Rating: 
Summary: So it's not like the book. Who Cares?
Review: This was an action/comedy/romance/history/heaps of other things, complete with an explosion. It did differ greatly from the book, but the movie in itself was fantastic. It had cute actors running around gorgeous countryside and fencing beautifully choreographed duels. The story was like a compact soap opera, and you came away from the movie feeling like you'd just been through it all yourself. If you can't stand good books being corrupted, this is definitely not the film for you, but if you can put that aside, it is a truly enjoyable movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Horrible....
Review: I suppose that I can't expect a movie with the word "Disney" on it to even pretend to try to follow an original story. But for God's sake! This movie is awful! Why would you pass up such a solid plot such as the book had in favor of the boring thread pushed in this wretched adaption. While Curry gives an above-average performance, the rest of the cast is weak. Sheen looks like a chump (as always), and Chris O'Donnell obviously has no idea of How d'Artangan is supposed to act. This movie is not even worth renting...much less buying. Pass it up!
Rating: 
Summary: Golly!!
Review: I am a bookworm, and a huge fan of Mr Tim Curry (you should see my locker), two things that legally bound me into the obligation of seeing this movie. I was left disappointed and dismayed. Disney completely butchered the plot line, and the casting was less than perfect.The only thing that I liked about this movie was the phenominal acting of Mr. Curry, of course. His talent to take the rottenest script and make it bearable is something that all great actors should posess. Unfortunately, even his cool character and all his beliveability came to an end at his demise: He was punched, then he fell off a boat, and "drowned" in obviously shallow water. That was the doing of the writers. Not even Tim Curry could salvage this ending. Dumas is rolling in his grave at pure mention of this new, Disney brand of nauseating film. I wholly reccomend that, instead of enduring the worst of "Disney Magic," you read the book and watch the more accurate movies, which you will find on a search for "The Three Musketeers." Still, in the midst of all its stupidness, this is a must see for all Tim fans alike.
Rating:
Summary: A travesty
Review: This movie stinks, with bells on. It misses at every level: as a swashbuckler, as historical ficton, and most especially as a retelling of the Dumas story. On critic aptly described it as "Young Swords", i.e. a bunch of cool young actors dressed in plumed costumes running around aimlessly and waiving their swords with amateurish enthusiasm. If you want to see how it should be done, see The Three Musketeers and The Four Musketeers from the 1970s.
Rating:
Summary: Campy, but fun
Review: Well, OK. They scrapped the plot, butchered French history, and completely, utterly miscast D'Artagnan. The whole king and queen being all sweetly in love was pretty nauseating, and the Cardinal's plots positively laughable. I suppose it's a bit much to ask Disney to clarify to kids that a man can be a manipulative, unscrupulous politician and not be *evil.* But it was kind of amusing, and most of the casting was decent...perhaps in a serious movie, the actors could have done better. Tim Curry was lovely...no Charleton Heston, but in a better movie he might have rivaled him. Charlie Sheen OK, but his acting was, IMO, forgivable because he looked nice. Kiefer Sutherland great. Michael Wincott...well...;) I plead the Fifth. Rebecca de Mornay fine, but not great. Chris O'Donnell positively nauseating, though IMO not as annoying as Michael York. Give me Gabriel Byrne any day.
Rating: 
Summary: Not so bad.
Review: Okay, so the movie plot didn't follow the book. At all. Disney's never been good at sticking to the facts, just looks at Pocahontas! Nonetheless, this is a good movie as long as you're not looking for accuracy, just a fun adventure movie. All the actors are great, and I'd recommend this movie to anyone. "All for one, and one for all!" ;)
Rating: 
Summary: Why bother when the Richard Lester versions are available?
Review: Sad to say, this version is everything you'd expect once it's been Disney-fied. It's very pretty and they hired entertaining actors, but an adult story of love and revenge has turned into pattycakes in pseudo-France. I cannot recommend paying money for this when the Richard Lester-directed version of this story is available. Check it out! (It's the one with Michael York, Christopher Lee, Richard Chamberlain, Oliver Reed, Raquel Welch....)
Rating:
Summary: best of the best
Review: alright,the movie doesn't follow the book,but that's not a great problem if you wan't to see a great movie(sorry,my English is not so good,because i am an dutch-man) I have seen the movie a fiew weeks ago,and recorded it on a tape. Now i have seen it already 3 times!! Why??because it is an movie whit great action and a nice story. The fights are nice and the stunts are nice,so the movie is nice. Don't argue about a book-story,but buy this movie and see for yourself.....
Rating:
Summary: The Three Musketeers
Review: First of all, the actors are have perfectly played these roles. The King and Queen are a bit young looking, but I suppose that it's the times. The plot flows well, with a past for one particular musketeer, and a future for our wanna-be musketeer hero (who, typically, is the hero), and of course, romance. The villain, though, was perhaps my favorite part of all of it, because he was played so evilly and so well. A slight drawback would be, I think, that things move just a bit too quickly, and some scenes and characters don't have enough time to develop. But it is an enjoyable movie, overall.
Rating:
Summary: Are they Kidding?
Review: Yep,the actors are kids potraying manly roles. The stars are too young for the role. Even the King is portaryed as a dumbell teen. The movie has a lot of action but does not possess the excitement of the Gene kelly and Chamberlain versions. Chris O'Donnel's heavy American accent immediatley detracts from the realism needed to enjoy this film. D'Artagnan is supposed to be French,you know. A diction coach should have at least tried to make his accent neutral. The costumes are fantastic as well as the scenery, but these aren't sufficient to make the film memorable. The swordfight choreography stinks, but of course, nothing can top Gene Kelly's classic swordplay. The only redeeming factor is Tim Curry's performance as Richelieu. He definitley did Vincent Price one better. I saw the film on screen and on video, and during both occasion, I dozed off during the supposedly climactic fight sequences. I don't recommend that you keep a copy of this version. It is best seen once. However, see first Gene Kelly's and Van Heflin's version of the Musketeers to compare the MGM classic with this Disney ho-hum version.
|
