Finally, a film to show me exactly what it would have been like in the 17th century if balloon ships flew around and blew shit up!
To be fair, Paul W. Anderson’s Three Musketeers seems to possess a… well… a pep that the fourth Pirates film lacked. If you’re going to make this kind of movie, by god it better be super-charged stupidity. And that’s what we have here, a Pirates film by way of Sherlock Holmes, with all of the cheesy slow-motion, swashbuckling and anachronistic disregard that you would expect. Nothing about the filmmaking indicates that PWA has suddenly upped his pay-grade, but the film looks big and bright. Most importantly, it looks like there may be a decent rapport between the musketeers and their younger companion. Then you’ve got Christoph Waltz to chew scenery, and Orland Bloom’s hair/make-up to chew scenery as well. Some of those things will probably work.
So does The Three Musketeers may have enough moving parts to eek out the kind of ultimately-cinema-damaging “eh, that wasn’t as bad as I expected” that has plagued much of the summer (at least from where I sit)? Maybe, if the aggressive disregard for Anderson doesn’t drag too much baggage into the mix.
Now kids, remember that you can’t spell “Paul W.S. Anderson” without “Anal Wounds!”
The film happens October 14th, 2011 in oh-so-dead-and-buried 3D
DISCUSS THIS on the CHUD Message Board
Like / Share it on Facebook (above or below) if you think it’s great!