Still more lazy thoughts from this one…

The Three (Four) Musketeers Film Review

Perhaps, we should call this “the summer is almost over” Duo Post. Heck, people are already weighing in on who won the summer of 2016. All I seem to care about at the moment is figuring out a way to complete what I laid out for myself months ago in choosing a pair of films to represent my side of this month’s (single) title. Jamming in two for the price of one in this case. How do I get into messes like this? Don’t answer that.

Well, at least my partner picked a vintage work for us to review in parallel and help carry out the dog days left. An enduring French classic by a celebrated author, and one of the most widely read. Alexandre Dumas works have been translated into nearly 100 languages, establishing him as one of the most popular in France of the nineteenth century and well beyond. We’ll be taking on one of his most appealing, The Three Musketeers.

A rollicking adventure filled with intrigue, wit, and no loss of (Gallic) romance, of course.

Rachel will scan an English transliteration of the originally serialized 1844 publication while I’ll again sport a pair of movies from…ahem…The Seventies (you had to know something like this was coming). Helmed by an American film director based in Britain who up and changed my life almost ten years before the first of his all-star “D’Artagnan, Athos, Aramis and Porthos” set appeared. All for one, and one for all, as they say.

The wordy one’s book review can be found here:

The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas Pere

A brief synopsis of the film(s): A young D’Artagnan arrives in Paris with dreams of becoming a king’s musketeer. Almost immediately, he meets and quarrels with three men. Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, each of whom challenges him to a duel. D’Artagnan finds out they are musketeers and is invited to join them in their efforts to oppose Cardinal Richelieu, who wishes to increase his already considerable power over the king.

D’Artagnan must juggle affairs with the charming Constance Bonancieux and the passionate Lady De Winter. A secret agent for the cardinal, the scoundrel seeking to embarrass the Queen of France, Milady’s determined to wreak revenge on the Three Musketeers for foiling her plots. Pitting the deadly Count of Rochefort with our hero swashbucklers who fight for the good name of the Queen and the life of Constance.

[spoiler warning: some key elements of the films could be revealed in this review]

“Now, that man in his time has insulted me, broken my father’s sword, had me clubbed to the ground, laid violent hands on the woman I love! He is inconvenient.”

I know why I chose to take on a pair of films (the adaptation split into two by the producer1) from 1973-4 instead of any of the cinematic translations done before or after. It’s that the traumatic and troublesome period also pushed boundaries within cinema in the wake of Vietnam, Watergate, and the post-war-oil crises-inspired general upheaval. Might as well step over whatever confines of what’s come before and at least have some fun with it.

Somebody’s had to do it, might as well go with a filmmaker who had a knack for doing just that.

three-musketeers-title

Note, a good portion of this occurs on the periphery of scenes and via aside dialogue by characters in the background.

Who better than the man who made such pop-comedies like A Hard Day’s Night, Help!, and A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum to accentuate the comedy within the Dumas classic for his version of the film. After finally reading it, I now see how well Richard Lester could exploit the tale for physical slapstick and comedic satire à la Monty Python. Few have done it better, which made him perfect for directing this film, in my opinion.

Though approximately encapsulating only half the book for the first film, The Three Musketeers provides a pretty substantial foundation of 1625 France. The squalor of the poor compared side-by-side with the disinterested King Louis and those circulating within the palace. You only need look at those wandering or begging in the streets; heck, look upon the Queen’s dressmaker Constance’s work environment and what she comes home to.

Lester brought the Jean de La Bruyère quote to life cinematically, in other words2.

threemusketeers

Well, you had a wonderful mix of American and British talent, and sublime characters actors to do it justice. Michael York as D’artagnan, and a suitably drunken Oliver Reed stealing scenes as Athos. Raquel Welch‘s surprise knack at physical comedy as the wife of Bonancieux, among her notable other charms. Geraldine Chaplin (Queen), Richard Chamberlain (Aramis), Frank Finlay (Portos), Simon Ward (Duke of Birmingham) and Roy Kinnear (Planchet) also superb.

Opposing this lot, Faye Dunaway as the Countess DeWinter, the late, great Christopher Lee as the lethal Rochefort, and good old Moses himself, Charlton Heston, in one of greatest villainous turns as the magnetic and not to be underestimated Cardinal Richelieu. Each provided the mustache-twirling takes in the film. The best villainous trio ever put into a costumed rollick like this. Dunaway, in fact, proved the other two sat around plotting way too much, and had decidedly more fun doing so.


“And you mark this: you kill Buckingham or have him killed, it’s no matter to me. He’s an Englishman and an enemy. But you touch one hair of D’Artagnan’s head and I swear, as God is my judge, I’ll break you on the wheel with my own hand.”

