Three Musketeers reboot -- dreadful?

[Finagle]

There's a trailer (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_three_musketeers_2011/trailers/11140715/) available for the big budget remake of the Three Musketeers. It looks like they're giving it the "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"/"Sherlock Holmes" treatment.
Specifically, "let's add big explosions and bullet-time action sequences and anachronisms" because, you know, there's not quite enough derring do and action in one of the most swashbuckling, action-packed stories of all time.

From the trailer, we apparently have the Duke of Buckingham's aerial ships of the lines fighting broadside to broadside over Versailles. Somehow, this makes Richelieu the bad guy. Meanwhile Milady has been transmuted from a conniving murderess to some kind of deadly ninja assassin in a big skirt. There's also some kind of steampunky mines and some kind of ninja with weird clicky weapons that look like they're borrowed from Hellboy. (Maybe this is Milady, but it's hard to tell, because it's a medieval ninja wearing a mask. )

Oh yeah, and there are flame throwers. (Maybe it's me, but if you're in a universe with flame throwers, you should possibly reconsider your choice of becoming a great swordsman.)

All this noise seems to be to distract us from the character of D'Artagnan who, let's face it, appears to be even more of a dork than he was in the original book. Every line he delivers in the preview is cringeworthy. "We are the Musketeers -- it's up to us to put and end to the Cardinal's plot!"

So, I dunno. If they hadn't slapped the name "The Three Musketeers" on it and instead had called it "Four Hundred Years Ago in Alternate World France, Weird Stuff Happened" this might have been a good movie. Who am I kidding? It would still be loud, crass and awful. But at least they wouldn't be pissing so loudly and voluminously on the grave of Alexandre Dumas, pere.

[Odesio]

As soon as I saw an airship I knew this wasn't the movie for me. I don't really expect any movie to demonstrate slavish devotion to the source material. But when the deviate so far I wonder to myself why they bothered with the source material at all. Aside from name recognition of course. The previews showing Milady de Winter doing aerial acrobatics didn't seal the movie's fate for me so much as it simply put a giant rock over it.

[RealityChuck]

People have been appalled by this for months. The Three Musketeers is the perfect swashbuckler and has never really been treated well on film (The closest was the Richard Lester version in the 1970s). But they will probably still use the early setpiece swordfights (e.g., D'Artagnan challenging all three Musketeers to a duel). Using the name made it stand out, but it's looks like it's going to be a third-rate cliched adventure (The Three Musketeers only seems cliched because everyone else has copied it).

Until they have a version where:

Milady is married to Athos, as she is in the book
They're not really doing the Three Musketeers.

[Simplicio]

I don't really have any problem with them adding a bunch of crazy sci-fi or over-the-top action to an old property. There are plenty of more faithful adaptations of the Dumas novel, if thats what you want.

The dialogue in the trailer is pretty cringe worthy though, so I suspect this will suck in anycase.

But at least they wouldn't be pissing so loudly and voluminously on the grave of Alexandre Dumas, pere.

Eh, Dumas took the character of D'Artagnian from another author, who in turn got it from heavily fictionalizing an account of the life of a real muskateer. I can't imagine he'd have much grounds for complaining if other people continue the chain.

[Thudlow Boink]

As long as they remain faithful to the candy bar...

[Fourtyfold]

Eh, Dumas took the character of D'Artagnian from another author, who in turn got it from heavily fictionalizing an account of the life of a real muskateer. I can't imagine he'd have much grounds for complaining if other people continue the chain.

But on the other hand, Dumas did greatly improve on the original. (by Courtilz de Sandras, if anyone is interested. Dumas did leave one of the main characters, Besmaux, out of his version)

[hajario]

I have a side question if you all don't mind: Why are they called musketeers if they mainly fight with swords rather than muskets? I have always wondered that.

[amarinth]

Until they have a version where:

Milady is married to Athos, as she is in the book
They're not really doing the Three Musketeers.I pretty sure that happened in the Kiefer Sutherland/Charlie Sheen version (which was not good for other, hopefully apparent reasons) but that, they got right at least.
I'm not planning on re-watching it to make certain.

[Capitaine Zombie]

I have a side question if you all don't mind: Why are they called musketeers if they mainly fight with swords rather than muskets? I have always wondered that.

