Los Tres Mosqueteros: D'Artagnan

A disappointing movie. Like some others here, I was looking forward to a film which finally does justice to the source material - one of the greatest swashbuckling tales of all time. This, alas, doesn't. There are some very good things. The feel is very authentic. Some of the set pieces eg. The Buckingham ball, the marriage of the King's brother, are stunning. Some of France's best acting talent is on display although I think Cassel and Duris are miscast. They don't do it for me. Matters aren't helped by some of the worst subtitles I've ever seen. Really bad. In summary, worth a watch but nowhere near as exciting as it should have been. It seems we have another part to come. Perhaps they'll hit their stride in that one.

Only the French could come up with a swashbuckling boy's own adventure where the hero saves the day by covering up adultery, but I'm glad they did.

Whilst none of the versions of this come close to the Richard Lester classic (well, maybe Dog Tanian) this one is very good indeed.

The colour palette is the modern brown and grimy one we've gotten used to from the more recent Bond movies, which is quite appropriate since Eva Green features as the duplicitous Milady, will, why break the habit of a lifetime. She's probably the best one to play the part since Faye Dunaway, and I look forward to seeing more of her in the sequel, which is named after her character.

Anyway this is a lot of fun you'll care about the characters, and there is a breathtaking cliff edge horse chase. True, you'll miss Roy Kinnear's mumbling asides but there is plenty to enjoy here.

The story revolves around D'Artagnan who joins the Musketeers of the Guard and shows enough bravery when he clashes with the three musketeers - Athos, Porthos and Aramis, who take him under their wing. When Athos is falsely accused of murder, the other trio ensure to save Athos and time, while unraveling the larger conspiracy to harm the King and the Queen as well as instigating wide unrest planned by the baddie Milady and others. How D'Artagnan and three musketeers become a big hurdle to Milady and will they be able to save their King on time forms rest of the story, building up for a sequel.

Straight up, this was definitely a good watch and even if the action set pieces mostly with the sword didn't stand out but the story as well as the characters instantly connects. To simply put, the production is top notch. Be with the setting and the costumes, the era is set solidly and the director wastes no time in kickstarting with the action right from the introduction scene of D'Artagnan. It kept throwing enough entertaining scenes throughout, made memorable by the actor especially the multiple duel scene with the trio or even the flirting between the main lead and Constance. It definitely was an easy watch and to keep more of Eva Green to the sequel alone is worth waiting for it.

I just finished the film. Perhaps I should say, "Je viens de regarder le film" but I think I'll write this review for an anglophone audience. There may be a version with English subtitles but the one I watched did not have that option. I had to pause and listen again a few times, but the dialogue is generally not too hard to follow if your French is not too rusty.

For purists, it may be a disappointment, but for me it was a delight. The film was not exactly faithful to the original story by Alexandre Dumas, although overall it followed the same trajectory. For example, when Athos told the story of his wife to D'Artagnan, they were not drunk and sprawled across a table at an inn, but in the forest where Athos had just mocked D'Artagnan with a bit of friendly swordplay. Also, D'Artagnan was buried alive in the original story, but he was in a coffin and it was Athos who dug him out of the ground. In this film he dug himself out of an open-pit grave coughing and wheezing.

D'Artagnan's letter of introduction to M. De Tréville from his father was particularly annoying. An important part of the story was that it was in his doublet when it was stolen in Meung.

Also, where were Grimaud, Bazin, Mousqueton, and Planchet? They figured large in the original story, but weren't even a footnote in the film.

But the introduction of D'Artagnan to the trio was perfectly faithful to the original, and delightfully amusing. Within an hour of his arrival in Paris, D'Artagnan had managed to rile Athos, Porthos, and Aramis and he had agreed to fight them in duels, one after the other. He paid his rent four weeks in advance (4 livres) "au cas où." The humor was morbid, dry, and subtle, and I think it was faithful to the description by Dumas.

The actors chosen for the parts represented interesting choices. Porthos was not as portly as he should have been, in my mind, nor Athos as taciturn, nor Aramis as refined and beautiful, nor Richelieu as commanding. And none of them had particularly long hair (except for Athos before they cut it in anticipation of slicing through his neck.) Moreover, the actors portraying the mousquetaires were all a bit long in the tooth.

Still, after a bit it all came together with credible performances. I'm not very familiar with French actors, but the actors in this film all carried their characters brilliantly. (Ils ont crevé l'écran, as the French say. They "crushed" it.) The actress chosen for Constance Bonacieux was perfect. She was charming and pretty and young, but not beautiful or refined, just as Dumas painstakingly described her in the book.

However, it was jarring was when Constance was stitching the wound of D'Artagnan and she said something like "Quelques centimètres" meaning that it was lucky the shot wasn't just a bit to the left. But anything set in that period would have used "puces" (inches) and "pieds" (feet). To be sure, the French got so upset with the clergy and the nobility that they changed the names of the months of the year, the days of the week, the units of measurement, and the position of the head relative to the shoulders of 17 thousand aristocrats, but that wouldn't happen till 165 years after this story was set. (Would be interesting to see if, in the versions subtitled in English, the translation given was "a few inches to the left". I know they often use different units in translations meant for US consumption. Pounds, miles, etc.)

I really appreciated it when the king said, near the end, "Messieurs, voici les fameux trois mousquetaires, qui sont désormais quatre" (or something like that), even though it wasn't in the book. The complete lack of political correctness was refreshing as well. If he had said "mesdames et messieurs..." it would have lacked historical authenticity.

The fighting scenes were particularly stunning. There was plenty of violence and blood, just as in the novel, and the réalisateur chose to go with that quirky NYPD Blue-style camera angle, which I think gave it a gritty reality often missing from films set in the early 17th century. Combatants in close quarters do not have a drone's-eye view, and this is reflected in scenes of more recent battles (e.g., Thin Red Line). It was refreshing to see that treatment in a depiction of more ancient battles.

The locations were real, or so it seemed. The white cliffs of Dover are hard to simulate, and the château de Vincennes is probably also hard to replicate. I'd guess that all the places were filmed in situ.

Overall I can recommend it to--well, I'm going to borrow a Spanish word here because we don't have this one in English (nor, as far as I know, in French)--to aficionados of Les Trois Mousquetaires. Just keep an open mind regarding the small details, which will be different from the book.

Note that this film corresponds to Tome I of Les Trois Mousquetaires, roughly the first 30 chapters. Hopefully they'll make sequel. That was hinted after the credits with a small "à suivre" teaser featuring Milady and le Cardinal Richelieu in which she referenced "les mousquetaires".

For those who have not recently read the book and who might want to reference it, The Gutenberg Project has several versions in its excellent and free collection.

This film offers a respectable take on the classic tale with commendable performances and a certain charm. The cast brings energy and charisma to their roles, capturing the spirit of the legendary musketeers. The camaraderie between the leads is palpable and adds a lot of enjoyment to the film.

However, there are a few issues that hinder the overall experience. The cinematography, while ambitious, often leans towards being too dark, making some scenes difficult to see clearly. This choice detracts from the visual appeal and can be frustrating during key moments. Additionally, the pacing of the film is somewhat slow, with certain segments dragging on longer than necessary, which affects the film's momentum.

Despite these drawbacks, The Three Musketeers is an entertaining watch with solid performances and a faithful adaptation of the classic story. It may not be perfect, but it provides an enjoyable take on the swashbuckling adventures of the iconic trio.