THE THREE MUSKETEERS

Sometimes a story is gently draped in another era and told in a different way. Technology and scale progress to the point where what is in our head can be fully realized by the finished piece. Other times however, advancements are shoehorned into places where they don’t belong, and what you see is as offputting as white earbuds adorning the lobes of The Mona Lisa.

THE THREE MUSKETEERS is the classic tale of three royal guards in France during the reign of Louis XIII. France is in a state of disarray, and while a wimp of a monarch is getting a grip on ruling the land, he is being guided – or misguided – by The Cardinal Richelieu (Christoph Waltz). He deeply wants Louis to make peace with the English ambassador, The Duke of Buckingham (Orlando Bloom). In the middle of these negotiations is Milady De Winter (Milla Jovovich). Milady’s allegiances are never entirely clear – though we do know she is first and foremost looking out for number one.

As Buckingham and DiWinter sceme and plot, into town rides young D’Artagnan (Logan Lerman). It is his dream to become a Musketeer, and he inadvertently stumbles into an audition – one where he will fight all three at once. Athos, Porthos, and Aramis (Matthew MacFadyenRay Stevenson, and Luke Evans respectively) admire the young man’s pluck, and enlist him almost immediately.

From there, it seems as thought these four are the only ones defending France’s true virtue – and they swear to stop Buckingham and their old friend DiWinter before things get really out of hand.

This iteration of THE TREE MUSKETEERS takes actors in period costumes and stuffs them into a new millennium action film in all its bullet time glory. No longer is swashbuckling or feats of daring-do good enough for a modern audience. Now you have to have actors in plumes and pantaloons acting like 007 characters. That’s not to say that any of the action that takes place in THE THREE MUSKETEERS is bad…more that its unnecessary.

If I am going to talk about what’s bad in this film, it’s cardinal sin (pardon the pun) is that it takes an actor as charmingly fiendish as Christoph Waltz, casts him in a usually-showy villains role, but gives him nothing to do. He speaks, he schemes, he charms, but he’s never let off the leash. This iteration of The Musketeers has three alternating villains, and for perhaps the first time, Cardinal Richelieu is the least important of the three. If the filmmakers planned all along to back-burner His Excellency, why cast a player like Waltz in the part?

This is a film that has clearly been made with 3-D in mind, as it spares no occasion to point a sword straight out at the audience. That might seem gimmicky – and believe me, it is – but at the very least, I must commend the director and the studio for not just taking on the 3-D element to bring in extra gate. Every action sequence, especially the heists and daring escapes, have clearly been mapped out for 3-D. The shots extend out past the the windowframe, but also provide for quite a bit of texture and depth. If we’re going to rip a film for bad use of 3-D, then it’s only fair to compliment a film for good use of 3-D.

On a related note, this is also one of the few 3-D films I’ve watched over the last two and a half years that was bright and snappy.

What’s funny about THE THREE MUSKETEERS is the casting. The three main villains are all top drawer casting – four if you include Mads Mikkelsen who is largely lesser known to North American audiences, but still a solid bit of casting. I can only assume that those actors ate up the lion’s share of the casting budget, since The Musketeers themselves really do feel like the bench squad. They parry without stumbling and get off the odd witty comment here and there, but in terms of screen luminance, all four of them seem overmatched. This is a perplexing decision for a film that has spared no expense where all other elements are concerned.

One could argue that MacFadyen, Evans, Stevenson, and Lerman do what they’ve been hired to do…but they are a far cry from Sutherland, Sheen, Platt and O’Donnell – who themselves weren’t especially amazing.

Where poor casting ends, pure lunacy picks up. The wrench in the Musketeers ultimate mission is a giant zeppelin/warship hybrid. Buckingham shocks the entire French royal court by flying his in, and ultimate The French build their own. While such ideas are memorable, and would be splendidly suited for a Terry Gilliam film, their inclusion in this classic tale is insane – not to mention that when the two vessels inevitably face-off, their cannons seem to tear each other to matchsticks, but magically they still zip around the skies unharmed.

I’m no Dumas scholar – but I’m pretty sure he never had any scenes involving flying warships.

I applaud THE THREE MUSKETEERS for it’s scale and vision, but can’t sum it up as anything more than cinematic silliness. It doesn’t do enough to set itself apart, even if it wants to flex its modern action muscles. Such halfassery might have sufficed in the spring or late august, but the fall is the time of year when many of the best offerings of the year are being served up for moviegoers fulfillment.

The Musketeers are valiant, but ultimately, unworthy.

Matineescore: ★ ★ out of ★ ★ ★ ★

What did you think? Please leave comments with your thoughts and reactions on THE THREE MUSKETEERS.