The Fourth Musketeer
- 2022
- 1 घं 25 मि
IMDb रेटिंग
3.3/10
1.5 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपने पिता के कहने पर, युवा डी''आर्टगनन ग्रामीण गैस्कोनी से पेरिस की यात्रा करता है।अपने पिता के कहने पर, युवा डी''आर्टगनन ग्रामीण गैस्कोनी से पेरिस की यात्रा करता है।अपने पिता के कहने पर, युवा डी''आर्टगनन ग्रामीण गैस्कोनी से पेरिस की यात्रा करता है।
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
Mollie Hindle-Pérez
- Milady
- (as Mollie Hindle)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
This movie was odd and disappointing for me, having grown up watching one treatment after another of Dumas classic tale, done with acting, action, and a PLOT. This 2022 adaptation couldn't seem to get off home plate. There are FAR too many d'Artagnans for one thing. We're told d'Artagnan (the "main" one) has practiced with the toy sword his whole life, but all we see is him whacking lamely at a grain sack.
The cast is small for a theme usually swarming with cast and extras. The scenes are all shot in close narrow angle which is quickly distracting. The "main" d'Artagnan serves 2 years in the academy (we assume) but returns to his father clearly not a day older when any young man of 18 would change quite a lot in two years -- even a High School production would exploit this easy opportunity to reinforce the idea of time and character development!
I can say, the costumes were not bad, and I didn't notice any jet aircraft or automobiles, but I can't think of any reason I'd recommend this to anyone.
The cast is small for a theme usually swarming with cast and extras. The scenes are all shot in close narrow angle which is quickly distracting. The "main" d'Artagnan serves 2 years in the academy (we assume) but returns to his father clearly not a day older when any young man of 18 would change quite a lot in two years -- even a High School production would exploit this easy opportunity to reinforce the idea of time and character development!
I can say, the costumes were not bad, and I didn't notice any jet aircraft or automobiles, but I can't think of any reason I'd recommend this to anyone.
When the opening credits showed a nice engraving of an 18th Century Gentleman I thought we weren't in for a gem - sadly I was right.
The sets and the set dressing are superb and as good as you are going to get but the positives stop there. The script, directing and acting are all so amateur that you would get better from the local 'AmDram'. The armourer was a complete joke, as was the fight director.
Given how many times the 'based on Alexandre Dumas' novel' has been made how is it still possible to get EVERYTHING so very wrong - even, in this case, the timeline!
If you want a musketeers movie you still can't beat the Richard Lester version. But there are other versions that are quite watchable - this is not.
Really, just don't bother, you'll never get that part of your life back. Watch some paint dry, it would be more entertaining...
The sets and the set dressing are superb and as good as you are going to get but the positives stop there. The script, directing and acting are all so amateur that you would get better from the local 'AmDram'. The armourer was a complete joke, as was the fight director.
Given how many times the 'based on Alexandre Dumas' novel' has been made how is it still possible to get EVERYTHING so very wrong - even, in this case, the timeline!
If you want a musketeers movie you still can't beat the Richard Lester version. But there are other versions that are quite watchable - this is not.
Really, just don't bother, you'll never get that part of your life back. Watch some paint dry, it would be more entertaining...
Not badly done for a low budget movie but nothing exciting. I would expect more from an action movie and from the story, which was also fine but simplistic. Not recommended.
Acting is not that great. But some does, it is not painful but could have done much more.
The sound is sometimes done nicely, but also wrongly done.
Pity, they pushed so much information in an unnaturally way that it is pity to see. The script is OK but due to acting it is just lowering the quality of the movie.
The camera work is just B rate and the sound also.
The intro is so much rushed, putting so much information in short time.
It is funny how rapid it goes but also how much potential it has in story.
Like the overall story but the sub elements are pity.
The ending is nice but also predictable and a bit disappointment in the result. The nice thing is how it got round up without being forced.
The sound is sometimes done nicely, but also wrongly done.
Pity, they pushed so much information in an unnaturally way that it is pity to see. The script is OK but due to acting it is just lowering the quality of the movie.
The camera work is just B rate and the sound also.
The intro is so much rushed, putting so much information in short time.
It is funny how rapid it goes but also how much potential it has in story.
Like the overall story but the sub elements are pity.
The ending is nice but also predictable and a bit disappointment in the result. The nice thing is how it got round up without being forced.
Production companies are constantly racking their brains as to what they can offer the viewer any time soon. In itself, this is not a problem, I think, as a European who sees high quality in American film. And that is in the convincing scenes of really good actors and, of course, the set design, that is, the scenery itself. They are always realistic portrayals.
Unfortunately, this does not always apply to the genre and the storytelling. Themes like the musketeers were transported very well many years ago. A remake like this is basically an insult. Because one believes to bring the spirit of the times into the given modernity. Which can succeed, if it is transposed to sci-fi level, for example. Light sabers and light swords are not an invention of George Lukas, they existed in comics decades before. That's what someone like me would like to see. The four musketeers in the year 2500.
This movie is not worth the production costs.
Unfortunately, this does not always apply to the genre and the storytelling. Themes like the musketeers were transported very well many years ago. A remake like this is basically an insult. Because one believes to bring the spirit of the times into the given modernity. Which can succeed, if it is transposed to sci-fi level, for example. Light sabers and light swords are not an invention of George Lukas, they existed in comics decades before. That's what someone like me would like to see. The four musketeers in the year 2500.
This movie is not worth the production costs.
क्या आपको पता है
- गूफ़When D'Artagnan journeys to Paris in 1625, an illustration of Paris is shown that includes the Porte Saint-Denis triumphal arch. The arch shown in the drawing wasn't built until 1672.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Fourth Musketeer?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Четвёртый мушкетер
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- लेस्सटर, लेस्सटरशर, इंग्लैंड, यूनाइटेड किंगडम(The Guildhall)
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 25 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें