[Classics Movie] The Three Musketeers

The first book-to-movie I picked for Maria’s Books into Movies Monthly Meme is the 2011 adaptation of The Three Musketeers. I have just re-read the book last month , so the story and character are still vividly lingering in my mind. This movie was directed by Paul W.S. Anderson, and intended from the beginning to be an adventure film. Let me break down my thoughts into these categories….

Characters and Castings

This is my first complain for this film (there would be few more… :D). I always believe that classics literature (as in literary fiction) was built from its characters. Consequently, if you want to make a movie adaptation from a certain classics, you must at least keep the original characters as they were created by the author. You can change the setting, you can alter or simplify the plot, you can erase some minor characters, but DO NOT change the personalities of the main characters, because they are who drive the story. Once you do that, you are ruining the author’s great work, and that is an insult!

Actually, I did not even finish this film. I stopped abruptly after the scene of d’Artagnan giving in the Queen’s diamonds to be exchanged with Constance’s freedom. It’s too much for me that I was too angry to continue watching. First, it’s Athos; played by MacFadyen who actually fits the character. D’Artagnan is confused when Rochefort is holding Constance as a hostage, and will release her if the Three Musketeers give in the diamonds. Athos advises d’Artagnan to ‘fight for your love, and let France fight for itself’. Hellooo…did I hear correctly? Athos—the most loyal nobleman in France, who sometimes can become unreasonable; who is willingly to sacrifice his life for his blind loyalty to the King or Queen? How could he advise d’Artagnan to prioritize personal matters before Queen’s life and honor?

Then, it’s d’Artagnan himself. I can forgive the boyish face of the star, but what annoyed me is that the brave, smart, and masterful fencing player d’Artagnan looks so stupid and helpless in this film. The real d’Artagnan—as Dumas created him—would never just walk in enemy’s trap like the fake one in this film walks in to Rochefort’s cabin to give in the diamonds, only to be captured inside. That’s so stupid and absurd! Still more, when finally d’Artagnan can escape and is fighting with Rochefort, he is fencing so unskillfully, that Rochefort wounds him several times very easily. That’s it, I stopped my DVD player right at that scene!

Speaking of the other castings, Cardinal Richeliu’s is the only one from the main characters that satisfied me. The King Louis XIII is too boyish and ridiculous, Anne of Austria doesn’t have the elegance and beauty which said to be the most beautiful lady in France (her maid Constance is much more beautiful than her), Duke of Buckingham looks more like a rocker to me than a romantic lover and a skillful fighter he should be. Porthos here loose his high gentleman fashion, and become like a villain with harsh manner and bald head. Aramis turns to be a macho man, who is originally more polite and ‘beautiful’.

Story and Plot

From the scenes I watched, several of the plot follows the book with slight alteration: d’Artagnan comes to Paris and got troubled with Three Musketeers, the fight with Cardinal’s guards, the mission of getting Queen’s diamond necklace. But the rest is so absurd. The Three Musketeers together with Milady (yes!) and Duke of Buckingham is competing to get Leonardo da Vinci’s blueprint of an airship; Milady double-crosses Athos (they seem to be lovers here) and gives the blueprint to Buckingham.

But like I said, the plot alteration was not annoying me too much. From the beginning I’d already knew that this would be a typically Hollywood’s action movie with guns and airships battles besides swords fencing. I did not care about the story, but cared more in the characters, which failed me in the end.

Setting and Costumes

I’m just wondering how people can even come to this idea, combining ‘Da Vinci’ thing with guns battle and airship technology? And with lasers too! (the scene of Milady’s stealing the diamond necklace). If they want to make a modern adaptation, why don’t they put modern clothes and modern settings all together? Weird…. :(

