The Three Musketeers (1973 movie)

Imagine this but cooler

I feel a little sad to watch old movies, because I’m used to the standards of my time. It is disappointing to see through obvious special effects, or how old movies struggle with shots or backgrounds that are effortless today. But what really makes me depressed is when old films, lacking modern-day technology or “professionals,” manage to be far better than the average film of today. Watching old films when people still had a glimmer of originality and an honest sense of quality is hard when you’re used to the endless line of lackluster action-packed mediocrities that act as the life-blood of Hollywood today. It can be really depressing when you are use to films that focus upon sex and violence for entertainment more than actual plot-content. A perfect example of this of course, is “The “The Three Musketeers”,” a bloody amazing film that is better than most modern films of today and this is before computer graphics really came into effect. Ok, it was made in the 1970s, but I don’t care, it is still better than almost any action movie you can name, even the better ones like “Gladiator.” No, I am not talking about the Disney version, don’t you dare even mention it. I’m talking about the great one directed by Richard Lester.
Now that I’ve fulfilled my elitist urges, let me go into the review itself. “The Three Musketeers” is based upon well, the book by the same name. Now when I started watching it, I was a little worried because while I know the general story line and the events of the time where it takes place, I have to confess I’ve never actually read “The Three Musketeers”. But fear not, the film really doesn’t require the book to enjoy, in fact it seems to be deliberately only somewhat based upon the novel, as long as you know the basic premise. Lets get the actor stuff over with. Micheal York plays d’Artagnen, Oliver Reed plays Athos, and Frank Finlay plays Porthos, with Richard Chamberlain playing the coolest musketeer, Aramis. It doesn’t really matter if you know anything at all about the story, it is pretty easy to get without any background. Jean-Pierre Cassel plays the Sun King Louis XIII, Charlton Heston plays Cardinal Richelieu (also only actor to get properly paid interestingly enough), Faye Dunaway as Milady de Winter and Christopher Lee as Count D Ronchefort.
The film opens up with a very cliché practice sword fight scene between the hero, D’Artagnen, and his father. Now, if you’ve watched many sword-fighting action films, then you’rr used to this very cliché sort of beginning, but I assure you, it gets better. Mr. D (his name takes too long to spell out again and again, and yes, I’m aware this note is longer than the name), after being defeated by his father’s “super special awesome attack,” is given the family sword, the family horse and some “healing ointment” and goes off to join the King’s Musketeers, being told by his farther never to forget his family name and to never let any insult pass.
Within five minutes, our hero predictably gets into a scuffle with an evil noble with one eye, who is really Christopher Lee. And then the film reveals its true colors. D. draws his sword dramatically, but his enemy casually breaks that sword with a heavy shovel, kicks him in the stomach and leaves him in the mud as he rides away. Our hero, undaunted, grabs a nearby rope and swings dramatically to try to defeat his rival, only to miss and fall again in the mud. Ok, you’re wondering how that could possibly be considered cool to anybody who isn’t a sick sociopath who always roots for the villains. Here is the thing, through -- when the hero gets into his first fight, who honestly expects him to lose? There isn’t any real suspense in the fight, because having the handsome good guy with the cool sword actually have trouble fighting a trained swordsmen and three guards would require more originality than most directors possess. Honestly, it is actually refreshing to see a movie that, despite being established as a heroic swashbuckling adventure, actually handles its fights somewhat realistically as well as actually making its hero challenged.
Mr. D wipes himself off and heads off to the Musketeer dueling club, passing on the way three funny looking duelists (go on, guess who they are, I dare you) and within five minutes gets all three of them to challenge him to a duel by pissing them off. Porthos (the vain, plump one who is obsessed with his clothing) is showing off a new belt while on a fake movable horse; Athos (he’s the tough guy – you’re thinking of Aramis) is flirting with a lady.
So what makes this film more awesome then practically every action movie in the last decade? Five main pillars of coolness hold this film up as one of the best things ever produced.
1) Acting. Ok, this film has Richard Chamberlain in it, so of course there will be astoundingly good acting, but that’s not the point. Every actor is good. I think we should take a special note of the main character. Now, in most films/comics/games/books/cartoons I hate the main characters, because they are cliché, uninteresting, and generally unintelligent, serving only as the generic hero who everybody is supposed to like despite being totally uninteresting. However, our friend here totally inverts that stereotype, even through he plays it up so much. Like most typical heroes, he is good looking, honest, enthusiastic, stubborn, loyal and determined to a fault. However his extreme enthusiasm is actually a great part of the humor, as he is obviously making fun of himself in this role. Again and again he rushes into a situation following his honorable instincts, only to have himself wounded, humiliated, or confused, and to get up and try again. A great example of this is when, seeing Christopher Lee,, he jumps out the window in an effort to attack him so he could prevent him from playing future villain roles, only to land on a rising painter’s platform and finds himself right back where he started, looking very confused. He then, undaunted, rushes down the stairs only to bump into (and offend) the three best duelists in France. The way the movie presents his almost childlike enthusiasm when it come to finding ways to get himself killed is actually really funny, particularly if you are somebody like me who often can’t stand the annoying stereotypical main characters, and so this seems like a wonderful parody. I will say, through, that if you’re a fan of the actual personalities of Porthos and Aramis, then you’re are going to be disappointed, not by their acting but by the fact that they have been extremely flanderized (look it up) and have lost much of their screen time, essentially joining Gimli as main characters turned comedy relief, except they are actually funny. I will say also, this, it’s a film with Christopher Lee as a main antagonist, of course the acting is great. Which again begs the question, why he doesn’t have an academy award.
2) Fight scenes
a) The fight scenes are actually astoundingly good. I’m not going to say they are totally realistic, I mean, its not totally realistic, of course, but it does a damn better job then most films you’re will see in your life. What I like the most is the fact that the heroes are good but not superhuman. In the first fight scene when they have to fight six of the Cardinal’s men, it is actually a big deal, as six men are hard to defeat, particularly when they are trained duelists. I also like the brutality of the fighting. Unlike most portrayals of rapier fighting, where all the fighters seem determined to aim at their foe’s swords rather than their guts and fight in a very formalized manner (“Scaramouche,” “Zorro,” even “Pirates of the Caribbean” are all examples of this), these guys don’t play fair, because they are fighting for real. Duelists on both sides will regularly punch, tackle or kick each other in hopes of gaining an advantage, with Porthos even grabbing a nearby branch and beating his foes. They aren’t these graceful dancers who you think would be cut to ribbons in a real fight; these guys are glorified street brawlers, which is actually more logical considering the time. As a fencer, I know that in a real competition, grabbing the other man’s arm and smashing him against the wall isn’t going to work, but fencing the sport is not intended for real combat.
b)There are also a lot of badass weapons and styles that show up. The Cardinal’s men use main gauche and rapier in fights, with one assassin having the sheer badass powers to duel wield rapiers against one of the musketeers. But this film gained my respect when it showed actual intelligence in its random villains. The duel wielder I mentioned above is a great example, despite having no name and fighting against a major character he actually holds his own for a while. And when it looks like he might be defeated, he demonstrates a new level of badass by thinking quickly on his feet and doing a very typical hero move, cutting a rope supporting a weight so as to have it fall on Porthos’ head. That is really cool; it makes the fights actually feel dangerous and realistic, and this is something that other films don’t seem to really get. Having one guy slaughter hoards of faceless mooks is really boring. In real life a single guy could very well be dangerous, named or not, and that is what makes realistic fights like this really cool. A second man actually tricks the head musketeer by getting his cloak caught on a water wheel and having him lift into the sky before defeating him. Seriously, I totally expected our random assassin to be killed and it shocked me no end that he actually outwitted his foe, one of our heroes. And because it surprised me, I actually had an emotional reaction, other than the typical “oh look, the hero defeated a random villain, how exciting” feeling of boredom I normally get when I watch a main character slaughter half the population of Holland without breaking a sweat. It’s not about character’s main roles that makes them skilled, its about legitimate fighting talent.
c) Despite the general realism of the fights, don’t think that detracts from the sheer coolness of the fights. They are wonderfully choreographed, but in a manner that has the feel of a real flight, as if everybody is thinking on their feet rather desperately. But there are also some really badass fight scenes. The first and most obvious one is the aforementioned first fight, which takes place in the courtyard of a nunnery with long white sheets hanging on clothes lines. The following fight is a great scene where you have these men trying to kill each other while these sheets are beautifully flowing in the wind. It is almost like a scene from the Chinese film “Hero” but less over the top. The sound and film work is really nice, and while I’m not quite going to say it is something astounding, it is certainly quite good. The next major fight takes place in a laundry, where clothes are being dyed and dried and hung out, and the fight is really funny as the laundry is knocked about and people fall into large pools of dye and change funny colors.
d) One fight scene that could have been great but instead was simply kinda cool was a fight in the dark. When the two rivals, Mr. D and Mr. Lee fight, they are in the dark using lanterns. Because they can’t see each other, both combatants try to trick each other despite not being able to see each other. However, because of the fact that the audience can see everything perfectly, it just looks awkward. Now I can’t blame the movie, it was made in the 70’s, how could it be any better, but it is very clumsy scene nonetheless. Great idea, but impossible execution.
e)I have to say, the weapons are cool. The rapiers come in a lot of different styles and methods of fighting show up in the story, and they really make a great impression. I admit to having a massive weapons fetish, so I was really happy in seeing the accurate looking and really cool. The hero’s new sword is really worth noting is simply awesome. Apart from being cool on its own, a hidden blade comes out of the hilt when he presses a button, that’s bloody awesome. Its also great because he accidently does it at least three times.
f. And finally, best of all, is the fight between the two female characters, and I say that in a totally non-sexual way. The evil female character (played by Rauel Welch) has the queens jeweled necklace and the love interest intercepts her as she tries to escape with them. They then grab various house hold objects and start beating the crap out of each other, with one using a candle and the other using a bladed comb
3) The sense of humor. Now here is where I can make a modern reference. You remember “A Knight’s Tale”, which could have been a perfectly decent movie even if it took itself totally seriously, but it was bumped to a new level of awesome because it was damn funny. Yeah, this is like that, but better, and I say that with the full understand of how hard it is to be more awesome than a film that has Heath Ledger in it, but trust me, I could make the tag line for this “Like Knight’s Tale, but even better.” The humor is very similar, with the tongue and cheek mix of slapstick and parody. The main character’s absurd enthusiasm, the musketeer’s general silliness, the heroine’s clumsiness, her husband’s relationship, the general fight scene humor, oh bugger it. The problem of reviewing a movie positively is that you actually care if you spoil it. Actually, the problem with reviewing a movie that is good because of its humor is that it really isn’t very funny just explaining a joke. So I’ll give a sample joke, then let you go take the effort to find the film on your own and drawn your own conclusions. One of the coolest moments of the film is when the hero launches himself into a balcony, and by mistake lands in the servant’s quarters. Facing off against a dozen confused men, our quick witted champion makes a grab for the carpet hoping to pull it out from under the men’s feet and knock them down. However he rips only a chunk of carpet. Then, looking around perplexed, he flees down the balcony, leaving behind a dozen confused men, one of whom says “He tore our carpet!”
4) Finally, the best part of the movie is some rather unexpected historical accuracy. From a movie that is based on three dudes running around having elaborate sword fights, its actually surprisingly good at historical realism. Apart from the general non-stupid sword fights, there are some really cool details about the time period. The most famous example is how the French King Louis XIV played chess using a giant chess-board with trained dogs acting as pieces (don’t’ even think of making a reference to “History of the World Part 1”). Or having a whole troop of dwarf servants who balance food on their heads. Or the absurd customs. Ok, I’m not quite sure how accurate that is, but it certainly sets the theme very well. And the scenes where they go through the streets, and the general customs/colors remind me a lot of “Shakespeare in Love.” It is also interesting to note that while the French nobility are spending their time sleeping with each other, dancing and eating exotic foods, the English nobility are setting up a fake hunting scenario so they can enjoy themselves. True, it is an English film, so you can expect them to be biased, but that is somewhat true. Back on topic, the film has great costumes, background, colors and what not, but it also has a really realistic feel to its portrayal of France. Waste being thrown from the windows, the nobility having a absurd clothing, hair styles that are larger than the women’s heads, the music, the dancing, its just great.
Alright, this is why I hate giving positive reviews, because with a few exceptions, I will sound like a total suck up/fanboy. Because I’m basically saying “oh its awesome, so awesome”, when anybody who watches it can figure that out for themselves without my help. So I’m trying to make people aware of it, but that is really hard to do that without spoiling the fun of watching the movie. So to be honest, is the movie perfect? No. Is it on my top ten movies of ever? No, because its special effects aren’t good enough. Is it really better than “Shakespeare in Love”? Not really. But it is an excellent film to watch, and it is certainly enjoyable all the way through. And it manages to pull off better and more exciting fight scenes than anything Zhang Yimou has ever done. But don’t mind what I have to say, go out and watch the bloody movie. Now. Get moving. Go. Ok, joke is old.

From
EE