We already had a thread about that. They're a soldier company, with musket as their main weapon. The use of a sword is for their duellist activities.

[JoelUpchurch]

Until they have a version where:
Milady is married to Athos, as she is in the book
They're not really doing the Three Musketeers.

But she was married to Athos in the Lester version. Athos strangled her instead of hanging her like the book.

[The Second Stone]

That and a musket has one shot and it takes a while to reload.

[Capitaine Zombie]

That and a musket has one shot and it takes a while to reload.

I tried that excuse before, to no avail.

[George Kaplin]

IMDB says this reboot is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Does anyone familiar with his work know of anything he's been involved in that hasn't turned out to be a total piece of shit? I'm genuinely curious. I've no fucking idea how this guy keeps getting work.

[Capitaine Zombie]

IMDB says this reboot is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Does anyone familiar with his work know of anything he's been involved in that hasn't turned out to be a total piece of shit? I'm genuinely curious. I've no fucking idea how this guy keeps getting work.

I disagree. His early works were really good, he was kind of a young Carpenter. Event Horizon, Resident Evil 1, and even Mortal Kombat were really well done (very subtle sound work). It got bad when he started to get big.

[George Kaplin]

Ah, see, I hated all those :)

[Justin_Bailey]

IMDB says this reboot is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Does anyone familiar with his work know of anything he's been involved in that hasn't turned out to be a total piece of shit? I'm genuinely curious. I've no fucking idea how this guy keeps getting work.

Anderson makes rainy Saturday afternoon movies. They're not great cinema, but for 90 minutes you're pretty entertained.

And yes, I'm the one guy in the world who likes Alien vs Predator.

[Two Many Cats]

The whole "Wonder Woman in a ball gown" routine made me wanna barf. Seriously. I'm all for capable women in movies being a feminist and all, but please.

[not what you'd expect]

As long as they remain faithful to the candy bar...

:) Yum, my favorite.

[Taomist]

Am I the only one looking forward to losing myself in fantasy for a couple of hours? :D I loved the books <been awhile since I read the other two though; time to boot up the Nook> and have so far enjoyed every dorky/bad/awful/popcorn-munching-worthy version on film. Love 'em all; will not be a waste of time. :)

The film version with Depardieu is by far my favorite, however. I don't expect this one to come close, but I'm expecting cheese. Cheese with swords! I don't expect I'll be disappointed. :)

[silenus]

I'm actually looking forward to it. Looks cool, in a "waste a few hours" kinda way. Since nobody can beat the Lester version, I have no problem with Anderson doing a romp.

[Capitaine Zombie]

The film version with Depardieu is by far my favorite

Jawdrop

[drm]

IMDB says this reboot is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Does anyone familiar with his work know of anything he's been involved in that hasn't turned out to be a total piece of shit? I'm genuinely curious. I've no fucking idea how this guy keeps getting work.

he's a genius...he somehow managed to get scantily clad women into a prison movie.

The movies - and probably the three musketeers - are usually shit though, yes.

[DeptfordX]

IMDB says this reboot is directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Does anyone familiar with his work know of anything he's been involved in that hasn't turned out to be a total piece of shit? I'm genuinely curious. I've no fucking idea how this guy keeps getting work.

Ah, as i was watching the trailer i was wondering why'd they cast Milla (married to the director) Jovovitch.

[Declan]

The film version with Depardieu is by far my favorite, however. I don't expect this one to come close, but I'm expecting cheese. Cheese with swords! I don't expect I'll be disappointed. :)

Are you thinking of the man in the iron mask, thats the only movie about musketeers that I remember with him in it.

Declan

[GreedySmurf]

And yes, I'm the one guy in the world who likes Alien vs Predator.

So you're the one!!!


:D

[runcible spoon]

Gah, d'Artagnon's accent drives me up the wall.

As a firm fan of all things steampunk, this looks like a terrible, terrible movie. I'm really sick of the whole 'no, our heroes aren't super-powered, they can just dodge bullets' thing. Swordsmen and machine guns don't work well together. Guns and swords, yes - even in the original, the Musketeers used pistols as often as swords, and even muskets occasionally. But once you throw in corridors with hundreds of guns mounted in the walls, you pretty much have to find a better way to get past than 'NOBODY will think of sliding along the floor! BRILLIANT!'.

[Chronos]

Personally, I'm not troubled at all by it. It's such a huge departure from the original, in such blatant ways, that it hardly even feels like an adaptation any more, and if it's not an adaptation, then it no longer needs to bear any particular resemblance.

[RickJay]

Titus Pullo's in it. It's worth a rental just for that.

[Grestarian]

Lester’s made-for-TV set is my favorite, as well. I’ve seen ratings/reviews that say his were the closest to the books out of all the versions. I have Three… and Four…, which I understand were drawn from Dumas’ book but split up (kind of like the last Harry Potter, but predating the approach by three decades).

I remember reading end of the book and being a bit irritated that it has D’Artagnan and Rocheforte on amicable terms; I much preferred the grueling duel and its ending. Made a nice book-end opposite the way they first met

I understand Lester also made a version of The Fifth Musketeer, Count of Monte Cristo, Man in the Iron Mask, and a couple others in an attempt to do Dumas’ whole musketeer-involving this was France-undergoing-change series. I think I saw Fifth… once and a snippet of …Monte Cristo with Chamberlain reprising Aramis once. I don't remember if I was impressed :confused:



But she was married to Athos in the Lester version. Athos strangled her instead of hanging her like the book.

Well, actually in The Four Musketeers (q.v.) he remembered strangling her [we see this in his flashback -- is this a de-facto divorce?] and, thinking she was dead, left his position and name behind to become Athos, only to find out later that she didn’t actually die. Near the end of the referenced sequel, the four of heroes arrange to have her head cut off -- but we don't actually see it, so maybe.... :smack:

In high school I was in a skit which the writers claimed was based on details in the book that weren't in Lester's TV movies. The writers had me do a monologue about how Milady corrupted a lot of lives with her (*ahem*) beauty, including the life of the executioner’s brother who had been a priest who was caught with Milady, then got defrocked and committed suicide. It was a fun monologue, but I don’t know if that’s part of Dumas’ tale. I'll have to haul that thing out and really pore over it some time.


I have a side question if you all don't mind: Why are they called musketeers if they mainly fight with swords rather than muskets? I have always wondered that.

Captain de Treville explains to D'Artagnan that, only after they distinguish themselves as swordsmen, are militiamen allowed to also carry and train in the use of muskets. The three that the main protagonist initially meets, challenges, and is befriended by, are a clique of soldiers who have “distinguished themselves in the killings” but they are by no means the only ones who have done so. But if you haven’t shown a knack for fighting/surviving, and a tolerance of blood/killing, then I suspect you’re more likely to be relegated to less glamorous duties like latrine-digging, drum corps, hauling cannonballs, raking the coals, etc.

Okay, okay, quick answer: the three musketeers are the clique the protagonizt wants to join -- kinda like the campus-dominating social group or the #1 Fraternity/sorority or -- well, you get the picture.


Personally, I'm not troubled at all by it. It's such a huge departure from the original, in such blatant ways, that it hardly even feels like an adaptation any more, and if it's not an adaptation, then it no longer needs to bear any particular resemblance.

At least the last people who attempted such a feat realized they had gone too far and went ahead and renamed the result as “The Musketeer” and called it a ‘re-imagining’ of the Dumas classics.


…in the Kiefer Sutherland/Charlie Sheen version (which was not good for other, hopefully apparent reasons)…

Yeah, basically it seems this thing is hauled out every few years. Douglas Fairbanks, Gene Kelley, Michael York, Chris O’Donnel … I dunno if it’s Hollywood recycling a superb story because they’re cheap, or Hollywood trying at yet another relevant time to get Dumas’ point* out to the masses -- and wrapping it up in the latest special effects and popular stars to try and get people to watch.


*The point as I always saw it
The Church (personified by Cardinal Richelieu) is corrupt and power-hungry. We need heroes to stop them!

[Capitaine Zombie]

At least the last people who attempted such a feat realized they had gone too far and went ahead and renamed the result as “The Musketeer” and called it a ‘re-imagining’ of the Dumas classics.


The Peter Hyams movie? The one with Tim Roth and Deneuve? It was shitty but the light was really good. They were fighting in Vermeer-lit rooms.


*The point as I always saw it
The Church (personified by Cardinal Richelieu) is corrupt and power-hungry. We need heroes to stop them!

