Help support TMP


POLL: Regarding 3 & 4 Musketeers


83 votes were cast.


Back to POLLS home page


Dennis writes:

No, you're not the only one to notice it and we had a discussion last summer which, I think, covered the issue pretty throughly:

TMP link

My take on it is that Dumas wrote Three Musketeers as the story of D'artagnan beginning as a young hick from the sticks maturing into the only true adult among the musketeers. The change in tone is from that of a youth seeing Paris, the Court and the life as a musketeer as a bright, glorious adventure to that of a mature adult accepting and managing a world full of responsibilities and disappointments. The musketeers start out as larger-than-life heroes for D'artagnan to admire, and, as he matures, they become a part of his youth he has outgrown.

Richard Lester's Three and Four Musketeers are not the only movies to follow this evolving storyline as found in the original book (pretty much divided by the book's two stories, The Queen's Diamonds and Milady's Revenge). The 1948 (IIRC) Gene Kelly version also grows darker as the story progresses-it would be difficult to tell the story otherwise as the first part is about casual infidelity and a trick with diamonds thwarted by the musketeers and what a wonderful thing it was to be a musketeer, while the second is about the murder of Constance and the judicial murder of milady De Winter and the repercussions from the two deaths and D'artgnan's acceptance of doing what needed to be done. Perhaps Lester's films make this point more obvious because they were split into two films-IMHO a better way to handle the story and change in mood because it allowed more screen time to develop the stories.

In any event, I don't think you could maintain a light-hearted mood throughout and do justice to Dumas' stories.

I also think, as Ross has said, that the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit tell much the same sort of story about the Hobbits-particularly Bilbo, Frodo and Samwise.

Oh, and the Three and Four Musketeers were filmed at the same time. There was even a lawsuit resulting from that fact. IIRC, the producers, the Salkands, wanted to pay the actors for one film project while the actors wanted to be paid for two films. I believe the actors eventually won the dispute. As I recall, Wikipedia-or something of the sort-has a nice summary of the dispute.


Back to the Homepage


Areas of Interest

Renaissance

489 hits since 24 Feb 2019
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

If you were a member of this website, you could participate in website polls. Would you like a free membership?

VOTING RESULTS
AnswerVotes%Chart
none of these/no opinion
8
10%
bar of chart
this is ridiculous
0
0%
 
I've never heard of these movies
4
5%
bar of chart
no, I have not noticed the difference
16
19%
bar of chart
I've never seen these movies
12
14%
bar of chart
yes, the movies are definitely different
42
51%
bar of chart
other (explain)
1
1%
bar of chart
POLL IS CLOSED
POLL DESCRIPTION

Gunfreak Supporting Member of TMP writes:

Now those movies were shot as one film, yet I feel distinct difference in style for those movies. The first one is very slapstick and has little gravity.

While the silliness and slapstick is still there in the second. It is a more serious tone to it, very few actually die in the first one, in the second far more "henchmen" meeting a final end. And of course three central characters die in it. The overall tone is darker too, the Athos-Milady story is far more serious and menacing. "Have you ever seen a woman shot in the stomach?"

Am I the only one who's noticed this?

Poll set up by Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian, based on this pre-poll discussion.