The Three Musketeers
In 3D, with airships. Should probably have been billed in full as Dumas' The Three Musketeers + Assassin's Creed + Inception + Final Fantasy IX - acting. Some fine actors took part in this movie, and they were specifically instructed to keep it acting-free. Christoph Waltz couldn't quite hold the line; he had actual chemistry with Juno Temple**, who played Queen Anne, and I think it threw him off. Other than that unfortunate blip, though, everyone stayed safely within the chewy camp / delicious cheese / parody skit night triangle.
The latter-day Sherlock Holmes adaptations are the obvious benchmarks here. Like the RDJ movie-verse, the more of a canon nerd you are, the more there is to pay attention to, because the script is at all times either being authentic to the throwaway (eg. Planchet) or subverting/undercutting the original for the lulz (eg. the Buckingham/Anne "romance"). Analogously to Moffat and Gatiss - who talk constantly about capturing the mood of the Rathbone films - the people who made THE THREE MUSKETEERS 3D clearly consider the nec plus ultra of screen Dumas adaptations to be:
1) The 70s Russian teleseries, i.e. the one with The Soundtrack Made From Electric Guitars(tm)
2) The 80s Japanese animated series, i.e. the one where D'Artagnan had a boy sidekick and Aramis was a girl trying to get revenge for her dead fiance
I would be lying if I said I didn't agree with them. As well as a related principle applicable to Hollywood in particular:
3) English-language adaptations of The Three Musketeers must feature a constellation of bad accent work calibrated to elicit the maximum amount of hilarity from Colonel Hans Landa
The problem is that, in retrospect, people assume the success of the RDJ Holmes movie and assimilate its influence accordingly, whereas upfront that film succeeded at the box office for two reasons that had nothing to do with its content: it involved RDJ, and it was the obvious second choice at theatres that December when Avatar sold out. What people thought of it after they saw it is a whole other question, but I slot both these movies as playing to minority aesthetics within the hardcore fandom itself. Like sororial unit, for instance, who has wanted Dumas to beef up the Athos/Milady moe since she was 7. It's what Kate Beaton does to History, and she's a NYT best seller.
When I think of Dumas' original book, these days, I see it bookended by two set pieces: D'Artagnan's arrival in Paris, which gets my vote as the single best action sequence (setup and payoff) ever committed to paper, and Milady's seduction and corruption of Felton, at the very least a milestone in the historical development of the psychological thriller. The former is essentially the action set piece equivalent of Hamlet's "2B or not 2B" speech -- the thing itself can't really be ruined, what I'm watching for in an adaptation is execution. Forex, Aramis's characterization. It's sort of like coming up with a new take on Mercutio or Malvolio: most swing too hard (IMO) toward ladykiller!Aramis or politician!Aramis, but this is the first time I've seen Aramis as, basically, Arthur out of Inception. What's more frightening about this is that it immediately and plausibly makes Athos Cobb, Milady a telescoping of Mal and Eames, and D'Artagnan Ariadne. Which leaves me with an unrequited desire to see Ellen Page play Katherine out of The Privilege of the Sword.
Other thoughts:
1) On top of it all, this movie turned out to be an effective use of 3D technology - better than anything I've seen since Tron, and much brighter.
2) Subverts Screenwriting 101 (eg. the plan that we hear about must go wrong) as much as Dumas
3) At one point I was like, "Would it be churlish to mention that this airship battle is BS because *****", and then they actually *****.
4) The first Hollywood version of the book that sets up sequels! (Improving on Dumas, because I think even Dumas would rather have had Milady herself than un version en laid.) I am excite. At this point they could plausibly do Bragelonne and Iron Mask without the timeskip, or any attention to IRL historical events whatsoever. XD
** Lola The Nymphet from Atonement! I checked on imdb, it drove me nuts for the entire film that I couldn't place her. (I also never connected Lola The Nymphet with Celia St. Trinian's.) This despite the fact that I think she was doing the same voice.
I have figured out how to add the footer on a crosspost! Go me! /rollsalot (Original post is here: http://petronia.dreamwidth.org/29074.html)
The latter-day Sherlock Holmes adaptations are the obvious benchmarks here. Like the RDJ movie-verse, the more of a canon nerd you are, the more there is to pay attention to, because the script is at all times either being authentic to the throwaway (eg. Planchet) or subverting/undercutting the original for the lulz (eg. the Buckingham/Anne "romance"). Analogously to Moffat and Gatiss - who talk constantly about capturing the mood of the Rathbone films - the people who made THE THREE MUSKETEERS 3D clearly consider the nec plus ultra of screen Dumas adaptations to be:
1) The 70s Russian teleseries, i.e. the one with The Soundtrack Made From Electric Guitars(tm)
2) The 80s Japanese animated series, i.e. the one where D'Artagnan had a boy sidekick and Aramis was a girl trying to get revenge for her dead fiance
I would be lying if I said I didn't agree with them. As well as a related principle applicable to Hollywood in particular:
3) English-language adaptations of The Three Musketeers must feature a constellation of bad accent work calibrated to elicit the maximum amount of hilarity from Colonel Hans Landa
The problem is that, in retrospect, people assume the success of the RDJ Holmes movie and assimilate its influence accordingly, whereas upfront that film succeeded at the box office for two reasons that had nothing to do with its content: it involved RDJ, and it was the obvious second choice at theatres that December when Avatar sold out. What people thought of it after they saw it is a whole other question, but I slot both these movies as playing to minority aesthetics within the hardcore fandom itself. Like sororial unit, for instance, who has wanted Dumas to beef up the Athos/Milady moe since she was 7. It's what Kate Beaton does to History, and she's a NYT best seller.
When I think of Dumas' original book, these days, I see it bookended by two set pieces: D'Artagnan's arrival in Paris, which gets my vote as the single best action sequence (setup and payoff) ever committed to paper, and Milady's seduction and corruption of Felton, at the very least a milestone in the historical development of the psychological thriller. The former is essentially the action set piece equivalent of Hamlet's "2B or not 2B" speech -- the thing itself can't really be ruined, what I'm watching for in an adaptation is execution. Forex, Aramis's characterization. It's sort of like coming up with a new take on Mercutio or Malvolio: most swing too hard (IMO) toward ladykiller!Aramis or politician!Aramis, but this is the first time I've seen Aramis as, basically, Arthur out of Inception. What's more frightening about this is that it immediately and plausibly makes Athos Cobb, Milady a telescoping of Mal and Eames, and D'Artagnan Ariadne. Which leaves me with an unrequited desire to see Ellen Page play Katherine out of The Privilege of the Sword.
Other thoughts:
1) On top of it all, this movie turned out to be an effective use of 3D technology - better than anything I've seen since Tron, and much brighter.
2) Subverts Screenwriting 101 (eg. the plan that we hear about must go wrong) as much as Dumas
3) At one point I was like, "Would it be churlish to mention that this airship battle is BS because *****", and then they actually *****.
4) The first Hollywood version of the book that sets up sequels! (Improving on Dumas, because I think even Dumas would rather have had Milady herself than un version en laid.) I am excite. At this point they could plausibly do Bragelonne and Iron Mask without the timeskip, or any attention to IRL historical events whatsoever. XD
** Lola The Nymphet from Atonement! I checked on imdb, it drove me nuts for the entire film that I couldn't place her. (I also never connected Lola The Nymphet with Celia St. Trinian's.) This despite the fact that I think she was doing the same voice.
I have figured out how to add the footer on a crosspost! Go me! /rollsalot (Original post is here: http://petronia.dreamwidth.org/29074.html)