The Three Musketeers

Richard Lester has to be one of the greatest directors of comedy there ever was. There are dozens of slapstick gags and situations in this movie and almost 100% of them work. And what an opulent setting they are placed in! Lester and his cohorts have created a film in which almost every frame resembles a museum painting come to life (and gone berserk.)

Lester is better with style than relating a narrative. I found it impossible to completely comprehend the story line here, and I think if you asked most people what the movie was about, they'd tell you there was a lot of swashbuckling and general mayhem and lunacy, but I doubt they'd give you much of Dumas' story. When the style is this good, however, a little fuzziness on the substance is not a fatal flaw. Still, it might keep this picture from being an all-time classic rather than "just" a most enjoyable film.

Lester is such an auteur that his direction is the main focus of this film even with such an all-star cast. It was a wise decision (actually it seems like a no-brainer) to divide what was originally shot at one time into two films, this one and 'The Four Musketeers.' There really can be too much of a good thing, and even at under two hours, 'The Three Musketeers' threatens to be overwhelming. But on balance this film is great entertainment.

This film, and its sequel (filmed concurrently) is by far the best movie version of the Dumas novel ever produced. The cast is excellent. The sets and costumes are marvelous. The swordplay (and there is much) is possible some of the most realistic ever filmed. And it's the only Musketeer movie I am aware of in which the Musketeers actually use muskets. Authenticity seems to have been very important to the producers, as well as staying true to the novel.

Sadly a film like this wouldn't be made these days. First off the fighting would be "punched-up" with a lot of wire work. And of course Hollywood would change the story to eliminate much of the "sleeping around" characters do (today's movie heroes in this type of movie aren't usually sexually active). They would also provide some creative story editing so that a certain character who dies in the novel would survive so as to supply the requisite happy ending. Fortunately for us this version does not suffer that kind of revisionism.

If you're a fan of Dumas or just looking for a fun film with lots of realistic sword fighting then you won't want to miss this.

I must admit that I was a fan of the Disney-fied version of "The Three Musketeers" in my misspent youth. The first time I saw it, I was a wide-eyed 12-year-old who thought that Kiefer Sutherland's Athos was IT as far as the character was concerned - that is, until I stumbled across this version of the much-done movie on cable last year. It was then that I watched Oliver Reed breathe a whole new life into the character of Athos with the help of a magnificent supporting cast. I have to say, I never fell off the couch laughing at the Disney version the way I did during the scene at the inn where Porthos and Aramis are attempting to pull Athos out of the well. Moreover, I never felt as though I understood the characters very well until I watched Lester's interpretation and compared it with the text of Dumas. He could not have chosen a finer cast of actors for his movie - Reed is superb as the quiet, thoughtful leader, Finlay is outlandish as Porthos, Chamberlain brings a flair to Aramis, and York seems completely immersed in D'Artangan. Yet great casting aside, the movie would be nothing if Lester had not incorporated the reality of life at court during the Musketeers' time period - the laziness and sheer excess (dogs as chess pieces on the palace lawn, wine fountains, and palace games). The fight scenes are also to be commended. They are not the overly-choreographed dances of Disney's "The Three Musketeers," but rather have a harsh reality to them. (Reed's fighting style is particularly all-out - he uses his entire body as a weapon.) In short, this movie has completely replaced the Disney version for me - as has its "sequel," "The Four Musketeers" (a must-see if you want to get the whole story and watch Porthos find "a new way to disarm himself").

Alexandre Dumas would more than likely applaud this particular version of his fantastic novel. I remember when I was a kid and first saw the movie in the theater... I was stunned at the cinematography (yeah, a film buff even at 12). After leaving the theater, I went to a nearby bookstore and bought my first copy of the novel. Wow, how impressed was I when I realized that Richard Lester and George MacDonald Fraser stuck to the concept of the novel. The novel, incase you haven't read it, is funny and fun. The first half of the book... kept me at edge of my seat. When I recently re-read the novel, my wife would tell me that I would wake her up sword fighting in my sleep. Anyway, back to the movie. Michael York as D'Artagnan was fabulous. He embodied the dweeb that we all now and love as the future Commander of the King's Musketeers. Oliver Reed gave the best performance of his life as Athos. Richard Chamberlain as Aramis... the Musketeer who wants to be a priest was entertaining, and a delight. And Frank Finley as Porthos (and later came to realize that he was also O'Reilly... Buckingham's jeweler) was tremendous. Richard Lester should have been nominated for an Academy award for his direction of this masterpiece, numerous members of the cast (including Christopher Lee as Compte Rochefort, Charlton Heston as Cardinal Richelieu, Raquel Welch as Constance Bonaciuex, Spike Milligan as Monsieur Bonacieux, Roy Kinnear as Planchet, Simon Ward as the Duke of Buckingham, Faye Dunaway as Milady de Winter, and of course Jean-Pierre Cassel as Louis XIII) should have been nominated for some kind of award. The casts portrayals were direct from the Dumas novel. The sword play in the movie is the best that I have ever seen in a movie. There is none better, with the possible exception of the Four Musketeers... the rest of the novel.

If you have never seen the movie... go and get it. Watch it. Wait for it on TCM or FCM and tape it. Once you see it, you'll want to add it to your collection... or check out e-bay if your local stores don't carry it. I bought mine on e-bay and watch it at least 3 times a year. :D

I have loved this film (or rather, these films!) since I first saw them as a child in the early eighties. At that point I hadn't read the novels, but, unusually, I think no less of the films now that I have. In their broad, slapstick style of humour, they perhaps reflect the times in which they were made, rather than Dumas, but there is no lack of the original's tragedy in the scenes of Athos' past and D'Artagnan's disillusion. George Macdonald Fraser's script is as fine as you'd expect of the writer of the 'Flashman' novels and the choreography of the fight scenes has been justly praised. The foils were apparently as heavy as their Seventeenth Century counterparts and the actors' agony was increased by filming in the hot Spanish sun....

When I watched these films again a few weeks ago I was also struck by the beautiful cinematography, with the scene in the snow and the climactic fight in the convent particularly well-framed. For me, this is as near-perfect an adaptation of the adventure novel as is possible, combining romance, humour, tragedy and action with wonderful production values and a terrific script. Few other films, and no other version of the 'Musketeers', reaches this standard. Messieurs York, Reed, Finlay, Chamberlain, Heston, Ward, Lee, Milligan and Kinnear, plus Mmes Dunaway, Chaplain and Welch will forever be associated with their characters for me. Brilliant stuff!