What's up with the crazy guns....I will go to see this though...
http://www.youtube.com/user/SummitScreeningRoom?v=hv7ha_iCM2Y&feature=pyv&ad=8310338412&kw=
I REALLY want to see this! :)
Anxiously awaiting this myself. And I get to dress up at work too. ;D
Another take on the classic story. This too is on my MUST-SEE list. In October too!!
A very good cast. From what I have seen from many stills, the Costuming is to die for!! Spot on and colorful.
It looks great. It also looks to be in a steampunk theme. ;D
Please forgive the following rant.
I haven't seen much about this new Musketeer movie, but why would anyone take a perfectly good classic story and modify it away from the original? For example, the Disney Three Musketeer movie had nothing to do with the Alexander Dumas story except for the names of characters and that it took place in France.
If they MUST warp a story, I wish they would change the name to avoid confusion not to mention tainting the quality of a rousing tale. Steampunk in the 17th century???
At least when they turned Romeo & Juliet into a musucal they changed the name to West Side Story. Now a days they would call it "Romeo & Juliet II, In the City"
Thank you for your attention. (Soapbox replaced)
The trailer has these Air Ships (blimps?) that look very steampunk to me. http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/ (http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/)
Quote from: Seaman Blurt on September 28, 2011, 07:25:34 AM
The trailer has these Air Ships (blimps?) that look very steampunk to me. http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/ (http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/)
That is what I mean. The first hot air balloon ride was in 1783. First they change the story then they change history to fit their "artistic view". It seems like people have stopped being original and are changing (warping) the work of others to suit themselves and their percieved audience. I do wish they had named it something else. Some kid will see this movie then read the book expecting battles with 'sky-ships'.' I do not think I shall give them the benefit of my presence or hard earned cash.
Quote from: KeeperoftheBar on September 28, 2011, 10:05:20 AM
Quote from: Seaman Blurt on September 28, 2011, 07:25:34 AM
The trailer has these Air Ships (blimps?) that look very steampunk to me. http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/ (http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/)
That is what I mean. The first hot air balloon ride was in 1783. First they change the story then they change history to fit their "artistic view". It seems like people have stopped being original and are changing (warping) the work of others to suit themselves and their percieved audience. I do wish they had named it something else. Some kid will see this movie then read the book expecting battles with 'sky-ships'.' I do not think I shall give them the benefit of my presence or hard earned cash.
you have a point, though i dont think kids read much these days unless it it reqired for school, and then it would just to read the cliff notes. Even, i have never read the original 3 musketeers *ducks*I have only seen movies based on the story. I am very easily entertained and being that i dont know the original book, i am not too disapointed
Just once, I wish that they would actually make a movie of the original book. The 70s one with Michael York was close but not quite.
Quote from: KeeperoftheBar on September 28, 2011, 10:05:20 AM
Quote from: Seaman Blurt on September 28, 2011, 07:25:34 AM
The trailer has these Air Ships (blimps?) that look very steampunk to me. http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/ (http://www.threemusketeers-movie.com/)
Some kid will see this movie then read the book expecting battles with 'sky-ships'.'
It's a bonus if some kid actually reads the book!
I'll bet there have been at least a couple of dozen film adaptions of this story, with varying degrees of accuracy to the book. Kids are pretty aware that movies usually differ from their source material, which honestly can sometimes be hard to adapt into the confines of filmed entertainment.
Having said all that, I'm already sold on this movie thanks to the presence of the supreme being in it.
Since Steampunk is one of the new fads is why you have the steampunk look in the movie. You want to appeal to your customer and you won't always do it 100 percent of them. Its a chance they are taking we will see if it pays off.
Oh please tell me they arn't doing it in 3D i am so tired of that crap.
Well i will go and see it but probably on tuesday since that is half price for where i go and i will sit in the balcony where they will serve me liqour if the movie is that bad.
Well it is in 3D, but around here at least you can see most stuff in 2D as well.
I don't mind the 3D gimmick most of the time, I'm not as tired of it as I am steampunk! I don't like paying 2 or 3 bucks extra to see it though!
You are lucky Zard.
Where i like to see a movie and i do know i pay for what i want.
Cost $10 for regular ticket, add $5 to be in the balcony (bigger seats they serve you food and no one under 18 allowed after 6pm), than an extra $4 for 3d bring it up to $19 for a movie.
As an Assistant Manager at a local theater for a fairly large theater chain, I can sadly say I am seeing more and more of "Let us take old tales, twist them and claim innovation." types of movies AND books more and more these days. I miss new stories and tales more and more.
Just a trivia tidbit here. I do not know all the technical specs, but there are 2 types of 3D. One looks great (Avatar) and the other is generic (Clash of the Titans)
I see a big trend in shoving 3D on everyone, and most (including me ) are not all that eager or impressed to jump on that wagon. They are pushing even harder now that 3D televisions are available. And I don't care myself to have it shoved at me. When the newest Conan was released, we were only allowed to show 2D in the afternoons, all evening shows were 3D only. ( and attendance was crap, FYI ) And also many up and coming are going to be 3D period. Sad but true.
Also seeing a definite trend towards Steampunk. I do believe they are getting in on the fad for sure. they have been experimenting with it for quite some time, as I remember the "Wild Wild West" movie with Wil Smith as being one of the first I noted it in. The recent Sherlock Holmes (and the new one coming soon ) with Robert Downey also dabbles in it.
As a side note, one movie ( Not Ren Genre, though ) that appears to at least be somewhat of a new idea is "In Time." While I am no Justin Timberlake fan whatsoever, the story itself has more than intrigued me to see it. But I will likely wait for a few reviews first.
But I am getting off track. Yes, another re-re-telling of a classic. I just try to remember that perhaps another author had quite a different viewpoint of a story, sort of like reading two different eyewitness accounts of an event. Or perhaps in differing dimensions or planes of existence, things are VERY different. Many stories subscribe to that notion as well.
But good or bad, I will certainly see this one as I have seen them all. Wouldn't want to break up the set or anything. ;D
(Side note: some pretty hefty prices there, folks. Ours is 6.75 on matinée times, 3 bucks for 3d and 8.75 evenings, also 3 bucks if 3D. Sorry, no balconies though. Come visit, I can get ya in free. ;D )
The plus with the place i go it is half price on tuesday so $9.50 if 3D but normal is $7.50.
As for the balcony like i said bigger seats for my big butt and i'm not elbowing the person next to me. Plus you can order anything off thier menu for the resturant and they have a full bar to order from served to you up to before the movie starts.
Quote from: Francisco Paula on September 28, 2011, 03:01:02 PM
As for the balcony like i said bigger seats for my big butt and i'm not elbowing the person next to me. Plus you can order anything off thier menu for the resturant and they have a full bar to order from served to you up to before the movie starts.
But that takes all the fun out of smuggling in items. One time in college, a girl I was dating and I snuck in a 1.5 liter bottle of wine. With it under her sweatshirt she looked pregnant so I took credit for the deed.
I don't care if you smuggle stuff in. Concession items are outrageously priced. It's the small few that do that then spread the trash across half the theater afterwards that annoy me.
So Keeper...were you the proud father of a Chardonnay or...? ;D
Sorry forgot to mention that the seats are set up like love seats where you don't have to have the arm rest between you and your date. Another i like is hmm $10 for a large popcorn or $10 for lobster nachos or a burger or a mini pizza.....then there is there onion rings that are to die for. It really makes it nice for a night out for a couple you have dinner and the movie and don't have to rush through dinner to make a show time.
Now back to the subject, i will probably go on half price tuesday check the movie out and see how it is. I also find you are better off judging each movie or book on its own not how it compared to other movies and such.
when we saw trailer the first thing we thought was, 'Not another Van Helsing'. That means it looks costumes to die for, technically amazing, visually eye candy, but story and acting wise... poo poo.
