GamerTab That was an excellent one.

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

blrnani Many people have a reverence for these classic Dumas works and imho the definitive rendition was the David Lean series. Consequently, they will find the title of this hodgepodge of a film rather misleading, as it only provides a very loose framework to hang the stories on. I say 'stories' because there are several going on simultaneously, which makes things a bit confusing, especially as the logic that is supposed to hold such things together too often gets jettisoned. First of all, this is a 'director's wife' vehicle, so Mila Jovovitch gets to do her Resident Evil tricks in a 17thC context. But it is also a teen hearthrob vehicle for Logan Lerman, so we get all the brash arrogance one would expect from the leading figure in a high-school play. And then there's the HK martial arts, Matrix and PotC action that is the dominant feature of the film. The cast is actually good, but somewhat wasted as they are basically connecting elements to keep the action flowing. Anyway, I think if one is forewarned that this film is a comedy that merely uses the subject matter as a loose structure, much as the Monty Python team used the Arthurian legend and the Bible, then it will be far more enjoyable than expecting another rendering of the Three Musketeers story. Whether you can get round the technological abuses is another matter - as it takes us into Connecticut Yankee territory. I really don't see where they can go from that closing sequence, as it would suggest a complete rewriting of European history, or a sudden updating to a WWII-type scenario, with the musketeers leading French resistance to the hated British occupying power (who consider that they're merely taking back the Norman territories that were stolen from them).

Evan Wessman (CinematicInceptions) While I must admit that I enjoyed this movie very much at twelve years old seeing it in theaters, I cannot sing many praises for it now. It has about as much raw entertainment as is possible for any movie and shamelessly models itself off of Pirates of the Caribbean, which is a major reason why I did and in a way still do enjoy it. I don't want to assume that the people who worked on it did not care about the movie at all, but it seems like more than one somebody was much more concerned with making the movie cool and fun rather than any kind of work of art. And in some ways that's fine, but it does reflect poorly on practically everyone involved.At first glance, it might seem like the plot was thrown aside, but I don't think that's the case. Much of the source material is throw aside to be sure, as the movie follows the content of the first eight or so chapters of the original book and takes vast liberties with it to boot (namely the airmachine). But there was a pretty involved plot that was constructed here that seems like there was a lot of work put into it. Where it falls flat is how the plot was put into script form. It has no evident theme and abandons more realistic or effective scenes in favor of setting up action scenes. The same goes for the dialogue, much of which you won't hear because of the atrocious sound editing in the conversational scenes.The characters are pretty much all one or two-dimensional people with memorable personalities. All of them are little more than your textbook flamboyant heroes, sinister villains, damsels in distress, duplicitous double-crossers, and bumbling comic relief. Nobody aside from Athos and *maybe* D'Artagnan has any sort of arc. Despite the huge cast, nobody gives a great performance, although James Corden's current notoriety may be attributed in part to his performance as Planchett.The action scenes are exciting and over-the-top with a lot of sword fighting and cannon fire. The four against forty battle is largely inflated from the matching scene in the book. Originally, it was four on five and the musketeers all get injured in the fight. I'm not saying that to complain, just pointing out what sort of movie they decided to make here. It may be fun to see our heroes and villains annihilate a bunch of inept minions, but where's the drama or suspense in that?My main recommendation is this: don't expect a great piece of filmmaking or a life changing story, but also know that you probably won't be bored watching it. I have two last bones to pick. First, there was way too much cleavage shown. Keep the corsets for historical accuracy if you have to, but that doesn't mean you have to look down a woman's dress every time she's in a shot. Secondly, the speech Athos gives D'Artagnan near the end about "France taking care of itself". It's such a selfish way of making decisions that I can hardly believe they kept it in. Overall Rating: 6.6/10.

Thomas Stevens An all-star cast and a total flop. I can only imagine the director was dead drunk when filming or deliberately made a shoddy movie... maybe both. TBH I watched the movie to completion in the hopes Mads Mikkelsen would actually run-through Logan Lerman and spare the world his complete lack of acting in future movies. But I shouldn't be too hard on Lerman, I didn't find most of the acting in this travesty worth a plugged nickel ('most' meaning 99.9% of this debacle).I'm now going to give myself a lobotomy, watch the version with Sutherland, Sheen, Platt, and the awesome Michael Wincott, and hope nothing this ridiculously awful will ever be made again.

jimbo-53-186511 In some ways this film can be seen as being enjoyable in a tongue-in-cheek, goofy, 'not to be taken seriously' type way, but it's the wait that's involved in getting there that is likely to be a make or break aspect for the audience....I must admit that I'm not overly-familiar with the source material here so wasn't really sure what to expect; however I was slightly disappointed with the actual structure of this film. Here, we have a first half which seemed to have very little going on and seemed to exist only as a long-winded way of introducing D'Artagnan. There are some amusing moments to be found in this set-up, but for me it felt that there was far too much unnecessary padding to what is essentially a fairly simple story.Given that it was slow in building itself up I hoped that my patience would be rewarded by some fantastic swashbuckling action and impressive fight sequences and once again I left feeling slightly disappointed. True, there are some fight sequences and some swashbuckling, but not enough - maybe my expectations were too high, but I just found that the film was rather weak as both an action film and as a story. I also thought that the ending was rather poor as well.Thankfully the film does benefit from strong camaraderie between the principal cast and this does help to carry the film through some of the duller moments and makes it feel slightly better than it should be - as D'Artagnan Lerman brings a sort of cheeky charm to the film and also brings some much needed fun. The likes of MacFadyen, Stevenson and Evans also work their roles well too and all 4 of these players are what really hold this film together.My thoughts on this version of The Three Musketeers is that it was entertaining in spots with the principal cast making it quite fun to watch at times. However, I thought it was a little on the slow side and also thought it would be more action-packed. For those reasons I found it a little disappointing overall.