Which is funny, because in truth, Richelieu is actually doing his job, it's the Musketeers that are continuously betraying their country for vainglorious reasons.
I think either towards the end of the book, or in one of the latter books, Richelieu and d'Artagnan (or is it Aramis?) have a conversation about duty, where the Musketeer comes to realize that Richelieu is more an adversary than an enemy.

BTW, are you sure that Lester's movies were made for TV? They were released as feature films in Europe.

[fumster]

We already had a thread about that. They're a soldier company, with musket as their main weapon. The use of a sword is for their duellist activities.How about when all three of them fight?

[MrDibble]

I'm sorry, I'd duty-bound to watch any movie that has airships in it.

And c'mon - this is worth watching for Orlando Bloom's hair alone.

It really looks like a movie that does not, in any way, take itself seriously, and i like that.

[runcible spoon]

In high school I was in a skit which the writers claimed was based on details in the book that weren't in Lester's TV movies. The writers had me do a monologue about how Milady corrupted a lot of lives with her (*ahem*) beauty, including the life of the executioner’s brother who had been a priest who was caught with Milady, then got defrocked and committed suicide. It was a fun monologue, but I don’t know if that’s part of Dumas’ tale. I'll have to haul that thing out and really pore over it some time.

Don't know about the whole monologue, but the bit about the executioner's brother is accurate.

[JoelUpchurch]

BTW, are you sure that Lester's movies were made for TV? They were released as feature films in Europe.

It was released in the theater in the U.S. also. I saw the Four Musketeers in a theater. The Lester version was rather infamous because the actors sued the production company since they were paid for one movie and it was released as two movies. I'm glad they released it as two movies, since I can't figure out how they could have released it as single movie without leaving some wonderful footage on the cutting room floor.

[Acid Lamp]

I'm sorry, I'd duty-bound to watch any movie that has airships in it.

It really looks like a movie that does not, in any way, take itself seriously, and i like that.

snip.

I KNEW we had common ground! :D

This looks fun; you fuddy-duddys can go grouse somewhere else. This movie is cheese, eye candy, and possibly the first really good venture into steampunk territory.

[smiling bandit]

I think either towards the end of the book, or in one of the latter books, Richelieu and d'Artagnan (or is it Aramis?) have a conversation about duty, where the Musketeer comes to realize that Richelieu is more an adversary than an enemy.

It's actally hilarious that these adaptations usually portray (as Dumas did) Richelieu as the secret evil mastermind undercutting the King, because the IRL Richelieu was basically a patriot who wanted a safe and secure France under a unified but generous monarchy. He actually pushed hard to get rid of many of the old feudal customs and problems, and had France continued under that path it might have avoided the Revolution or even become a Constitutional Monarchy.

[Maus Magill]

I never thought there'd be a version that made the Disney abomination look good... until now.
People have been appalled by this for months. The Three Musketeers is the perfect swashbuckler and has never really been treated well on film (The closest was the Richard Lester version in the 1970s). But they will probably still use the early setpiece swordfights (e.g., D'Artagnan challenging all three Musketeers to a duel). Using the name made it stand out, but it's looks like it's going to be a third-rate cliched adventure (The Three Musketeers only seems cliched because everyone else has copied it).

Until they have a version where:

Milady is married to Athos, as she is in the book
They're not really doing the Three Musketeers.

Agreed - except for the last part. Didn't this happen in the second part of the 1973 version? Remember - Lester made one very long movie that was released in two parts.

[Quercus]

Captain de Treville explains to D'Artagnan that, only after they distinguish themselves as swordsmen, are militiamen allowed to also carry and train in the use of muskets. The three that the main protagonist initially meets, challenges, and is befriended by, are a clique of soldiers who have “distinguished themselves in the killings” but they are by no means the only ones who have done so. But if you haven’t shown a knack for fighting/surviving, and a tolerance of blood/killing, then I suspect you’re more likely to be relegated to less glamorous duties like latrine-digging, drum corps, hauling cannonballs, raking the coals, etc.Weren't the Musketeers all at least semi-noble? (Especially, impoverished nobility (exhibit A: D'Artagnan) and/or younger sons who couldn't just live off of their father's estate)

So even if they had no fighting talent at all they wouldn't be ever digging latrines and the like; that's for their commoner lackeys.