I have been watching the previews on TV recently and the the thing I hate (3D or regular) is the unrealistic dueling scenes
ala the the Musketeer. I mean c'mon repelling down a tower dueling with 5 dozen or more opponents. Give me
Cyrano(1950), or Scaramouche(1952) anyday.
The "crouching tiger" effects are making me double guess seeing this. Those that like those types of films probably won't want to see this, and those that like period pieces don't want that in this type of film.
Yes I have to agree with alot of you, ever since my wife and I began seeing the trailer for this film, we felt that alot of the scenes they showed seemed very silly to us. Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for suspension of belief (within reason and provided that it is an important ingredient of the film ala The Matrix etc), but like someone else already said, all that Crouching Tiger stuff just doesn't look right for a film of this genre. And so for us this movie is a definite pass for us. Oh well my favorite version is the Michael York, Oliver Reed, Frank Finley and Richard Chamberlain anyway.
We'll be seeing it, if for no other reason than it's the only thing playing right now in this genre.
I wish the makers of the two Elizabeth movies would continue, using other characters from that era. There hasn't been a decent Mary QOS or even Henry VIII in ages.
Quote from: LadyStitch on September 28, 2011, 08:00:13 PM
when we saw trailer the first thing we thought was, 'Not another Van Helsing'. That means it looks costumes to die for, technically amazing, visually eye candy, but story and acting wise... poo poo.
Have to agree with Lady Stitch, not a movie to be taken seriously, just going for the garb and one liners.
Quote from: Rowen MacD on September 27, 2011, 09:55:33 AM
What's up with the crazy guns....I will go to see this though...
http://www.youtube.com/user/SummitScreeningRoom?v=hv7ha_iCM2Y&feature=pyv&ad=8310338412&kw=
the color is insane on that, so vibrant. but still to much CGI, going to be fun to watch
I am thinking of bribeing my sister to watch my my kiddo so I can go see this. It has been ages since I have seen a movie in theaters that wasnt animated.
I think I want to see this film, although it does look a bit steampunkish for me. :P
I'm all about de steampunk. However, since this does not appear to be a science fiction take on the story, this is not the place for it. Frankly I was so excited about a new Dumas adaptation that I didn't even notice the sp elements. And the ninja-ish guy emerging from the water? Not so much. I will see it because I will basically watch or read anything that is in any form or fashion, Dumas. And costumes!
Just went to the Midnight showing of 'The Three Musketeers'..LOVED IT!!! Time well spent.
Fun, humorous, well paced, great costuming, loved the hats of Milady de Winter and of the King, and excellent cast. I did not mind at all the liberties taken that were not early 17th century. This is a film I would surely see again and buy once it gets onto DVD.
i think i want to see it after seeing a previews for it i want to see it
Quote from: Lady Kathleen of Olmsted on October 21, 2011, 02:43:03 AM
Just went to the Midnight showing of 'The Three Musketeers'..LOVED IT!!! Time well spent.
Fun, humorous, well paced, great costuming, loved the hats of Milady de Winter and of the King, and excellent cast. I did not mind at all the liberties taken that were not early 17th century. This is a film I would surely see again and buy once it gets onto DVD.
My Lady, have you ever read the actual book? It is extremely good and I hardily recommend it.
My objection with this movie, which I have not and will not see, is the association to Dumas' classic. If they had named it almost anything else, I would have no problem.
Alas, I am getting old and set in my ways.
Of course I have read the Book, Keeper! Way back in high school some 40+ years ago! What makes you think I have not?
There have been so many versions of this classic tale. You may not desire to see this film, that is okay. Don't! I did not like the Kiefer Sutherland/Charlie Sheen version. My favorite is the Richard Chamberlain/Oliver Reed/Frank Finlay/Michael York version and this one.
This version is geared for today's audience, yet very enjoyable.
Quote from: Lady Kathleen of Olmsted on October 21, 2011, 11:21:47 AM
Of course I have read the Book, Keeper! Way back in high school some 40+ years ago! What makes you think I have not?
