Milady's lives before D'Artagnan that will be coming to the big screen in 2011 will be worthy of such a great novel.

Rui Miguel Duarte Much better than Hollywood versions. Excellent timing. No time wasted on accessory adventures or hiper-detailed beginnings and clumsy and too keep with budget. This film spends viewer time on what's important. Sign of the times, perhaps, lots of «kung fu» and «buffy the vampire slayer».. Some people like to re-invent the wheel.. but the book is all adventure anyway and we can't blame Dumas for not having thought of everything, can we?! The taste of the 21st century spectator is as much reflected in this film as that of the 19th reader is satisfied in the book. To the dread of the purist, this movie may in fact remain true to the original; certainly not in «form», but in «logic». All in all a good movie and among best of the several (though not all) of «Les Trois Mousquetaires» that I have seen so far. The «garde robe» is exquisite and it's historic accuracy (or at least the look of it) marks the different to Hollywood amateurism in these more serious aspects of show-business. If they colored the story, these people at least new what they were filming about. Last, but not least, the cast: Awesome babes! I mean.. I'd buy that soul if I could afford it. :-)Rui Duarte