So, being a musketeer is a bit like being a fighter pilot or something: glamorous, high-tech (for the day) and even though they rely on their ground crew to keep everything running, they're not expected to use the enlisted men's crapper. And, if they're running around a city causing trouble investigating plots, you'd expect them to use fists and/or pistols, not their battlefield weapons.

[silenus]

The Lester movies most assuredly were not Made-For-TV. Charlton Heston writes about them in loving detail in his autobiography. They were studio-made, theater-released films. As noted, the actors sued because they made one movie and the director/studio released two. Chuck wasn't too upset about it because he was very well paid for what amounted to a lengthy cameo.

The Lester version had Milady and Athos married (estranged)(attempted murder will do that), her beheaded at the end, and lots of musketwork by all concerned. They are pretty good shots, too. Only Athos could fire a wheellock pistol off-hand without aiming and hit a man 40 yards away in the ass. :D

[Revtim]

It reminds me of that Wild Wild West abortion with Will Smith.

[Little Nemo]

I was thinking it looked like The League of Extraordinary Musketeers.

[Misery Loves Co.]

noooooooooooo! I can't believe Matthew Macfadyen is starring in this bag of shit.

*sigh*

Damn.

[RealityChuck]

Agreed - except for the last part. Didn't this happen in the second part of the 1973 version? Remember - Lester made one very long movie that was released in two parts.Maybe. I haven't seen the film since 1973, so probably forgot that detail.

[Grestarian]

Don't know about the whole monologue, but the bit about the executioner's brother is accurate.

Thank you. The monologue was written by my friends to explain that unfilmed part to the classmates. It did a lot to further illustrate how evil Milady was.

[runcible spoon]

snip.

I KNEW we had common ground! :D

This looks fun; you fuddy-duddys can go grouse somewhere else. This movie is cheese, eye candy, and possibly the first really good venture into steampunk territory.

No, see, it looks like a really BAD venture into steampunk. Which is objectionable to me as a fan of steampunk. Dammit, just because it's steampunk, doesn't mean it can't be GOOD.

[Grestarian]

It was released in the theater in the U.S. also. I saw the Four Musketeers in a theater. The Lester version was rather infamous because the actors sued the production company since they were paid for one movie and it was released as two movies. I'm glad they released it as two movies, since I can't figure out how they could have released it as single movie without leaving some wonderful footage on the cutting room floor.

Hmmm...Interesting.
I hadn't seen it until it got to TV (we couldn't afford to take the whole family to a movie) and years later when I wanted to add it to my collection, the video-tape dealer read a description aloud from his dealer database, "Early 70's made-for-TV version by Richard Lester? Charleton Heston, Raquel Welch, Richard Chamberlain -- looks like a lot of well-known fine actors.... ah! Looks like it's 'in suspension' because they're releasing that Disney version in a few weeks. Sorry; I can't get it for you..."

[JoelUpchurch]

Hmmm...Interesting.
I hadn't seen it until it got to TV (we couldn't afford to take the whole family to a movie) and years later when I wanted to add it to my collection, the video-tape dealer read a description aloud from his dealer database, "Early 70's made-for-TV version by Richard Lester? Charleton Heston, Raquel Welch, Richard Chamberlain -- looks like a lot of well-known fine actors.... ah! Looks like it's 'in suspension' because they're releasing that Disney version in a few weeks. Sorry; I can't get it for you..."

I bought it when they released it as a 2 DVD set.

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Musketeers-Four-Two-Movie-Collection/dp/B003BJODK0/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1317701299&sr=8-2

It is also available on Netflix or I should say Quikster.

[Arden Ranger]

I'm sorry, I'd duty-bound to watch any movie that has airships in it.

And c'mon - this is worth watching for Orlando Bloom's hair alone.

It really looks like a movie that does not, in any way, take itself seriously, and i like that.

I'm with you. I like Orlando Bloom with his evil goatee.

Besides, it's a costume movie. I can never say no to a costume movie. Especially one that involves sword fights.

[Capitaine Zombie]

It's actally hilarious that these adaptations usually portray (as Dumas did) Richelieu as the secret evil mastermind undercutting the King, because the IRL Richelieu was basically a patriot who wanted a safe and secure France under a unified but generous monarchy. He actually pushed hard to get rid of many of the old feudal customs and problems, and had France continued under that path it might have avoided the Revolution or even become a Constitutional Monarchy.