There have been so many versions of this classic tale. You may not desire to see this film, that is okay. Don't! I did not like the Kiefer Sutherland/Charlie Sheen version. My favorite is the Richard Chamberlain/Oliver Reed/Frank Finlay/Michael York version and this one.
This version is geared for today's audience, yet very enjoyable.
Forgive me, my Lady, no offense was meant. But in todays troubled world, fewer and fewer people are taking time to appreciate the written word.
I agree, the 70's movie version was by far the best. Possibly because it did stay so closely to the book. You have very likely also read the sequels "Twenty Years After" and "Man in the Iron Mask"
As I stated, I fear that people will associate a piece of classic literature with a movie that is "geared for today's audience", which I feel is just wrong. I suspect that the producers of the film are worried it can not stand on its own merits and are using Duma's novel to bring in the viewers. Imagine some young reader being disappointed that the book doesn't have flying ships, like in the movie. I had the same qualms with the old movie "Poltergeist" as it had noting to do with poltergeists. If they had called it "Weird things from the TV" I would have enjoyed it more.
I am feeling my age. Now that Andy Rooney has retired, I may seek the position of America's Curmudgeon.
No offense taken, Keeper.
Loved Man In The Iron Mask.
Quote from: KeeperoftheBar on October 21, 2011, 12:49:06 PM
Quote from: Lady Kathleen of Olmsted on October 21, 2011, 11:21:47 AM
Of course I have read the Book, Keeper! Way back in high school some 40+ years ago! What makes you think I have not?
There have been so many versions of this classic tale. You may not desire to see this film, that is okay. Don't! I did not like the Kiefer Sutherland/Charlie Sheen version. My favorite is the Richard Chamberlain/Oliver Reed/Frank Finlay/Michael York version and this one.
This version is geared for today's audience, yet very enjoyable.
But in todays troubled world, fewer and fewer people are taking time to appreciate the written word.
I am feeling my age. Now that Andy Rooney has retired, I may seek the position of America's Curmudgeon.
Agree with the written works lament. One of the reasons I laud the Kindle varieties as it at least has regenerated more actual reading interests for some.
And just tell me where to vote you in. ;D
We did a sneak preview showing of both versions of the new movie (2D and 3D ) last night and it met with some interest and mixed reviews, mostly those between modern ideas and old school.
My 80 year old father and I saw it in 3D today, big thumbs up from us! While it obviously deviates from the source material, it is a nice looking movie, and we thought the general 'feel' and characters were pretty good. It has a lot of humor and clever dialog.
We will be seeing this next weekend (we got sidetracked by 'Real Steel' last Saturday).
I have read the book, but will admit that I want to see the movie primarily for the costumes and scenery. The story has been told ad nauseum, and I don't expect stellar acting from this group of performers.
I have also read Hunchback of Notredame. I loved the book, and still managed to enjoy the live action and Disney versions too.
My boy toy and I saw it this past weekend.
I will be honest I went into it with a bit of trepidation and ended up loving it.
Don't take it as THE three musketeers movie or story from the book.
Think of it as 'one of the many adventures of the three musketeers".
I thought the writing and the actors did a great job of embodying the spirit and personality of the characters and bringing them to life.
Surprisingly my least favorite actor in the movie was Mila Jovovich and I love her. I will see anything she is in ( I even saw Ultraviolet in theaters because it was a her).
Quote from: Auryn on October 25, 2011, 01:58:56 PM
Surprisingly my least favorite actor in the movie was Mila Jovovich and I love her. I will see anything she is in ( I even saw Ultraviolet in theaters because it was a her).
She was my least favorite as well (though I'm not sure I've ever seen her in anything before). I think she took the movie too seriously. Because clearly, this was the biggest cheese-fest ever. (In a good way!) Two friends and I went in costume late last Saturday night. The action was entertaining, the sword-fighting was really good, the movie itself was totally hilarious, and while the costumes were historically confusing, they still looked beautiful. I thought Louis and Anne had an adorably awkward romance, and Orlando Bloom hammed it up wonderfully. The whole thing was a delightful ham and cheese-whiz sandwich. I've been debating about seeing it again.