The Three Musketeers

Subjectively, the film fulfills everything you imagine in the phrase "The Three Musketeers directed by Paul Anderson," in a wholly positive sense. The trailers promised that it would be a blast. The inventive action combined with a superb cast, where everyone enjoys their role to the fullest, brings smiles of satisfaction to the audience’s faces. However, there are issues in the passages without any action, where perhaps it's not so much the gibberish dialogue that bothers us, but rather the fact that it has no pizzazz and lacks even the slightest bit of unpredictability. This means that you’ll simply know that Lerman will be a (likable) brat until the end and that the main three characters will be serving up catchphrases even if airships are falling from the sky. I'm not disappointed, I just think Anderson needs a tighter dramaturgical whip on him, and then he'll serve up one Death Race after another. :) 3 ½. (09/02/2012)

A little more sophisticated Uwe Boll, which unfortunately doesn't change the fact that a grave robber like Paul W.S. Anderson should never have come close to such a substance. Moreover, this mixture of clumsy borrowings of pirate playfulness and Ritchie cunning is completely walled off by the director's inability to come up with anything stylishly consistent. Some of the shots of Milla Jovovich suggest that Paul is probably henpecked at home. I understand that it's nice to show how his wife is still the same thunderous female at a more advanced age, but unfortunately Anderson proves that he, too, is still the same dumbass at his age. Two just for Mads, who (again) has no eye and is demonic (again). (18/10/2011)

"The Three Musketeers" are an absolute classic in both literature and creation. Some film adaptations are more successful than others, some are more serious, others funnier. When we were told that Paul W. S. Anderson would be making a new version, one started to wonder if Hollywood had gone crazy. The director, who is responsible for films like "Resident Evil" or "Death Race", didn't seem like an excellent choice for such a classic. It's not surprising, he's a director who handles action well, but the ability to breathe life into a classic, that was doubtful. And the result? The doubts were completely justified. Swords are used here for a maximum of five minutes, the rest of the battles are mostly done with the sounds of firearms. "All for one, one for all" is only said while drinking wine and they don't ride horses because it's quite unnecessary when you have an airship at your disposal. Milady de Winter, played by Milla Jovovich, is basically a disguised Alice from "Resident Evil" because the action moves she shows us seem to have been taken straight out of a zombie classic. Or from "The Matrix". And on top of that, we have Cardinal Richelieu, played by Christoph Waltz, who fences. The classic has been turned upside down and it has become a crazy Hollywood-style brawl. Dumas is turning in his grave and cursing Anderson, and I can calmly say that I will never watch this again. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/07/happy-feet-2-bobr-cislo-4-musketyri.html (23/02/2013)

In his modern interpretation, "Paul W. S. Anderson honors the realities of the story and intends his modern rendition to approach the narrative quality of the original literary work." I laughed again at the official distributor text. I will admit, though, that these Three Musketeers are better the second time around than the first time. The second time around, I knew what to expect - unprecedented, but quite entertaining stupidity with airship fights, action scenes that beat anything from Anderson's Resident Evil, likable heroes and beautiful cleavage... namely women. Why not? (19/02/2012)

These Three Musketeers are something completely different than you would expect. And that’s actually a good thing. After all, what good would it do me to watch the same story over and over again, just with different actors? This story is always taken very seriously not only from a historical point of view and at times gets quite romantic. Anderson took the originally story, fucked around with it, gave it a thrashing, abused it and this is the result – a completely zany ride which makes no sense whatsoever but entertains. And that’s the most important thing. You must take it as entertainment, not as a historical tale. Then it works, and rather well at that. The actors also understood this and I must say that I had quite a good time with them. I laughed and got to see the musketeers as a bonus. (03/12/2012)