That's not how he is portrayed by Dumas, IIRC. He starts as a conniver, that subtly influences the King, while the Musketeers "work" for the Queen (and de facto, for her British lover as well). It is made clear that he likes power but uses it for "the glory of France". Towards the end of the book, with the La Rochelle siege, it is highly clear that the differences between Richelieu and the Musketeers kind of fade away. In latter books, he is increasingly defined as an asset for France.

Basically, Richelieu is a French Grand Vizir. Maybe evil but actually doing the work the King should be doing if the King wasnt completely inept. I'm not talking about actual history but how he is portrayed.

[Attack from the 3rd dimension]

Hm, historically inaccurate, patently absurd, badly acted and ignores the source material on one one hand, and Milla Jovovich on the other.

I'm in. I feel dirty, but I'm in.

[mbh]

Regarding the Richard Lester movies.

When he finished filming The Three Musketeers, he found that he had four hours worth of footage. He split it into two pieces: The Three Musketeers: The Queen's Diamonds, released in 1973, and The Four Musketeer's: Milady's Revenge, released in 1974. (The actors had only been paid for one movie, so there was some litigation about salaries and royalties.)

In 1989, he re-assembled most of the cast and filmed The Return of the Musketeers, very loosely based on Dumas' novel Twenty Years After. IMDB indicates that it got a theatrical release in Europe, but I think it went straight to TV in the USA. The villain of the novel was Mordaunt, the bastard son of Milady and Rochefort. In the movie, Lester changed the character to "Justine deWinter", and cast Kim Catrall in the role. (IMHO, it's not as good as the first movie(s), but it's still kind of entertaining. Unfortunately, several of the cast members have died, so Lester probably won't get to do The Man in the Iron Mask.)

Regarding the sword-vs-musket issue:

There were musketeers, and there were The King's Musketeers.

Ordinary musketeers served in the regular army. The King's Musketeers were the king's personal bodyguards. In order to join the King's Musketeers, you either had to serve several years in a regular army regiment, or you had to distinguish yourself with some act of heroism in battle, or do some personal service for the royal family.

In the book, D'Artagnan earns his place in the Musketeers at the Siege of La Rochelle, when he and the other three capture a bastion and hold it while eating breakfast, under heavy fire.

In the movies, D'Artagnan is made a Musketeer for retrieving the Queen's diamonds, and is already a Musketeer by the time of the La Rochelle battle in the second movie.

Regardless of whether you were a musketeer or a Musketeer, you only carried your musket into battle. Back in Paris, you only needed your sword.

[Nava]

Okay, okay, quick answer: the three musketeers are the clique the protagonizt wants to join -- kinda like the campus-dominating social group or the #1 Fraternity/sorority or -- well, you get the picture.

No, those three are the first ones he runs into and who, after some initial headbutting, kind of take him under their wing(s) - but by the time he gets to Paris, he already wanted to join the elite corps known as the Royal Musketeers. It wasn't merely some sort of nickname of these three guys, nor did D'Artagnan interest in joining the Musketeers come from meeting them.

Think of it as "rookie wants to be a SEAL. Rookie manages to butt heads with three guys within minutes of arriving to destination. Guys, who turn out to be SEALS, decide they like the little idiot, befriend him and help him screw his head on straightisher enough. Rookie eventualy manages to join the SEALS, yay."

[DrDeth]

The Musketeers were one Royal Guard unit, they were the Kings escorts outside the palace. Inside the palace, the Royal guard were those dudes in argent & or with halberds, as seen in the Lester film.

I think the Lester films were great- great acting, sets, costumes, moments of humor, and even moderately realistic. Even the Cardinal was portrayed as a patriot- unscrupulous, yes, but still a patriot.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musketeers_of_the_Guard

[Chronos]

Whoa, Attack, you have Mila Jovocich on one of your hands? I'm jealous.

[Sparky the Wonder Spirit]

But at least they wouldn't be pissing so loudly and voluminously on the grave of Alexandre Dumas, pere.

Eh. Monsieur Dumas would only be sad that he hadn't thought of the flame-throwers and airships first.

The man wrote serial adventure stories - not sober, historically accurate chronicles. If he was around today he'd be collaborating with Michael Bay.

[Attack from the 3rd dimension]

Whoa, Attack, you have Mila Jovocich on one of your hands? I'm jealous.

Can't talk. Busy.