Post by ronnierocketago on May 26, 2009 4:00:58 GMT
THE MUSKETEER (2001) - **1/2
The tragedy perhaps with director/writer/producer/cinematographer Peter Hyams is that he was born a few decades too late. With his genre-diverse filmography (with mixed results), Hyams would have fit in perfectly with the old school Hollywood studio system, where directors were expected to work numerous genres as more a 9-to-5 job than exploring some artistic theory vision, which typifies most would-be contemporary directors coming out of film schools.
Since most of his movies have been either forgettable or decent, with 2010 (and allegedly OUTLAND) as his real quality efforts, some would easily dismiss Hyams as a journeyman jobber, not leaving much of an auteur imprint. Yet I have sneaking admiration for the guy, though I don't know why exactly. Maybe it's that he lights his own movies (rather well I might say), or that he's willing to tackle different genres? Surprisingly more you would think, both traits describe very few contemporary directors.
But undisputedly the most bizarre of his productions is THE MUSKETEER, yet another adaptation of Alexandre Dumas' classic 17th century Royal French-era novel THE THREE MUSKETEERS. I would respect your intelligence in that you all knew that already, but these days you can't be too careful, or else some folks might assume it was adapted from the candy bar. Go ahead and laugh, but Sir Ridley Scott is adapting the MONOPOLY boardgame, and Peter Berg with BATTLESHIP, so I wouldn't be shocked if we eventually get a big-budget CGI movie based off that (rather delicious) chocolate treat. With seperates Hyams' MUSKETEER from the other previous versions was this scheme of his to combine the swashbuckling sword sub-genre with Hong Kong fight choreography.
Yeah you read that shit right. Just to put things in perspective for you kids too young to remember, a decade ago there came out a little movie called THE MATRIX. It was a sharp shiv to the bowels of American action cinema after several uninspired years of mindless idiotic Michael Bay CGI fests and bored buddy cop/guerilla actioneers. Sure THE MATRIX was the Hollywood culmination of earlier Japanese magna, "wire-fu," and Hong Kong stunts, but none the less it ripped Hollywood a new asshole. This wound intensified after the Chinese drama CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON (which also featured wire-fu) won several Oscars, and was nominated for Best Picture.
Just imagine that wacky pitch by Hyams to Hollywood studios, or whoever originally began this project: "Yeah, its Errol Flynn meets THE MATRIX!"[/i] Honestly I probably would have laughed at such a project, but this was back when Hollywood was rushing to cash in on the success of Keanu Reeves knowing martial arts, so I can't be surprised that Universal and Miramax took the bait. To this day, MUSKETEER has featured the only Hollywood trailer I'm aware of where the Hong Kong stunt team was overtly advertised as the star. Interestingly, while the $40 million budgeted MUSKETEER bombed hard, both studios only paid $7.5 million for the distributions rights and were the only ones involved in this picture to make a profit. Opps.
Those fights are certainly pretty good. I like that one on top of a runaway horse carriage in a forest, and you assume at any moment for the henchman to get clobbered by a branch, yet instead they keep ducking and jumping, defying your expectations. Also enjoyed the fight on the ropes outside the castle tower, even if I wondered why nobody just cut the hero's (Justin Chambers) damn rope and end it? But the real showstopper is this insanely climatic battle involving a giant room and ladders, where at one point the hero and villain Tim Roth (or more like their stunt doubles) use a ladder as a see-saw. I wonder how many weeks were spent in planning that one sequence. Why would such an empty room would just happen to have ladders stacked together? Who cares?
Which perfectly expresses my opinion of the rest of THE MUSKETEER, for there is very little to enjoy beyond the fights. Hyams does his best to embrace this adventure tradition with its staples: hero able to command his horse on command whistle, him and the other Musketeers infiltrating a fortress by knocking out guards and stealing their uniforms, supposed swordsman code of heroics, Chambers in creaky wood attic looking at possible love interest (Mena Suvari) in a compromising position and floor collapses, hammy baddie with eyepatch, henchmen only fighting hero one at a time, lovely damsel in distrress, and so forth.
