Go Back   Movie Fan Central Discussion Forums > Movie Talk! > Movie Reviews
MOVIE FAN CENTRAL FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-10-2002, 05:07 PM
The Three Musketeers (1993) -----> Rating: 5/10

THE THREE MUSKETEERS
RATING: 5/10

Director: Stephen Herek
Starring: Tim Curry, Chris O’Donnell, Charlie Sheen
Genre: Action
Year of Release: 1993
Reviewer: urbanlegend23

I rented this movie for study. I am soon acting in a play following the story of The Three Musketeers and I wanted to see how to portray my character and interact with others. I wanted to actually rent the 1973 version of THE THREE MUSKETEERS, but only this one was available. I looked at the cast (Kiefer Sutherland, Charlie Sheen, Tim Curry, Rebecca DeMornay) and it looked like it was going to be a good movie. However, THE THREE MUSKETEERS is definitely not something I’d use for study. It was an entertaining enough picture, but it just didn’t work for me on several levels.

The character I am playing is the main baddie. Cardinal Richelieu. In this film Tim Curry portrays him, and I learnt something out of his performance. In his role as Richelieu you never think Curry is acting as his character, you think it is Richelieu on screen. Curry had great presence and I hope I am as good as he was . The thing I like about Richelieu as a character is that he isn’t over-cartoonish and he doesn’t burst into fits of rage and killing people so often, he more slyly betrays his victims. It makes Richelieu all the more despicable. But what exactly happened to the character in the end?

There were a few other good things about the movie, too. The horse work was stunning; especially in the battle scenes. The battle and action scenes themselves are quite good; not as good as they could have been though. The final battle scene was the best, and throughout the movie the swordplay was terrific. The costumes were also terrific, from the Musketeers’ heroic capes, to the Cardinal’s evil reds; they got it all right. You could notice how much effort had gone into the costumes from every last extra. Great stuff! The sets also were very realistic and they got those right as well.

Alas, this movie can not be saved just on Tim Curry’s performance and the visual sides of things. THE THREE MUSKETEERS has many flaws, more than it has good points. The thing that annoyed me the most about the movie is Chris O’Donnell; he just can’t act his way out of a paper bag. Even some 9 years after this movie was made, O’Donnell is still a disaster of an actor. In this movie he is so annoying and I didn’t like his character at all. His character may have been more likeable had he got more professional acting lessons and if the script wasn’t plagued with such cheesy lines.

I also felt this remake was not adequate with the development of the characters. As I know it, Aramis was meant to be the philosopher, Athos, the philanderer (the love one) and Porthos the one who was brave and into senseless gratuitous violence. In this movie the Musketeers are just three men really, they aren’t developed enough for my liking. They aren’t in the film enough either, it’s mostly taken over by that goddamn D’Artagnan (O’Donnell) who annoyed the crap out of me. The Musketeers are good and heroic and all, but they are losing that unique touch that them the Three Musketeers in the first place.

Another thing that annoyed me is that god awful King! He looked like a girl and just was not the King I was hoping for. Hugh O’Conor’s performance as his is utterly laughable and he wears a wig that so much resembles a girl that at times I truly couldn’t tell the difference between who was the King and who was the Queen.

The movie also abandons the original story, completely simplifying it. The original story with The Three Musketeers tale was about the Queen’s ten precious diamond studs, but in here its just about that idiot D’Artagnan wanting to become a musketeer and the Cardinal wanting to betray the King. It’s an alright plot (it has too much of O’Donnell though) but I would’ve liked to see more depth to it.

Overall, this movie is a popcorn flick that was made to be a fun Disney picture for kids, not the serious and involving tale it should’ve been. If you’re into that, I recommend this flick. If, like me, you were looking for something much better that gives the original story justice, go rent the 1973 version.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:33 PM.