MovieChat Forums > The Musketeer (2001) Discussion > why cant´t anyone make a real musketeers...

why cant´t anyone make a real musketeers film?


Why can´t some filmmaker just sit down and read the book, it is very good by the way, and make a film without changing everything exept the names? why do they have to make a new terrible example every five minutes? are the on drugs?

reply

I find that most filmmakers and producers don't like to read unless its a technical manual. This is a broad statement I realize but it comes from personal experience and from reading interviews. While the filmmakers I do like, steep themselves in literature and storytelling. Personally I don't have a problem with changing aspects of the story as long as it helps the story- telling. Like Fight Club. I like the book but I love the movie; the differences made the movie better.

The B and The T

reply

I also have a feeling that some directors like taking the book, throwing in what they imagine, and call it their "vision". While I have not read the book, I have a definite feeling that this is what happened to this movie.

-----
Looks like you forgot to take your anti-retard pills again.

reply

Now, don't jump on me Racer but we all have "visions." But some "visions" are better; I would rather see Scorese's "vision" than Peter Hyams and his ilk any day! Do you really have something to say? Is what you are going to add going to further the story or hurt it? Are you throwing in f/x and stunts for the hell of it or will it make the movie better?(rhetorical statements all) That's where I think a lot of artists go wrong not just directors, ego!

The B and The T

reply

Me? Jump on you for something you said? NEVER! :-D

Anyway, I do believe that you are correct. A version of The Three Musketeers by Scorsese would probably be closer to the book, and be more realistic. Hyams' vision was probably one filled with fantastic fight scenes, and in the transition, he lost a good portion of the story. He might have been inspired by some Asian films, and imagined "Wouldn't it be cool if they fought like..." instead of how they would have actually fought back then. In his mind, he probably imagined the musketeers as being able to do all sorts of things, fighting while rolling on barrels, the ladder fight, etc, and he imagined this to be something new and incredible, since we've pretty much seen the musketeers fight the same way for the last...good amount of years.

-----
Looks like you forgot to take your anti-retard pills again.

reply

I just wanted to let you know you're OK in my book SpeedRacer! Need to work on the movies you like(said in a low almost inaudible voice). Just Kidding!

The B and The T

reply

You're good in my book as well, ganesha23. I just can't wait for our next lively discussion.

-----
Looks like you forgot to take your anti-retard pills again.

reply

[deleted]

sometimes book scenes do not shoot well as film scenes so the director probably tosses the book to the side and goes for whatever can be done since there's a production deadline likely to be met and a budget to try to follow (time is money). Maybe the director doesnt want to be accused of not being accurate? Therefore the movie becomes "based on the book". Ha ha, it seems there are many reasons. Does it matter? I think I happen to like when I go see a movie and it is NOT like the book. That makes it a bit more interesting.

reply

Plus the original book the one that Dumas wrote not an updated book is so boring in every aspect that to do it like that would kill the audience when most of the time all the audience wants is to be entertained and not wast ten bucks. Yeah sure the story sucked but the action was cool

reply

Well I doubt the director read past the first page, if he even began to read the book. D'artangan's parents murdered? Must have missed that one!

reply

Go and watch a boxing match or something. Some people actually like some plot in their movies.

reply

The original Dumas book is by no means boring, it is full of action, romance, comedy, and would make a brilliant serial drama if not a film. I suspect you probably haven't read it and just presume that as it is an old, long book, it must be boring. You obviously like action, and there is plenty of it in the original book, including a crazy, but beautiful naked woman attacking D'Artagnan, which would probably make great cinema viewing.

reply

[deleted]

ok I have a grand suggestion for the last few opinions...
1. become a film consultant - these film makers could use your information about making a film accurate since you know the original story so well.
2. if you know the story so well, have tons to complain about on everyone else's attempt to make a good Musketeer film, find a cozy spot and write the script yourself...the storyboards,hire a crew,umm...you may need some studio to loan you nearly a million bucks (unless you feel like going the total independent route)...and a production team...and make the most superior to date Musketeer film that has never been released in the history of cinema. I'll buy a ticket to the premiere.

(ok I am inclined to like this Musketeer film, despite that I must forget Dart's voice is not remotely french)

reply

i COMPLETELY agree with you, ratking! I was just thinking the EXACT same thing. It really is unbelievable, how every single Musketeer movie is so appaling, when the book is so brilliant! I mean, how does that even happen? What mysterious process happens in the heads of the script writers/directors between reading the book and writing the script??? It really stuns me.

And I just have to comment on what someone else said about Dumas' book being boring and so forth... yeeeeeaaaah. You (the other person) seem to be one of those people who'd like every single movie to include lots of exploding stuff.

