Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much
Console best movie i've ever seen.
Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.
Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable
TheLittleSongbird Another great Douglas Fairbanks film, not one of his best but still hugely entertaining. As an adaptation it is rather abridged, the details and spirit are there but there are versions since that have had much more depth to characterisation and such, the musketeers here are still very fun to watch but can feel like window-dressing. However, as a film and a stand alone there is plenty to love. Aside from the abridgements the only real misgiving was the rushed ending. The Three Musketeers though is still beautifully photographed and the costumes and sets equally evocative and lavish. It is wittily written, a lot of chat especially for a silent film but it has the Dumas spirit and none of it feels like irrelevant filler. As well as rousingly scored, there are three scores available one from 1921 and the others from 1996, the most fitting of the three is Louis F. Gottschalk's from 1921. The story is still diverting and goes at a crisp pace, with lots of twists and turns along with a real sense of adventure, excitement and suspense, basically all the ingredients for a great period adventure. The action sequences are highly athletic with lots of exciting bravado, it is edge-of-the-seat stuff with no signs of clumsiness or predictability. Fairbanks is great, he is full of charisma with touches of arrogance, wit and sparkling humour and tackles his stunts with a real effortless ease. Margarite De LaMotte is a touching Constance and Barbara La Marr a sensual and haunting Milady DeWinter. Adolphe Menjou is appropriately cruel and the Musketeers are well-played, but aside from Fairbanks the standout in the acting department was Nigel De Brulier as a sly and malevolent Richelieu. Overall, the 1973 Richard Lester version is still the definitive adaptation of The Three Musketeers but if we're talking about adaptations being judged on their own this is one of the better and most enjoyable ones, apart from the Burbank Films Australia animated version and the updated one from the Asylum I don't think any of the adaptations are really terrible(yes that is including the 1993 film). 9/10 Bethany Cox
Kevin Clarke After admiring Douglas Fairbank's smashing looks in the later THIEF OF BAGDAD, I have to say he looks extremely unattractive in these pseudo-historical French costumes and a wig you wonder where he got it from. And not only does he as the star attraction look bad - the French queen (for one) is just as terrible with an equally terrible wig. Not to mention the Three Musketeers: stout, unsporty, unfunny. I wonder if in 1921 this was considered 'attractive'? (I very much doubt it.) Still, some of the scenes are fun to watch, even at epic length (more than two hours running time.) I guess with the right symphonic live music it must have been impressive back then. With cheap (and thin sounding) computer music as a soundtrack on DVD today, it is... a bit dreary. (Sadly.)Interstingly, there is a 1929 stage operetta of the same title by Benatzky/Charell created for Berlin (and recently revived in Nordhausen, Germany), that makes interesing comparison with this film - whole scenes have been taken 1:1 from it. Only with better music attached to it. It would be fun to see the film with a Benatzky-based soundtrack!
Ben Parker D'Artangan (Douglas Fairbanks) goes up against his rival Richelieu (Adolphe Menjou), with the help of his Musketeer friends. There is a plot, something to do with the Queen, but don't ask me what it was.Like most film adaptations of long (in this case about as long as War and Peace, like all other Dumas books) novels, a lot has been simplified and left out, yet the plot is still hard to follow! This means that people who've read the book complain about the missing parts, and people who haven't read it, complain they can't follow the movie! For this reason, i don't know why anybody ever adapts long novels. In this case, the appeal of the swordplay and romance is a well justified reason for putting these characters onscreen.Like many entertainment-driven silents, it is impossible to delve too deeply into character, let alone themes - so what we have feels like a fairly empty and superficial version of an epic story.Enjoyable Fairbanks vehicle is just a piece of fluff, the silent era equivalent of Pirates of the Caribbean - which is no small achievement. It has genuine sword-swishing action, and the dashing and charismatic Fairbanks - who makes for both great comic relief, and a great hero.Highlight: there is some sparkling little samples of dialogue (title cards), which were unexpectedly hilarious. Mainly in D'Artangan's scenes.7/10.
Craig Smith Douglas Fairbanks knew how to be in the middle of the action. In all the scenes he is in it is go, go, go. He never walks when he can run, jump, even fly. Fairbanks was very athletic and he shows those skills in the movie. Very rarely in this film does he stand still and that is not for long. When he is in a scene there is always going to be plenty of action.The basic plot is that Fairbanks wants to become one of the King's musketeers and in the process finds himself involved in protecting the Queen's honor. The movie is a bit overlong and I found myself having troubles at time following the plot which made the move drag somewhat. But when there was action everything changed. The film comes alive during the scenes involving sword play and when Fairbanks is trying to get back to the Queen from England. And when all is said and done Fairbanks gets his wish and becomes (as you know he will) a Musketeer!
