Three Musketeers reboot -- dreadful?

There’s a trailer 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

As long as they remain faithful to the candy bar…

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)

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.

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.

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.

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

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

I tried that excuse before, to no avail.

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.

Ah, see, I hated all those :slight_smile:

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.

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.

:slight_smile: Yum, my favorite.

Am I the only one looking forward to losing myself in fantasy for a couple of hours? :smiley: 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. :slight_smile:

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. :slight_smile:

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.