I think I realized MUSKETEER might be screwed when Hyams featured two groan-inducing moments: That shot of Chambers' mentor whipping out automatically pistols from his sleeves (oh jeez), and the Queen of France (Catherine Deneuve) joining in a bar brawl. You have to be fucking kidding me. What is she doing in this movie anyway?The script is terribly uninspired and dry. I mean swashbucklers are supposed to be lively entertaining popcorn, yet there is no magic in anticipation for the action, which is part of the cavalier fun if you ask me. I was sorta bored.
Shit it's predictable, but not in the grinning predictable fashion where you snuggle with the cliches because that's how you play the game (which I seem to do with most actioneers). Here it's just....predictable. Then again, what else did I expect from a Gene Quintano screenplay, considering he previously penned several POLICE ACADEMY movies and even that bland Jean Claude Van Damme vehicle SUDDEN DEATH which Hyams helmed.
Chambers is fucking dull as the supposed charismatic greenhorn D'Artagnan, out for revenge against Mr. Roth who apparently murdered his parents in front of him. Well everyone has got their own problems. Really, I'm supposed to care about the hero, right? Worse, the whole movie is supposed to revolve around him, everybody else just shallow pillars for him. The other Musketeers, you know those who were the basis of the damn book title are almost irrelevant and non-existent. Look I understand this is called MUSKETEER, not MUSKETEERS, but come on. That's about as dumb as making an A-TEAM movie and only focusing on Mr. T. Alright, bad example, but you get my point. Anyway, Mr. Chambers flopped with MUSKETEER but now is on that GREY'S ANATOMY program which I've never watched, and I don't give a shit.
Chambers and Suvari have zero romantic chemistry, and that scene by the lake is painfully trite. At one point, she gets shot and its so melodramatic and...I didn't care. There is this silly running gag of how there is supposedly an aligator in the sewers of the Royal Palace. It never appears, but man I wished it did randomly pop out of nowhere like in DEEP BLUE SEA and grab some random peasant or soldier for a snack. I mean it would have been fresh and surprising, but nooooooo. It guess it was too much for the budget.
Thankfully I almost....almost...forgave alot of that snooze time because of Roth. Now granted, here he basically is playing a watered-down cardboard retake of his Oscar-nominated Archibald Cunningham from ROB ROY, maybe one of the best villains of the 1990s as far as I'm concerned. But a zero calories, sugar free Diet Cunningham is very much welcome in MUSKETEER. When he threatens to slash some kid's throat to make someone write a letter, and she asks if he has any mercy in his heart. He replies: "No heart, no mercy." It's such a dorky line, and yet Roth makes it stone cold gold.
I also loved when confronted by an old friend to a sword fight, Roth without hesitation takes his revolver out and shoots him. See I can appreciate and admire such obvious smarts from a no-bullshit adversary. I gotta admit, there is one decent idea in Hyams' interpretation of the Three Musketeers outside of the action. Usually the bad guy Cardinal Richelieu (Stephen Rea) is portrayed as the all-powerful, untouchable schemer for power. Hyams retains that concept, except adds SCARFACE dynamics where Roth effectively emasculates the Cardinal out of his own diabolical plot. I liked that.
At times I was involved in the material's nature as I supposed Hyams intended, so MUSKETEER isn't technically a bad film, it's just barely watchable. The only reason you might to check this film out is for those fights (especially the climax), or something to wash out your memories of Roth in a monkey suit in Tim Burton's PLANET OF THE APES, or to see if this is better or worse than that lame Disney version with Jack Bauer and Robin.
Off-topic, but I figured Peter Hyams' career had curled up and died after A SOUND OF THUNDER, but he's got a new movie out later this year with Michael Douglas. BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT is a remake of a Fritz Lang film noir title, which would make this the second time that Hyams has remade a 1950s thriller, after his decent NARROW MARGIN with Gene Hackman. This doesn't look like a cinema breakthrough or genre revolution at all, but I wouldn't expect anything else from Hyams.