Rating: 
Summary: This is not a movie for people who enjoy watching movies!
Review: This movie is outrageous and ridiculous and stupid and corny and just not one to watch and enjoy and absorb often. Please do yourself a favor and stay away from this mish mash of scenes. It don't make much sense. Very little character development and even less fun...
Rating:
Summary: I can't believe I saw this worthless piece of crap.
Review: I just want to say that I feel sorry for the wasted Blockbuster coupon - "rent one movie get another free".So I rented "Heist",which is another story, and this "masterpiece".People from Newark of De United States might enjoy this [junk] but not me.My advice to all who concider to buy or rent this movie, don't do it.
Rating:
Summary: Canadate for MST2000
Review: Now this movie was flat out bad. I mean really bad. I mean so bad non sober person would say this movie was bad. The best acted role was that of a 4 year old. That's really sad. In its favor, and this is amazing, it had wonderful costumes, and sets, and scenery designs, can't really speak highly enough about that. The movie had a couple of good action scenes, but you know only Jackie Chan can carry a bad plot and deliver good action and get by with it.
Rating: 
Summary: At least they had accents!
Review: Well most of the Musketeers in this film did anyway, except for the leading male hero of the film, D'Artagnan! I had no idea this film would be so dull considering that Peter Hyams (2010, Outland) directed it and Tim Roth (Rob Roy, Reservoir Dogs), who is totally wasted here, starring as the bad guy, Febre. The film is just not exciting and I found myself not really caring about the hero's revenge or much of anything else after a certain point. First of all, I have no idea who Justin Chambers (leading man/hero, D'Artagnan) is but I do know he turns out a dull and uninteresting performance in this film. It doesent help that he resembles Chris O' Donnell who played the same character in "The Three Musketeers" with Charlie Sheen and Keifer Sutherland. That movie may have been silly but at least it was entertaining. I would like to see the DVD feature of "Casting Justin Chambers" to find out what they were thinking. Even the one thing that I thought would save "The Musketeer", the fight sequences, were not as exciting as I thought they would be, but they did keep me awake. I had heard the fight choreography compared to "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" somewhere - my answer to that is: go rent "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon". The finale sword fight on ladders between Roth and Chambers (their stunt doubles) is of course the highlight of the film but it's over before you know it and I'm still not quite sure how the bad guy died, I'm assuming by sword. I expected Roth to carry the film but that was asking too much. He is still the most exciting character in the film but that isnt saying much, considering the competition. Actually, I was thinking he might use one of those ladders in the final fight to climb out of the movie! Mena Suvari (American Beauty) plays the love interest for Chambers. There is no reason why they should be together except he's the best looking guy around and she's the only girl in town and they dont waste anytime putting her in a bath tub again either. My favorite part is when she is shot in the chest almost point blank range when "taking one" for the Queen and in the next scene, she's fine. The weird part is I didn't feel much sympathy for her when she was shot. Actually, I felt more sympathy for D'Artagnan's horse when it fell over from exhaustion. It doesent help that the whole 3 Musketeer "All for one..." thing is done in a tired predictable fashion in movies. Its definitely getting old seeing french Musketeers with american accents! Now the Musketeers are flying and sticking to the ceiling and it still didnt help that much! *Trivia: The guy that wrote the screenplay for "The Musketeer" also wrote "Police Academy 4: Citizens on Patrol" - Think about it.
Rating: 
Summary: Needs work...but fair
Review: A good action film where Chambers makes a noticeable first hand appearance. And the role Roth plays does add some price to the movie. But, there are some things that are needed to improve this DVD.
Rating: 
Summary: Musketeer-very good
Review: The background colors of this film looked like an old European painting; burnt umbers, browns, golds, old crumbly castles. I like horses and they were a large part of the film. Nothing vulgar in this film, lots of good action fight scenes. I'd recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: A Letter . . .
