Westside Steve Posted November 20, 2011 Report Share Posted November 20, 2011 The Three Musketeers Summit Entertainment PG 13 110 min OK gang it’s time for a little guilty pleasure. As you know I won’t look at any other reviews until I’ve finished but after I’d settled on a grade for this one I looked at the Critic to Viewer ratio. Though I certainly didn’t expect a love fest, I was surprised to see how badly the critics hated this one. Oh, to be sure, I understand why, but gee whiz… Actually, even though it’s been used more times than Rick James’ crack pipe, the story is one of the easiest of all time to hammer into an entertaining f movie. And surprisingly enough, director Paul W S Anderson (not Ghoulardi’s kid) known for his film adaptations of videogames and uber-bore PSANDORUM has actually managed to cobble together a couple decent hours of entertainment. You know the drill. With the young and feckless king Louis XIII on the throne of France the evil Cardinal Richelieu Christoph Waltz) is pulling the strings of power. Three royal guardsmen Athos Porthos and Aramis (not to be confused with Donatello Raphael and Michelangelo) are unceremoniously booted from their position. Here, as in many versions, the three are accompanied by D’Artagnan, the boy wonder, and will respond to some injustice or treachery and once again save France. But, as I said, the critics hate it. Well the acting really isn’t very good, never rising above what’s found on the CW network. The three main musketeers have British accents (they usually do) and D’Artagnan (Logan Lerman) sounds like he’s from Van Nuys. Even the usually excellent Waltz seems to be hamstrung by the writers. Also the plot against the king involving Lord Buckingham and a fleet of 18th century flying battleships is pretty ridiculous. C’ est la vie. Even with mediocre acting and embarrassingly silly storyline, I noticed that 45 minutes in I wasn’t bored or annoyed. Quite the opposite. This thing is actually a great deal of fun, especially if you’re up for a whole lot of swashbuckling. Oh sure it’s rife with clichés short on originality and lacking any great performances but all those elements that make for a fun yarn are there. It’s a hook that never really changes over the years and never really gets old. I started out with C-, went to C to C+ and settled on B-. WSS Email westsidesteve@aol.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted November 26, 2011 Report Share Posted November 26, 2011 The Three Musketeers Summit Entertainment PG 13 110 min OK gang it’s time for a little guilty pleasure. As you know I won’t look at any other reviews until I’ve finished but after I’d settled on a grade for this one I looked at the Critic to Viewer ratio. Though I certainly didn’t expect a love fest, I was surprised to see how badly the critics hated this one. Oh, to be sure, I understand why, but gee whiz… Actually, even though it’s been used more times than Rick James’ crack pipe, the story is one of the easiest of all time to hammer into an entertaining f movie. And surprisingly enough, director Paul W S Anderson (not Ghoulardi’s kid) known for his film adaptations of videogames and uber-bore PSANDORUM has actually managed to cobble together a couple decent hours of entertainment. You know the drill. With the young and feckless king Louis XIII on the throne of France the evil Cardinal Richelieu Christoph Waltz) is pulling the strings of power. Three royal guardsmen Athos Porthos and Aramis (not to be confused with Donatello Raphael and Michelangelo) are unceremoniously booted from their position. Here, as in many versions, the three are accompanied by D’Artagnan, the boy wonder, and will respond to some injustice or treachery and once again save France. But, as I said, the critics hate it. Well the acting really isn’t very good, never rising above what’s found on the CW network. The three main musketeers have British accents (they usually do) and D’Artagnan (Logan Lerman) sounds like he’s from Van Nuys. Even the usually excellent Waltz seems to be hamstrung by the writers. Also the plot against the king involving Lord Buckingham and a fleet of 18th century flying battleships is pretty ridiculous. C’ est la vie. Even with mediocre acting and embarrassingly silly storyline, I noticed that 45 minutes in I wasn’t bored or annoyed. Quite the opposite. This thing is actually a great deal of fun, especially if you’re up for a whole lot of swashbuckling. Oh sure it’s rife with clichés short on originality and lacking any great performances but all those elements that make for a fun yarn are there. It’s a hook that never really changes over the years and never really gets old. I started out with C-, went to C to C+ and settled on B-. WSS Email westsidesteve@aol.com yeah but you didn't even mention them including a runway model as one of their mooketears? what's up with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.