BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Stephan Hammond It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

TonyMontana96 (Originally reviewed: 25/01/2017) I have not seen the original, nor have I any plans to, so this is the first one for me, and despite its problems it's actually pretty decent. Chris O Donnell is not really that good or convincing here but I have seen him act (Scent of a Woman) so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. The three actual musketeers are Athos (Kiefer Sutherland), Aramis (Charlie Sheen), and Porthos (Oliver Platt). These three have good chemistry together and all play their characters respectively well; also featuring are Rebecca De Mornay as an outlaw queen, Gabrielle Anwar as Queen Anne and Paul McGann as the cardinal's right hand man. I left out Tim Curry (Cardinal) as I feel his performance ranges from camp to cringeworthy, whereas most of the cast give well-grounded performances. For example Curry seems to make most female characters uncomfortable when he tries to get close to them, and those moments are cringe inducing for myself and probably other audience members.There are a few things I also picked up on such as some horrible dialogue such as when Curry says " I teach pigs to dance, and horses to fly", apart from being impossible, it's also silly and not funny, if that was indeed the intention. Some more examples are from other cast members who say things such as "little wimp bag" (yet again an attempt at humour) and "Don't lose your head" during a possible execution scene, I think the screenwriters thought this would be somewhat amusing, however I'm here to tell you it's bloody awful.Aside from its dialogue and hit and miss humour, I think it's plot takes a backseat to the swashbuckling action, in which there is a scene when a character is sleeping, and the attempted killer decides I'll wait until he wakes up and then tries to stab him during contact, really? My question at the time was why wait? I do not think the plot is fatally flawed however as the final sequence is a lot of fun and there's plenty of cheesy fun to be had on display. A few other things I enjoyed were a scene where Sheen is teaching O Donnell how to woo a lady, and he is so nervous he shouts something like "your poisoned face" to the girl and it cut's back to the musketeers where you can see their why did you say that reactions which I found fairly amusing. Furthermore I admired the choreography of the sword fights, the realistic costumes, and the pacing which is brisk for the most part. Overall this is a pretty good swashbuckling adventure that may be cheesy but can be enjoyed for what it is.

couchfrenchfry I watched several Three Musketeers films recently. This one I could not watch. First, it is letter boxed. Zoom does not fill the screen. Second, Cardinal Richelieu tortures and then murders a man for trying to steal food to keep from starving. I do not know how this got by the censors at Disney. I did not watch much more but threw the disc into the trash can. Richelieu may have been indifferent to the suffering of poor folks but he was a statesman, not a monster. I was looking forward to some lighthearted fun. I will be very suspicious of every Disney film from now on. Simplification is okay but dragging what is usually a fun romp down to this level is inexcusable.

brainpower-302-398622 After seeing almost every version of The Three Musketeers i watched this version expecting to be bored to death. But how can a movie with Tim Curry and Charlie Sheen be boring ? This version was fun to watch from start to finish even though it had some bad choices ( Hugh' O'Connor, Chris O'Donnell) the storyline was OK and the acting brilliant. Athos , Porthos and Aramis were finally portrayed by good actors and Curry was a scheming bastard but funny at the same time.I still have to see a good D'Artagnan and this still wasn't it , O'Donnell came out and the least important character and his acting didn't help.All in all, a fun version and i hoped it would be the last but it looks like i was wrong. Too bad they didn't the Man in the Iron Mask with these actors, it would have been hilarious and we wouldn't have to see the DiCaprio version with some has beens Musketeers.

skmaven Carping about the lack of fidelity of Disney's The Three Musketeers to Dumas' book or to history misses the point. It's not *our* history. It is (implicitly) set in a parallel world, possibly - no, probably - the same one in which the delightfully silly sword-romp At Sword's Point (1952 ) is set. And this too is a delightfully silly sword-romp, not to be taken seriously in the least.Almost every time the story is revisited, the character of Athos gets another softening. In the book he murdered (or attempted to murder) his wife out-of-hand, without waiting for her to regain consciousness and try to explain (what an SOB!), and still hates even her memory. The relationship never comes up in Fairbanks Sr's The Three Musketeers, and is barely hinted at in a reaction-shot in The Iron Mask - which still manages to make clear that there's some real bad history there. By the 1948 version, he "merely" repudiated her - and never ceased to love her. In the 1993 version he believed her guilty of murder and turned her over to her enemies, and grieved for her ever after.I don't have a favorite version of The Three Musketeers - each and every one I have seen is flawed, usually in different ways. But this one makes a nice casual treat, particularly on a double bill followed by At Sword's Point.