Review: Dear Makers of the Musketeer: So you tout yourself for having superb action sequences - okay, I'm interested. So you say I should see your movie because it's the same choreographer doing YOUR fights as The Matrix - now I'm intrigued. Then you hire Tim Roth, who is a God among actors. And now I'm hooked. OH YES PLEASE MAY I SEE YOUR MOVIE ? Then you do 4 VERY bad things. 1) YOU SPEND NO MONEY ON CINEMATOGRAPHY. Whoever lit this movie should be shaken . . . repeatedly. Somebody thought it would be artistic to film this movie in "Natural Lighting". Too bad that some of the scenes are so damn dark you can't see anything at all. You guys were WAY too interested in making pretty shots and not at all interested in whether or not I can actually SEE them.
2) YOUR EDITOR IS PROBABLY THREE. No, that's insulting to toddlers everywhere. Whomever it was that put this film together has issues - he/she must be spastic. It's great that you put in all these wonderful fight scenes - it's great that you used your entire budget to choreograph everything, but at least film the stupid movie so that I can watch the scenes without the camera moving angles 57 times. It was jarring. You see the fight from one angle - something cool happens - then the camera abruptly cuts to a face shot. Action is flying everywhere BUT THEY'RE FILMING THE LOOK ON THE ACTOR'S FACE. WHY????? WHY????? Trust me, the acting wasn't good enough to warrant filming their faces!
3) YOU HAVE NO SCRIPT. Storyline-wise, you have a bunch of drunken, disorderly Musketeers who are very sad because the king has disbanded them. Suddenly, just because the hero says so, they all follow him like rats and the Pied Piper! Wheeeeee! Wish life was that easy. And the dialogue . . . don't get me started.
4) YOU WASTE TIM ROTH. In reality, you had a pretty good cast. But when you give them no script, don't inspire them, and under-pay them, they give wooden performances. And you wonder why? The only interesting actor among them was Tim Roth, and his lines were so cruddy that it was difficult to appreciate him. That's just heinous - sinful. Bad. This movie was such an abomination, and to think I actually looked forward to it. Please, Please don't make another movie like this EVER again. I don't think I could live through the hype and the hideous product. Really. It brought tears to my eyes. Yuck.
Rating:
Summary: not history, but not bad
Review: If you're looking for a documentary for a French History class,
this isn't it. It wasn't intended to be an historical epic, true
to every fact. It IS a fun movie to watch, reminiscent of Errol
Flynn, Tyrone Power, or Jet Li. It has the feel of the swash-
bucklers of past years, of more innocent times when good guys
beat bad guys, the hero got the girl, and everything was set
right by the last frame.
D'artagnan has panache, looks good, and isn't cynical. The villain is truly despicable. The heroine is beautiful and courageous. The action scenes are marvelously conceived and executed. So, put away the history book, get some popcorn, and
ENJOY!
Rating:
Summary: they should file this movie under "comedy"
Review: this is the story of the musketeers as you've never seen it before- with everything from bad acting to pathetic special effects to poor lighting. this, being probably the worst adaptation of the story i have ever seen, can be seen more as a comedy than an actual action-packed film. the girl in the film (does it really matter what her name was) survived a major blow to the chest with a gun and lived to be fine and healthy as ever(must be the bullet-proof corsets). and, of course, there are the fight scenes. somewhere between the poor choreography and the fact that the musketeer "gravitated" to his enemies like something out of the matrix, i began to realize that this movie wasn't going to be oscar material. if you one of those people who think they absolutely must see this movie, i should warn you, you'll never look at the story of the musketeers the same way again. this low-budget attempt to give a new twist to the old tale does not do that original story justice.
Rating:
Summary: Why are there soooo many ladders here???
Review: While my wife and I are fans of this genre of film, we were at first appalled, and then disgusted by this poorly executed version. Some people have praised the fight sequences, but I found them lacking for the most part, and laughable in others--esp. the men on ropes on the castle's turret, and in the room full of ladders. Why were there so many ladders there anyway? Most disturbing were the inconsistencies in the plot. Why doesn't the hero make it back to the queen BEFORE the bad guys whom he beats up at the river scene? Why does he ride to Paris rather than to the ferry, where he could have saved Lord Buckingham and foiled the cardinal's plot? Why was this movie even made?? Save your money...we were disappointed even though we only rented it.
|
