The Three Musketeers

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

Richard Lester did what no one before or since has been able to do: tell Dumas' story as magnificently as it deserves to be told. This tale gets told again and again in Hollywood, but leave it to a European to do it right. The cinematography, sets, and costumes are all fantastic, but they aren't all clean and impossibly perfect like the 1948 Gene Kelly or 1993 Kiefer Sutherland versions. Lester infuses this familiar story with an energy and tone that made his work with the Beatles successful. Yes, "The Three Musketeers" is an intriguing adventure, but the humor in their friendship, that's what draws me in again and again. And what an amazing cast he had to work with: all the Musketeers are perfect, especially big Oliver Reed, who can be silly, witty, and scary all in the same scene. The supporting cast is full of great actors, including Charlton Heston (having fun at being evil here), Christopher Lee (gets to mix deadpan humor in with his menace), Raquel Welch (cast as beautiful but clumsy, really enabling her to be a character and not just a live mannequin), Spike Milligan (doing what he does best), and most wonderfully Faye Dunaway (seductively evil: my favorite kind!). And, of course, holding it all together as D'Artagnan is Michael York, who never found a greater role.

Besides handling the shifts in tone well, Richard Lester also had the great rare luxury of breaking Dumas' large novel into two seperate movies which he filmed simultaneously. This really allows for greater character development and a truly epic scale. All of the other film versions try to cram all of that plot into 120 minutes. Not only is it impossible (in the 1993 version they simply change it completely using only the basic idea of Dumas' book), but it makes this huge complicated story with many threads seem contrived and ridiculous (the 1948 version has such dramatic and sudden shifts of tone - from wacky comedy, to romance, to heavy drama - that it can confuse and lose the audience).

This is great moviemaking.

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!

Alexandre Dumas's classic The Three Musketeers seems to never lose its appeal, it gets another cinema version every generation. In the seventies Richard Lester shot such a long film that producers Alexander and Ilya Salkind decided to release it in two parts. This film only takes us to the point of the affair of the diamond studs.

Michael York is one truly bumptious Gascon in his interpretation of D'Artagnan. Apparently it's a French mantra that people from Gascony are braggarts and quick to fight. I don't know how well that point is known outside the French speaking world, but it's in the strength of Dumas's tale that we Americans even those who haven't studied The Three Musketeers in high school of college English can appreciate that fact. Because of that fact he manages to make all kinds of enemies, the wrong ones and the right ones.

Fortunately the right ones, Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, Oliver Reed, Frank Finlay, and Richard Chamberlain all recognize York's worth and he becomes a companion of The Three Musketeers. The King's own guard, fighting against the encroaching power of France's prime minister Cardinal Richelieu.

Charlton Heston adds to his collection of real historical characters portrayed on film with his interpretation of Richelieu. He was hardly the villain in real life that he is here. As he said on his deathbed that he had no enemies, but the enemies of the state. Richelieu was in fact a great French patriot though as a Cardinal was not terribly pious or scrupulous.

Richelieu was also not a tall man and the six foot two inch Charlton Heston had to stoop over a bit when playing him. Note that carefully when you watch Heston, especially in his scenes with Christopher Lee as Rochefort. Lee does not lack in the height department either.

Three women have substantial roles in The Three Musketeers. Raquel Welch makes a sexy Constance, not quite the innocent that June Allyson played her as in the MGM version with Gene Kelly. Geraldine Chaplin is serene and beautiful, but tragically unloved except by Great Britain's prime minister the Duke of Buckingham {Simon Ward}, France's mortal enemy. Milady DeWinter played by Faye Dunaway is as deadly and beautiful as Lana Turner was in the Gene Kelly film.

Personally I've never thought that Hollywood ever got The Three Musketeers quite right. It will never happen I'm sure, but I'd love to see the operetta that Rudolf Friml wrote the music for, made into a Three Musketeers film. Still this one isn't too bad with an accent more on bawdy comedy than anything else. The followup Four Musketeers takes a more serious turn.

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.