What's it all About? Yet another retelling of the Dumas Musketeer tale that changes things to become a bit more movified. The first 20 minutes are pretty much a scene for scene facsimile of the 1973 version. Then some big changes occur. Cardinal Richelieu and Rochefort have more predominant roles and instead of the Queen having an affair with the Duke of Buckingham, it is now the Cardinal who wants to unite France and England to depose the King. He has the Musketeers disbanded and only our three remaining swordsmen (and D'Artagnan) can fight together for King and country.
Best bits? Nothing to see here
Did it make you think thoughts? From the outset this film establishes itself as a light hearted, chuckling, true Disney affair. With this in mind I thought there would be heroes punching villains and using the hilt of the sword to knock foes unconscious. It was surprising then that the film depicts lots of killing, stabbing, sword slashing and a particularly gruesome iron maiden scene. I was confused. Oh well.
Looking at the action scenes, they do their job but have no choreography that shows off the abilities of the musketeers. That is, our heroes just fight like normal guys. It's fairly common practice in action films to portray the hero as a super dude who has crazy ass moves and dazzling skills. Our boys however, fight as if they've just finished their shift at the local burger joint, picked up a sword and fancied duelling some mustachioed villains. Boring and lame.
The set pieces are ok but there is one that sticks out as being truly abysmal. The three
The casting crew need to have a long hard look at themselves as well. Charlie Sheen? Now, stick Chuck in a comedy ala Hotshots and it's a winning combination. Make him have to pretend he's a 17th century French swash-buckler and there's a well deserved combination of egg and face. Oliver Platt fares no better and there's something about Sutherland that just rubs me the wrong way (I think it's his face, acting, posture and voice).
If you see this man, Slumpy commands you to punch him in the face |
The only thing better than the 1973 version is that the story is easier to follow and perhaps makes more sense.
Would you watch it again? Nah, this is a pretty poor effort.
Rating (out of 100%): It's a romp that is easily forgettable so with that in mind I give it a lacklustre 45%