"save your drama for your mama."

reply

I am mad about it to, I have been waiting for that great muskateer film that is what it can truly be.Not all these films that are all like 105 mins, some are ok but none of them give me the film that they can really be and that is just a pure shame.I would like atleast a two hour movie, with some awesome acting and much better done sword fights and I would also like to see a movie done with the story being told perfect.

reply

I've seen nearly every "Musketeer" film made. The 2 Lester films were probably the best depiction of the period with the added benefit of much more interest in the secondary characters such as the Queen and Buckingham. For period and swashbuckling, the two French films starring Gerard Barray would run a close second. But as far as the portrayal of the main characters, I think the 1948 Gene Kelly film is the best.
In my humble opinion, "They Were Called Three Musketeers...but They Were Four" is the worst. Ironically, it featured karate-style fighting with visiting Asian characters, wholly inappropriate as was the Asian style fighting which to my mind somewhat marred "The Musketeer."

reply

The 1970's movies cuaght the best jist of Dumas' humour and will be hard to top

reply

i have to agree that Lesters 70s musketeer movies are the closest to Dumas original books. I have read all of them and think that although the books were clearly in the language and style of the time, the 70s movies captured the spirit of the books. Granted, Lester introduced more humor and abridged much of the book, but it's a movie and that's to be expected. Still, it stands out amongst all the more recent debacles, including the embarrassing Man in the Iron Mask with De Caprio. The 70s version with richard chamberlain was the best of that part of the last musketeer novels. The real disappointment was the sequel to the Lester movies in the 80s called the Return of the Musketeers. Not only was the spirit of the original missed, but production saw the untimely death of Roy Kinnear - which probably effected the post production. ONe day, someone will do it as a mini series which can encompass both volumes of the Three Musketeers, the 3 volumes of Ten Years After and the 5 volumes that include the man in the iron mask. that would great.

reply

I know! The book is SO good. They don't have to change names (hello, her name's Constance) or add plot twists. The novel is perfect in the respect that it has this subtlety and mystery to it. People have to play that up. And also follow the book when it says that D'Artagnan is actually handsome.

P.S. I'm auditioning for Constance Bonacieux if they ever get the hang of making GOOD movies.

reply

I actually love the three musketeers that came out in 1993 with charlie sheen and keifer sutherland. Great chemistry between the actors, which is what the movies should have. I thought this movie was ok but i didn't like how they killed D'Artagnan's father as a washed up musketeer when he was to die defending the king.

reply

I beg to differ. I can handle ninja musketeers more than Chris O'Donnell. If it wasn't for Keifer Sutherland, that movie would have been the absolute worst.
The Three and Four Muskteers from the 70's is probably as good as we're going to get. It's the most accurate Musketeer movies I've ever seen.

Hearing Chris O'Donnell saying "I have the heart of a musketeer" in such a wooden manner made the replies of "Warrior, Poet..." so laughable and pathetic.

It seemed like Keifer was the only one who was trying in that movie.
The Musketeer was just a stunt movie. I think a better script and less over the top stunt work would have made for a better movie.

reply

One day, someone will do it as a mini series which can encompass both volumes of the Three Musketeers, the 3 volumes of Ten Years After and the 5 volumes that include the man in the iron mask. that would great.
I'm hoping this will happen too, but maybe instead of a mini-series have a long-running series with several seasons to do the books real justice.

Life is a comedy to those who think, and a tragedy to those who feel.

reply

The Richard Lester Three musketeers from the 70s is the the most accurate adaptation to date. He actually read the book, and it shows, plus the production is amazing and it has a stunning cast.

reply

We could use an updated Three Musketeers in the vein of Kevin Reynolds The Count of Monte Cristo. That would be fantastic! The 70's Musketeer films are easily the best. Is there a decent old French version?

Danny Butterman: Ever fired your gun in the air and yelled, 'Aaaaaaah?'

reply

Perhaps you should take a look at "Les trois mousquetaires - Les ferrets de la reine" from 1961 and it‘s follow up "Le vengeance de Mylady" (1962). Showing lots of original french castles, fine sets and lavish, colourful costumes, these two look quite impressive and overall they are faithful to the Novel. Especially the casting has been done very carefully here. For once all of the musketeers seem to match Dumas Description. The main objection I have against both films, is that Director Borderie never tried to deliver more than pretty costume tales. For example the camera never pans forth and really catches some emotions from the actors. Therefore several key elements, that are worked out fine in the Richard Lester films, have no dramatic power here (Athos love/hatred to Mylady, Myladys seduction of Felton, Death of Constance etc.).
Nonetheless an interesting complement to Hollywood made Musketeer films.

reply

From what I understand, very seldom do the filmmakers/directors read the original source material if they're making an adaptation of it unless they just so happen to be a writer too, in which case they are generally used to that sort've thing and wouldn't mind reading it.

"Too bad you can't reload your game and try again." Cassidy- Fallout 2

reply

Does anyone else find irony in "musketeers" (warriors specializing in the musket as weapon) doing all their fighting with swords.

The I. G.

reply