I rate this four to ten, and I believe I have been fair enough for that. Why on earth did Matthew MacFadyen and Milla Jovovich ever play in this film anyway??

~~~~~~

I watched this for Books Into Movies Monthly Meme #1

Porthos in The Three Musketeers: Character Thursday (55)

Porthos is, probably, the most uninteresting musketeer from the four inseparable musketeers who served the King of France under Mr. de Treville. From my first encounter with him in Three Musketeers, it’s easy to learn that Porthos adored his appearance so much, that he challenged d’Artagnan for a duel only because d’Artagnan has caught his false golden embroidered belt!

Just like his other comrades, Porthos’ income was not as big as his taste; and like other musketeers too, he used to spend his salary so quickly, that in only few days he would have been moneyless. But again, like other musketeers, Porthos had his charming manner which was quite a gentlemanly appeal for high rank women (ladies and duchesses). From these mistresses, the poor musketeers used to get their ‘second’ salaries. It’s an easy case for Porthos too, with his handsome countenance and well-built massive body.

You can guess, I think, which one is Porthos?...

Porthos might not be very intelligent, but he was brave and loyal. In short, Porthos was a simpleton; he didn’t have many mysteries veiled his life—well, apart from his false golden belt perhaps—like Athos or Aramis, and there’s certainly not any politics in him. His only aim in life was, perhaps, being admired by others as a pure gentleman, being well taken care in terms of clothes and foods, and having enough money to get them. I don’t think he cared much for politics, he’s just loyal to the King and Queen like any other conservative gentlemen who had high adoration to royal figures. And Porthos disliked the Cardinal just because Richelieu opposed the King (and Queen).

Well, Porthos might only be an ordinary gentleman, but later in The Man In The Iron Mask, he would show his quality as a devoted and loyal friend.

That is my Character Thursday of this week, an analysis of book character of my choice, who is yours?... Just put your post URL in the linky below. Do you like to join us in discussing characters from books you read? See the details of Character Thursday first.

The Three Musketeers [Re-read]

This is perhaps my third reading of Alexandre Dumas’ first installment of D’Artagnan Romances series: The Three Musketeers. I read it first as a child (the illustrated abridged version), then read it again several years ago in Bahasa Indonesia translation, and now I got the chance to read it in the English unabridged version, together with Melisa, Maria and Althesia. Surprisingly, even having been familiar with the main plot—especially with the cold-hearted Milady—I was still surprised by some little details scattered within this 555 pages, which I thought I have never known before. Or, was it because I have read Twenty Years After and The Man in the Iron Mask before this that made those details more sense? Maybe….

Anyway, this time I put more attention to the historical facts of this story, The Siege of La Rochelle—the war between France and England in 1627-1628 during the reign of Louis XIII—which I have neglected in, at least, my second reading. La Rochelle was the last city which was inhabited by the Huguenots at that time, and the Cardinal wanted to take it to entirely clean France from the remnants of Calvinism. But this war was also believed (at least according to this story) to be triggered by personal interests of Duke of Buckingham and the Cardinal—who both tried to gain Anne of Austria’s love. Yes! That’s what happened when two powerful people from two countries played at a high stake.

Richelieu in "Siege of La Rochelle", 1881 by Henri Motte

The third reading enabled me to see Cardinal Richelieu as an honorable gentleman, and not merely as an antagonist who would like to destroy the queen, as I perceived before. Even d’Artagnan and the three musketeers paid some respects towards the Cardinal, despite of their dislikes. Richelieu had a mixed feeling towards the four inseparable musketeers, he admired their nobleness, brave, and intelligence, but on the other hand, he would not rest easy while they kept intercepting and ruining his plans. His last interview with d’Artagnan grew my admiration towards the Cardinal.

Rereading this book has also given me chance to follow d’Artagnan from the very early of his career. I could see that the young Gascon had already been possessing courage, intelligence, witty and prudence, even when he was scarcely twenty years of age. One quality that marked his youth off his future life as an adult was his uncontrolled amorous passion. While falling in love with Constance Bonancieux, he could also cultivate a madly attraction to Milady. I am wondering whether, if d’Artagnan met Milady when he was more experienced in his career, would he still be fallen to her charm?

In The Three Musketeers, Dumas poured out all his humour and wittiness in describing his young musketeers’ adventures. He forced me to laugh out loud several times everytime the musketeers were teasing each other; at Aramis, for example, who would be blushing a great deal when the others could guess that ‘a cousin’ means a lady he was courting, and ‘money from selling poems’ came in fact from his lover, instead of a publisher who bought his writing. It was also comical how the musketeers could never save their assets very long; for example when they got four beautiful horses from Duke of Buckingham. Athos—whose weakness was in wine and dice—put the horses at stake, and lost his and d’Artagnan’s; Aramis—with his delicate heart—sold his in low price; while Porthos—well…this is the most hilarious—he made his horse to be delicious foods which the four musketeers enjoyed very much without realizing it at first (except Porthos)! LOL, this scene is very funny indeed! =))

And in that witty manner, we came to know each musketeers’ personalities and secrets. Athos has a noble manner and heart which was sometimes senseless, but he also suffered from a huge burden that made him often drawn in his somber mood, then passed his time in drinking. It was revealed in the end, that he was actually Count de la Ferre, who came from a high rank family in the kingdom, and had a dark history concerning his marriage with Milady. Aramis was a ‘beautiful’ gentleman who adored glamorous style, and had a divine passion to serve the Church as an abbé. It was revealed later that his passion in theology appeared not of any divine reason, but rather as a gloomy reason when his lover was abandoning him! Aramis was the most hypocrite from the four, and whose life was full of mystery and intrigue, but he has the most delicate style in diplomacy—one of the best of all. Porthos was a simpleton whose intellectual was perhaps behind the others, but he was a loyal friend, and of course as brave as others. Porthos was depicted as a handsome and well-built young man who adored high fashion and exquisite gourmets.

From the four, d’Artagnan was definitely the most intelligent one, although his emotional was too unstable to be their leader—we should give that to Athos instead, for his perfect calmness. It’s remarkable to see how the trust between the four was built up so quickly, one solid foundation to their true friendship. Everytime d’Artagnan rushed to pursue something urgent, the others would unquestionably follow his step, always believed that he must have a good judgement for that. And look how the three musketeers gave themselves up to d’Artagnan when they accompanied the Gascon to England for returning the Queen’s diamond studs—an incident which could have had triggered a war between England and France, even before the siege of La Rochelle, had d’Artagnan didn’t possess his iron nerve! What a brilliant and heroic rescue that was!

Although not the best from the series, The Three Musketeers has set a good base for the d’Artagnan Romances; it’s less serious, it’s historical, it’s witty, it’s really entertaining. Four swords—instead of stars :D—from me for the four musketeers. I know now why Dumas gave the title “three” musketeers instead of “four”, it’s because d’Artagnan is the center of the whole series, so it should be: d’Artagnan AND The Three Musketeers, d’Artagnan: Twenty Years After, etc.

One favorite quote of mine, from the last intriguing interview of d’Artagnan and Cardinal Richelieu, a passage which showed d’Artagnan’s noble and brave character—which basically represented all the four musketeers’ characters. This interview was very crucial, because it would fix d’Artagnan future (life or death), and this was d’Artagnan's answer for his ‘defense’….

“My Lord, I swear to you that I have not for one instant thought of defending my head against your eminence. I will submit to whatever punishment your eminence may please to inflict. I do not cling to life sufficiently to fear death.”

~~~~~

*I read the Wordsworth Classics 1993 edition*

*This book is counted for*

3^rd book for Back To The Classics 2013

2^nd book for Read Big! Reading Challenge

1^st book for Historical Fiction Challenge 2013 -2015

36^th book for The Classics Club Project