The author has also constructed his about around three historical events in time. There are also many famous and powerful of the time in the novel.
The author has incorporated these historical figures with the heroes in the novel. You can also tell that the novel takes place in seventeenth century France because of the way they speak in the novel.
Everyone in the novel speaks old English. The novel also has some gothic and romantic parts in it. The author has been able to add phrases and titles to help create the French atmosphere of the novel. In adapting for film, both versions have strayed from the book, but there is still a lot of focus on the story in the version.
With this remake, director and co-producer Paul. Anderson has unwisely sacrificed an engaging and all time favorite work of fiction for a very expensive piece of cannon fodder. There is a legend behind the story of the three musketeers and it stands for valor and honor, the protection of king and country and the defense of justice by fighting corruption.
Sadly, none of this is even remotely brought to light in Anderson's version. Having previously worked with Milla Jovovich on the zombie infested "Resident Evil" franchise, Anderson sticks to his guns with flamboyant action and goes to the extent of throwing in blades, explosives, zeppelins and yes, fancy fencing.
To an extent, creativity in adapting for the screen is always appreciated. However, by overdoing it Anderson has paid a very heavy price as he has not only overlooked core elements of the story, he has also not given due detail to any of the characters.
Who were the three musketeers? What made them famous? Why have they pledged alliance to a young and weak King? Regrettably, Andrew Davies and Alex Litvak's screenplay does not justify a franchise re-boot by avoiding early origins of the musketeers and the trio's prominence in the French Monarchy. For a period piece set in the 17th century, costumes, props and sets seem to be convincing. But what do I know; I haven't been alive for the last years. Although Anderson scores in this area, he fails again with the totally uninspired acting.
Lerman plays a hot-headed D'Artagnan, but not with the same passion as portrayed by actors before him. As the titled musketeers, I just could not feel that patriotic vibe from Macfadyen, Evans and Stevenson.
As Buckingham, Bloom oozes with cool and makes a grand entrance but his screen time is limited, so don't expect too much swashbuckling as his roles in "Pirates of the Caribbean". Jovovich is the same as ever, only here she does not have zombies to kill. My biggest disappointment is the underused Christoph Waltz. We have seen before how fearsome a villain he can be as the conniving and scheming Col. Landa in Tarantino's "Inglorious Basterds". Yet somehow Waltz fails to maintain that same intensity.
It becomes all the more disappointing because the Cardinal is supposedly a central yet treacherous character, but in this film he doesn't appear to be so. Perhaps it all boils down to the script again although I was expecting more from Waltz in comparison to the rest of the actors, as he could have actually been the film's saving grace.
At the end of it all, this latest adaptation will not be worth remembering and will go down as a half-baked attempt at remaking a movie that has been made too many times. In my book, the version still rules! LloydBayer Oct 4, But Dumas claimed in his original introduction to The Three Musketeers that he thought the work was historical, not wanting to seem plagiaristic himself.
Ironically, the Memoires are, in fact, historically based. He took the name of Sieur of Artagnan from a property his mother's family owned. He left Gascony not in , as in the novel, but in Athos, Porthos, and Aramis are also based on real Musketeers. Aramis was Henry d'Aramitz, related to Monsieur de Treville, and Musketeer from on--we know little of him beyond that.
He was a King's Musketeer who died in Paris in , but little is known beyond that--there is some indication on his death certificate that he died as a result of a duel. Goofs Aramis is shown quoting Genesis the first chapter in the Bible while presumably reading from a Bible, which is open in the middle. Given Aramis' reputation and the subsequent action, it is possible that he was quoting from memory and merely had a book open in front of him to give the impression of piety.
Quotes [the three musketeers and D'Artagnan are escaping from the Cardinal's men in his own coach] Porthos : Champagne? Alternate versions Two scenes were cut from the German cinema version to secure a "Not under 12" rating The murder of the prisoner is cut completely ca.
Records, Inc. User reviews Review. Top review. Still really enjoyable. Just saw this film for the first time in 10 years and I still really enjoyed it. The characters are funny, the actors are perfect for the roles they were given and the story, as often as it has been told, was well executed. The three musketeers is a story I have grown up with.
I've seen and read pretty much every version out there, but this is still one of the most enjoyable versions. It is a film that you can enjoy at any time of the day. It is not a popcorn kind of film and you don't have to pay endless amounts of attention either. It is not a brain teaser. Just kick back and enjoy. You will not regret watching it if you are looking for a light hearted comedy with a pinch of drama.
Details Edit. Release date November 12, United States. Austria United Kingdom United States.
0コメント