While The Three Musketeers film ends with D’Artagnan becoming a Musketeer, it’s the second half of the epic fable that may be my favorite of the two. The character establishment can be disengaged somewhat, and the intrigue and manipulations kicked up substantially. Especially the action sequences. With Spain standing in for France and Britain for the most part, the set pieces in The Four Musketeers brought the tale to a rousingly emotional, if bittersweet, conclusion.

four-musketeers-title

Luckily, this was not the typical sequel conjured up by studio execs we’ve come to know too well these days, unfortunately. Merely where the Dumas’ story was supposed to bring this mighty cast3 to, through George Macdonald Fraser’s screenplay. A deft and rather sly distillation, granted your mileage may vary if you’re seen the 1948 film starring Gene Kelly and Lana Turner, or heaven forbid the Disney-Brat Pack ’93 adaptation. Poor you, if you missed this.

The other standout aspect with this featured pair was the startling swordplay on display that hadn’t been seen prior to this. A realistic, effort-filled style more true than typical movie staging back then. One that utilizing whatever end of the sword to beat your opponent with. Needless to say, leather gloves and boots a must. Credit the great William Hobbs4, with a fine assist by Mr. Lee himself5 for bringing off this wilder and more dangerous swordfight choreography onscreen6.

The Christopher Lee, Michael York D’Artagnan vs. Comte de Rochefort final sword duel has to be a highlight in its authenticity in how to vanquish a skilled opponent by whatever means necessary.

miladyroch3f

The Four Musketeers offered a more somber conclusion to this classic tale than audiences expected, given comic elements infused with the first film. Surely, it was more fitting for the tempestuous period of its release, and a nonpareil wake-up call for unsuspecting moviegoers. Its wry humor more telling, as was Heston’s more heavy presence that grounded this with less frivolity. Compared to what we get these days, its audacious social commentary and intelligence was refreshing, and remains so.

This really should have been the epic as intended, guess we could now think of the time between release dates as merely one very long intermission.

Parallel Post Series


  1. Originally intended as a three-hour epic it was determined the film couldn’t make its release date in that form. So producer Alexander Salkind decided to split it into two shorter features. Thus, following an incensed (and stiffed) cast and crew, and a Screen Actor’s Guild lawsuit, the “Salkind Clause” (you can’t do that without actor’s consent) came in effect. 
  2. “Life is a tragedy for those who feel, and a comedy for those who think.” 
  3. Richard Lester at one time thought this could have been another Beatles vehicle, having The Lads portray our four musketeers. 
  4. Hobbs has choreographed some of the finest sword fights in film history, including The Duelists, Flash Gordon, Excalibur, Ladyhawke, The Count of Monte Cristo (2002), and my personal favorite Rob Roy
  5. The 6-foot 5-inch thespian, who enlisted in the Finnish army to help repel the Soviets prior to WWII to become a British commando during that war, was also an accomplished fencer in real life. Lee likely appeared in more on-screen sword duels than any other actor. 
  6.  The stunt people were terrified of Oliver Reed due to his sheer ferocity when it came to fight scenes. Even he was severely injured, almost dying, when accidentally stabbed in the throat during the windmill duel scene. Michael York had his leg cut in one duel and almost lost an eye in another. Frank Finlay was struck in the face by a two-by-four and burned in separate fight scenes. Actors actually doubled for their injured stunt doubles in spots. 
Advertisements

10 Responses to “The Three (Four) Musketeers Film Review”

  1. Cavershamragu

    Great review chum – this is my favourite adaptation – the second half is certainly darker than the jokier first, so I often think a break between viewing them is a good idea, but it is beautifully shot and costumed and the cast is terrific.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. Rick Ouellette

    Thanks for this great look back at one of my favorite film(s) of my high school years. I saw “The 3 Musketeers” four times at my local cinema back then and the follow-up twice. I have read the Dick Lester bio (The Man Who “Framed” the Beatles) and enjoyed the backstage stories of this movie almost as much as the sections on Hard Day’s Night and Help!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      Oh, I need to read that bio! Covering The Lads and this, along with his work overall, should make for some wonderful reading. Thanks for mentioning that and joining in on my appreciation of this adaptation, Rick. 🙂

      Like

      Reply
  3. Rachel

    What a fantastic review and I loved all the behind the scenes stuff. Can you imagine that many injuries on a set in these modern filming times? I sure can’t. There is something that is captured when a thing is really done (or really there) that just can’t be found otherwise in filming. Not that I’m trying to advocate for no CGI, etc (there’s a time and a place for everything) but no one technique should be leaned on too heavily. Sadly, these days, it seems a variety of ways to address a scene’s needs is not always used. Ah well, THAT’S WHAT THE 70s ARE FOR. 😉 Couldn’t resist.

    I’ve caught a lot of Dumas adaptations but this one was completely off my radar. So glad you picked it to pair with the book. Thanks Michael!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    • le0pard13

      Glad to hear this brought the Lester adaptation to your first-time viewing, Rachel. Good points about CGI and the old techniques. It was good to get back to these two films as I hadn’t seen either of them in ages. Even my wife kinda got caught up into it during my screenings. Always a good thing in my book. Only one more ’70s tale left in the year, but we’ll have to get through a classic author and director pairing before that. 😉

      Thanks, Rachel.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

Are you talkin’ to me?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Basic HTML is allowed. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

%d bloggers like this: