Start to Download Movies in Seconds!
Downloading movies has never been so simple! Now with Movies you can easily find and download any movie you want. Our website guarantees fast download speed, no codec problems and of course - best quality. You can search our database and download the most popular hits or some rare classic movies that you always wanted to see. Movies guarantees your satisfaction as soon as you open the downloaded movie!
Buy The Three Musketeers (LQ) Movie. Watch online or Download
6
Genres are ActionAdventureRoma Produced in 2011, Germany, USA, UK, France
Available Quality: DivX, iPod
Rating: 6 out of 10 (14422 votes)
 |
480x208 | 361 MiB |
|
 |
720x304 | 1453 MiB |
|
| Actors | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Til Schweiger | Logan Lerman | Orlando Bloom | Milla Jovovich |
| Matthew MacFadyen | Christian Oliver | Mads Mikkelsen | |
| Directors | |||
| Paul W.S. Anderson | |||
Storyline
Plot Summary:
The hot-headed young DArtagnan along with three former legendary but now down on their luck Musketeers must unite and defeat a beautiful double agent and her villainous employer from seizing the French throne and engulfing Europe in war.
More Movies
Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
Action, Thriller, Drama
Action, Comedy, Romance
Action, Thriller, Sci-Fi
Action, Comedy
Grann-Bach
24 May 2012
About what youd expect, possibly slightly better
Following a few minutes of Assassin's Creed footage, this presents aplan intended to start a war between England and France, and only thetitular heroes can stop it. Let's start with what you're probably mostinterested in learning; yes, this is very much a Paul W.S. Andersonfilm(albeit it may be his best... though he still makes mistakes, suchas setting things up that he does not follow through on, pay-off tothings he only introduced seconds before it, etc.), for better or forworse, and yes, it is a fun ride if you are prepared for what it is,and you can live with it playing fast and loose with historicalaccuracy, and how close it is to the source material(it does includeone or two notable things that I'm told are in the novel, and thatwe're familiar with). The action is stronger than any of his others, ifhe still does overuse slow-mo slightly(he goes downright 300 in onesequence, and it isn't anywhere near as good), and the scenes tend toeither end too soon or go on for overly long. There are a few standoutsituations that I won't soon forget. This uses 3D extremely well,second only to Avatar, usually adding to the atmosphere and only a fewtimes jabbing the audience in the face with something(one or two ofthose occurrences could be more effective). In general, the FX areamazing. The sets, costumes and props are gorgeous, as opulent as theyought to be. Dialog is usually bad or mediocre, with one or two cleverlines. The comic relief is not funny, although this can make youchuckle(not exclusively intentionally). Vital to almost any version ofThe Three Musketeers is D'Artagnan, and this one is reasonable. He'snot obnoxious, and he can be charming. Oh, he's flat as a board... allthe characters are(another mainstay of this director). Athos, Porthosand Aramis are among the numerous well-cast actors. Milla is deliciousas the deceiving double-agent Lady Winter, Waltz is spot-on asRichelieu, Mikkelsen is a despicable villain, and Fox as the king doeswell. In fact, the latter has to both be a laughing stock(a pathetic,childish ruler devoid of perspective) and sympathetic(he's an awkwardyoung man in love). He pulls them off, but this really could have donebetter if it didn't try for so much at a time. The plot is excessivelyconvoluted, full of holes, and in the end does not hold up to any kindof scrutiny. I recommend this to fans of Jovovich and her husband. 7/10
goebel-c
24 May 2012
Nuking the fridge is harmless in comparison to what this film does
First of all I ought to note that I did not expect much of this film -and yet was left completely underwhelmed. There are some major issues regarding this film which I would like toaddress, they are the reason for my extraordinarily low ranking, whichwould have been even lower if I had not thought it disrespectful tothose actors who did their job very well (against all odds).One may argue that screen adaptations require some changes to be madeto the original material, and I wholeheartedly agree, but the changesmade to this particular adaption are so fundamental they might as wellnot have bothered to call it ÂThe Three Musketeers". There is as goodas nothing left of the original plot in this movie, and what is left ofit is changed beyond recognition. I did expect it to be more actionladen than ultimately necessary, I expected it to deviate from theoriginal plot, but nothing could possibly have prepared me for thisshipwreck of a film. One might think that while a film shouldn't be required to follow thebook's plot word by word to qualify for bearing the title of a famousnovel - one should be able to tell it is supposed to be based on saidnovel, right? Apparently not. Apart from the title and the the names ofthe characters, there is but little that would betray it to be evenroughly based on Dumas' novel. Buckingham is turned from lover to evilLord, and Queen Anne into a blameless little lamb who fell prey to theCardinal's machinations. No such thing as the fleur-de-lis is evenmentioned. Constance doesn't only not die, she isn't even threatened byMilady. And that's just a selection. One might be led to think it was deliberately conceived as a parody ofremakes. After all, it has all the ingredients  a butchered plot,characters with any debt taken out of them (despite the fact that ifgiven the chance, most actors would have delivered an outstandingperformance, but the time usually assigned to character development isdevoured by Âsexy" scenes featuring Milla Jovovich  who herself is awhole other problem), references to everything from the Matrix toMission Impossible, goodness  it even has airships. Airships. Not one, not two, but an entire armada of airships. Iunderstand that Rocheford's eye patch is tempting, but they might aswell have put a parrot on his shoulder, it would not have managed tomake it appear any more ridiculous. I was surprised they did notventure to release an air Kraken. If this film had had less Milla Jovovich, no airships and if anyone hadbothered to actually read "The Three Musketeers" beforehand, it mighthave been decent - and had they fixed some minor problems (like theannoyingly clean costumes and settings), it may even have been great.It certainly had the potential. It's a pity it nuked the fridge... orshould I say - flew the airship?
woodiah
23 May 2012
Not a Good Movie
Went to see this movie, only because I have seen the numerous previousones. I wasn't expecting much and got exactly what I expected... Themakers have totally disregarded the fact this story is set at a "timeand history" and have gone high tech including ridiculous CG affects.We have flying machines machines, multi-firing cannons, and all withexplosions that are totally unbelievable for the "period in history"the story is set in... Other than that, the acting is elementary.Have an hankering for The Three Musketeers, rent the 1993 version - Itabuses the story enough and is watchable!Skip this one!
Steve Stephenson
23 May 2012
A very enjoyable action-adventure movie
I enjoyed watching The Three Musketeers. A lot. I was not expectinganything that would leave me praising it for years like Avatar or KingKong did, but the movie was very pleasing to watch. There is action,humour, surprises, a fairly interesting plot, friendship, romance andother values that are important in life. Some of the scenes may beunrealistic, but of course nobody can expect a movie like this toportray realistic events. This is an enjoyable adventure with someedge-of-the-seat action. One of the top reviews on here states that thedialogue and characters are poor. Utter nonsense. There is nothingwrong with either. Character development is nice and smooth and makesyou engage with the characters. Sound and graphic effects arebrilliant.Overall this was very enjoyable and I would recommend it to anyonewishing to watch a nice action-adventure flick.
el-fast
19 May 2012
As to be expected - Richard Lester still is unchallenged.
Even as a young boy, I enjoyed the 73-74 version of the great novel ofDumas over and over again. When it's announced that there would be anew version of this magnificent piece of work, I look out for it -worrying. And still my worries aren't scrambled. While this movie isenjoyable, it doesn't raise above the level of ye average no-braineraction flick. A pity, but then again, it doesn't hurt to see that youryouth favourites cannot be touched.On the other hand, I'd enjoy a new well made "Three Musketeers" verymuch. Perhaps in another 20 years? And perhaps in French, as it's aFrench story!
MrGoodMovie
19 May 2012
A First Class Romp
The Three Musketeers is as good a romp as you'll get for your money.Great SFx (watch it in 3D to best effect), fantastic CGI, interestingplot, and a quirky bow to some great scenes from other movies.When D'Artagnan arrives at an inn on his way to Paris and demands anapology for an insult to his dappled mount "Buttercup", you just knowthis is a romp of the highest order.Don't take it too seriously and you will enjoy the action and mayhem Âif you are expecting to see a serious swashbuckling spectacle worthy ofErrol Flynn them ummm .. go watch an Errol Flynn movie .Absolutely loved it, pure escapism and why not? God knows we need it intoday's climate.
julian-mumford
19 May 2012
A disappointing albeit colourful romp
That sound you hear is author Alexandre Dumas slowly rotating in hiseternal resting place, such is the extensive re-imagining of hisoriginal novel. Director Paul Anderson retaining the name andcharacters but little else of the original story.The Three musketeers Aramis (Luke Evans), Porthos (Ray Stevenson) andAthos (Matthew Macfayden) serve at the pleasure of the weak French King(Freddie Fox). Having retrieved Leonardo Da Vinci's secret blueprintsfor a "Flying War Machine", they find themselves out maneuvered byCardinal Richelieu (Christoph Waltz) and Milady (Mila Jovovich).The trio meanwhile occupy themselves by getting drunk, eating andchasing the occasional French Maid. Meanwhile young D'Artagnan (LoganLerman) dreams of becoming a Musketeer, leaving his bucolic rural basedfamily for the den of inequity that is Paris.D'Artagnan manages to rub everyone up the wrong way, challenging peopleto a duel every second stride. Having initially narrowly missing askewering by the leader of Richelieu's guard, Captain Rocheford (MadsMikkelsen), D'Artagnan arranges to then duel all three Musketeersindividually for minor infractions.Before you can say, just kill the cocky annoying little bugger and bedone with it, more of Richelieu's guards turn up. This enables ourquartet to join forces and engage in some PG rated swash buckling, withmore never ending bad guys to be cut down, than a Call of Duty videogame.Once the film establishes that the quartet can do what they like, killlots of guards and seemingly be rewarded for their efforts, the filmreveals the courtly machinations of Cardinal Richelieu. This involvesusing Lord Buckinghamshire (Bloom) to provoke a war with England andmore double crosses than a John Le Carre novel.Waltz as ever plays the bad guy to the hilt, Bloom looks uncomfortablewhich is understandable because no-one gets a chance to actually act.On occasion they do try but all concerned give performances appropriatefor very large and expensive school play. Pantomime buffoonery isobviously the directors chosen approach, lob in a few CGI airships andvoila, the film is a colourful mess. Interestingly, has there ever beena decent film that employs airships, Pixar's "Up" being an exception.Most of the blame must surely lie with the directors lack of confidencein the material, the start is OK and young D'Artagnan apart, characterinteraction is reasonable and despite the early critical mauling thefilm received, you think maybe it's not so bad. Then, as if everyonebelieved that this would never be enough, the director abandons allpretence of reality and heads off into "CGI Green Screen" hell, wherelittle or no acting is expected or possible.Lerman decides to play his character as American as a hotdog and whenthe inevitable love interest appears, the admittedly pretty youngQueens maid, she could not appear more American if "Apple Pie" waswritten on both arms, is this story at least nominally set in France?Interesting note, Bavaria in Germany stands in quite effectively forVersailles and the village set scenes. Only in the movies would wehave, Americans attempting to be French, whilst filming in Germany.Whilst there is some minor fun to be had, with the talent and money ondisplay, this could and should have been so much more. Whilst a sequelis obviously set up in the closing credits, there may be more honourfor all concerned to merely say Adieu.Summary A disappointing albeit colourful romp, using the characters AlexandreDumas created merely as a starting point for a sub standard "Raiders"style adventure. Add in a measure of any swash buckling movie everseen, all generously mixed with an early Elizabethan Episode of "BlackAdder" and you get the general idea.Largely to be avoided unless airships quite literally float your boat.
cymonerry
19 May 2012
The tradition continues with a twist - spoiler
Here it is again, The Three Musketeers.So what's new? Nothing except the ridiculous use of cgi to create animpossible act of physics. Flying English warships, bullshit. I foundthis part of the movie unnecessary.Having got that out of the way I love Mila Jovovitch since The FifthElement. Her hatred of the English in The Messenger Joan of Arc makesher ideal for the part. Roy Kinnear died making one of these Musketeer movies, he was a gem. Ithink he would like this movie it has all the stuff they did in the 70swith the likes of Oliver Reed, Faye Dunaway and Charlton Heston. Iloved those films and this one is also lots of fun. Check out theoriginals before or after seeing this. They are truly classics.All said, a great performance by all, just a bit annoyed by theoverstatement of English Naval power for that time. Airships? We hardlyhad a Navy during this period. We would soon be entangled in civil war,plague and fire all involving the French before being whipped by theDutch. This is Pure French propaganda translated to English, butsurprisingly embraced by the English soon after its publication.In homage this is definitely Hollywood doing its version, in that theyoverdid it with their flying rubbish that would never get off theground. The ship has an enormous wooden double steering wheel. Airshipsneed to be light. But It is definitely worth the watch if you considerit your average violent kids film with comic values. I Think Hollywoodconfused this classic with The Pirates of the Caribbean and could notresist adding their "magic" puke!The tradition continues, only slightly perverted by Hollywood.
gandalfnorth
17 May 2012
Great Fun
Took the family and everyone enjoyed it. It was great fun with goodaction throughout the movie - no dull sections.The direct made effective use of 3D effects that actually enhanced themovie rather than distracted from it.The costumes will receive an Oscar nod I think.The script was light and entertaining.Performances by Matthew McFadyen and Milla Jovovich were especiallystrong.It was something of a cross between Pirates and Lord of the Rings whenit came to the action.Orlando Bloom still can't play the heavy well. Too bad - it's just nothis thing.Take the family and enjoy it!
Joe Franke
17 May 2012
Aims High - Reaches about the middle - Well above the bottom (possible spoilers)
First off, I love Dumas' story of The Three Musketeers. I have seenevery version I could lay my hands on - which includes DouglasFairbanks's, Gene Kelly's, Richartd Chamberlain's, Chris O'Donnell /Kiefer Sutherland, The BBC miniseries with Jeremy Brett and severalothers. I have never found an 'ideal' version. By ideal, I don't mean aword-for-word adaptation of the book(s). I just want a movie that getsthe characters right. Let the modern adventures take them where theywill.So it was with some excitement that I heard that Andrew Davies (of BBCPride and Prejudice fame) was hired to write the screenplay. A drama ofthe highest level seemed to be in the making. Then I heard that PaulAnderson was brought in to direct, as was Alex Litvak to 'liven up' thescript. At first I was disappointed, thinking, 'Great, here goesanother classic adaptation down the drain." But, then, I relaxed. Itwasn't going to be the dramatic movie that I had hoped for, but itmight be more fun.And fun The Three Musketeers certainly is. First, the high points. Thepace is snappy, the action is scintilating, the costumes are dazzling(Cardinal's Guard's uniforms were especially good), and the colors arevividly brilliant. The special effects are superb. In short, itcertainly LOOKS like a big-budget blockbuster. The acting was good-to-middling. The good: Ray Stevenson as Porthos. Iwish he had been given more screentime. His Porthos is tall, strong, and a little reckless, withsquinty-eyed, devil-may-care grin. Matthew Macfayden as Athos. I'veseen him before in other films (Pride and Prejudice 2005, Robin Hood,and Little Dorrit) so I knew he would bring some gravity to the role.He certainly did but again I wished for more screen time. He wasprobably the most developed if the three. And, of course, MadsMikkelsen as Rochefort. Mikkelsen strikes just the right note ofmenace. The surprising: (good) Milla Jovovich as Milady. Most people think ofResident Evil, but she can act convincingly (watch The Fourth Kind),and puts in an excellent turn here as milady. (bad) Luke Evans asAramis. He came off as pale and, with the exception of one importantdialogue, uninteresting. (bad) Christoph Waltz as Richelieu. It was nota bad performance (Waltz is capable of great performances - see Waterfor Elephants), but in a movie that relies so much on depiction ofcharacter, the role asked Richelieu to emanate power. Waltz tries hisbest, but is ultimately trapped in a role that offers little dramaticcontrast. (good) Freddie Fox as King Louis XIII. The King plays alarger role in this film than in previous adaptations, and Fox makeswhat could be a weak, watery character quite sympathetic. The indifferent: (indifferent) Orlando Bloom as Buckingham. Nothingreally stood out in Bloom's portrayal. There are other actors who couldhave done just as well. Bloom was simply a box-office attraction.(indifferent) Logan Leman as D'Artagnan. Cocky enough to shatter thescreen, but his American accent seemed out of place in a largelyBritish cast film. (indifferent) Gabriella Wilde as Constance. Mz.Wilde is very pretty, and very convincing, but her Constance came offas snippy and nasty.Now for what many 'purists' are wailing about, and the source of muchtrashing - the plot. For there is one, but it is not overlycomplicated. This movie covers basically the same territory as thefirst half of the book - the story of the Queen's diamonds. Not to blowanything, but (SPOILERS!!) the movie ends right as Buckingham issetting sail for France - presumably to set siege to La Rochelle. So,there are the standard fights with the Cardinal's Guards, the theft ofjewels, a plot by the Cardinal, and the Musketeers pressed into serviceto save the Queen. All pretty entertaining, and well done IMO, withthis one draw-back that sticks with me every time I've watched thisfilm: despite so much traveling, there is very little sense of thedistance covered. The trip to Calais is accomplished by simply changingscenes; the journey from Calais to England, almost ditto. Clearly,Litvak and Anderson felt that the drama of the trip to Calais could bedispensed with (the trip is a major part of most adaptations). While Iappreciate the desire to be different, I felt a little cheated here.Perhaps Anderson thought that another action sequence would unbalancethe film. Given the amount of other action sequences (all excellentlyscripted), he was probably right.I know what you're thinking: BUT AIRSHIPS??!! Well, sure, why not!Dumas had a great sense of the fantastic (read the unedited MonteCristo). Saying he would have approved or not is beside the point; theinclusion of a fantastical element is very much in the Dumas spirit.Credit to Anderson and Litvak for not just including the airships to becool (though that was obviously a primary reason), but making themimportant to the story. In addition to the above, there is very littleblood or sex. If you like your Musketeers raw and uncensored, you willbe disappointed. Anderson did a fine job directing, and Paul Haslingergot into his best Hans Zimmer imitation with the soundtrack (mixingbits of Pirates of the Caribbean with shades of Sherlock Holmes). If you're a book purist, don't even bother with this one. Just hug yourRichard Chamberlain versions tight, and hope for Blu-ray. If you like good action with crazy sword-fights, some funny dialogueand aren't worried by things like 'drama' and 'character' and just wantto have a good time, this new set of Musketeers delivers in spades. Andit is set up for a sequel, so there is probably more to come - love itor hate it.
on_the_money
17 May 2012
More fun than I thought!
Surprisingly fun and action packed. And having just caught the ChrisOdonnel version on cable this weekend, I've got to say that I'm gladthey updated it! There is more humor, more action and it just looks bigger then anyprevious effort. Casting is rather interesting with a great number ofsolid actors playing the roles of the Musketeers themselves inMacFadyen, Luke Evans and Ray S. And Mads Mikkelsen is such a bad ass.I would have liked to seen more of him. Both Orlando and Milla arequite a lot of fun and definitely add a little bit of needed glamourand sex appeal. I'd recommend it 100% to anyone looking for a good funfilm.
danielmooncalf
16 May 2012
Absolute crap.
Rent/download the 20 year old Disney one, instead.Who read this script and thought it was worth making? It opens withAthos assassinating a guard, as they break into some weird SteampunkishDavinci museum. Then some woman in full court dress somehow outrunsprojectile traps, and is able to help the musketeers steal some plansfor a super weapon. It's a stupid scene, and it only gets worse fromthere.D'Artagnan is an ugly little asshole. The special effects are garbage.It was like watching a little kid play a bad video game. Porthos wasthe only entertaining one, but would you dig through dog poop to findan unwrapped Hershey's kiss? If you would, then you should watch thismovie.
fayazissak
15 May 2012
Utter trash
I found this movie to be complete and utter trash, the CGI was obvious,especially in fight scenes, the story was ludicrous, the movie itselfwas long and dull. Why does Hollywood think that they can continuallyre- invent this particular story is beyond me. Its a shame because it looked half decent from the trailer, and hassome great actors in the movie too. The Three Musketeers is a movie that you will easily forget, it willleave no long standing impression in your mind. I would love to see aversion that has a decent script and stuck more closely to the originaltext.If you are looking to pass a couple of hours and don't care what youwatch, go for it, otherwise I would advise you to spend your time morewisely!
capone666
14 May 2012
The Vidiot Reviews...
The Three MusketeersAt long last, Hollywood's crafted a film starring the 3 hottestMouseketeers: Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears and Annette Funicello.Oops! Apparently, this action movie is about France's royal guard - andnot pre-teens in mouse ears.Determined to follow in his father's footsteps by serving the King ofFrance alongside the Musketeers, D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman) heads toParis to enlist.Upon arriving he learns of the guard's disbandment. Fortunately, fatealigns him with former members, Athos (Matthew Macfadyen), Porthos (RayStevenson) and Aramis (Luke Evans).After proving his parry, D'Artagnan joins the ex-Musketeers as they setout to save the queen from being framed by a treacherous cardinal(Christoph Waltz) and his assistant (Milla Jovovich).Featuring fast-paced fencing matches, airship dogfights and slow-moexplosions, this bombastic adaptation is as far removed from AlexandreDumas' novel as possible.Besides, we all know that after retirement the Musketeers didn't sailaround in a flying boat, they invented a chocolate bar. (Red Light)vidiotreviews.blogspot.com
animesh303
14 May 2012
Entertaining adaptation of classic novel but not a blockbuster
Nice adaptation of novel by Alexandre Dumas. Athos, Porthos, and Aramiswere different in character from what I had imagined after reading thenovel, but similar was the fate of Sherlock Holmes. They had a goodsense of humor. Sherlock Holmes succeeded well with re-invention of thecharacter with good acting by Robert Downey Jr. Though the plot wastaken from the novel, yet there were many instances where it indulgedin fantasy like sky ships, chambers of Leonardo da Vinci and even usagefew words like 'insurance policy' which didn't exist in those days.Being a French story, the language and ascent didn't help in bringingthe originality. However, the lack of certain aspects were well coveredby some twists and superb acting by Milla Jovovich (Milady), OrlandoBloom (Duke of Buckingham) and Matthew Macfadyen (Athos). The 3Deffects were good and the script made a good sinker for its sequel. Myrating: 7
adripr8
13 May 2012
very amusing film!
The film is good with good action but could have been better.the fourmusketeers are good specially ray Stevenson is very funny but the bestare the villains Milla jovovich is very very evil Orlando Bloom made adifferent character and Christoph Waltz simply PERFECT! The director isPaul W.S Anderson and is good but it have a lot of slow motion exactlythe same of resident evil 4 but in this film not stick well. Theambiance is espectacular , the final of the film remember resident evilafterlife.I have a good time viewing it,I hope that it have a secondpart'm looking forward for watch. Probably the best of the film is thediscovery of a beauty like Gabriella Wilde.
zorro2a
13 May 2012
Poor
Well what a lot of hype for a load of nothing, this is a very pooradaptation of a great story, Logan Lerman (who) as D'Artanyen lookedlike a Sixteen year old doing a school play, the two brightest actorswas Matt MacFadyen as Athos, and Orlando Bloom in his best role to dateas the "baddie". Someone has already said that the Charlie Sheen/TimCurry version of a few years back is much better, with more action allthrough the film and not just in the last 20 minutes. And whats withall this 3D stuff, every film that comes out now is done in 3D, why, lsaw Three Musketeers in 2D as this 3D hurts my eyes and it adds nothingto the story, all the TV ads that have been on is very misleadingbecause it shows most of the action at the start or end of the film,it's a great pity l love this type of film and have been lookingforward to is for weeks, but what a let down.4/10
fc1914
13 May 2012
Worth killing 2 hours.... and thats all
At first when I heard about this movie, I thought that it will be a lotof fun. The fun was there, but in some strange course. Maybe it isbecause of my taste, maybe I like more intense and unpredictablemovies, but I expected a lot more. There were some really odd elements,which look like artificially added, in relation to the time of theaction, the dawn of XVII century, like the Da Vinci vault and how itwas made look like, also the flying war machines battle. Also the"shallow" ending, which showed even the blind people that there will bea sequel, could easily be replaced with three simple words - "to becontinued". I mean letting go the great conspirator, doesn't matterwhat the planned to do, even if he's the cardinal himself is a bitstrange to me. The story is good but the movie could have been made farmore deep and unpredictable. 5/10
TangoX
12 May 2012
Do yourself a favour... Place back in box and leave well alone!
Don't even bother watching this, it will make your brain ache, theworst film I have ever seen of The Three Musketeers...I do not know where to start, having watched the 1973 version, which inmy mind was far better, and I would recommend to everyone to go and buyit, that will entertain you, keeping as close to the original book asany film can. However this pile of trash is not even worth wasting money on, FLYINGSHIP'S!and to think they even hinted at making a sequel at the end of thefilm, please please do not, its going to be as bad as Steve Martin'sPink Panther.So why have I missed out the 1993 version, well for me, we had thefinest actors in the 1973 film and I feel that was closet to the bookout of all the films, also the actor line up cannot be beaten at all.So rather then going out to rent this or even buy it, just buy the 1973film called The Three Musketeers. You will have more laughs and nosilly flying ships, that belong in Monty Python.
Ahmed El Sayed
11 May 2012
I was waiting for something better
* What can I say ! a battle or 2 in the start with swords and thats it* the Picture was clear but i cant understand what it was in 3rd ! *Music was normal and boring nothing really special about it . * Themovie with so direct was too much talk and less action . * I tried toenjoy it as much as i can but i could not . * it was the same like theother other classic movies who is trying to turn famous novels tomovies and still as most of them had huge failure ! because they alwaystry to change the main story to give something new so they screw ittotally! the main movie stars acting was not bad but there was so manystars to focus on in this little time and also the main focus was onthe King of France character and he was the most character thatappeared on the screen while the focus should be on the Musketeers !
Copyright SoulFilms © 2002-2012 All Rights Reserved.
- Support
- | Privacy Policy
- | Terms of Use
- | FAQ
- | Help
- | PDA version