La Femme Musketeer (2004) User Reviews

Michael York out-acts his screen 'daughter'

[Igenlode Wordsmith · 7/10 · 30 January 2005]

This actually isn't that bad. Historically it's complete rubbish, of course (and why is *D'Artagnan* always the one who ends up with a daughter instead of a son? -- see the enjoyable "D'Artagnan's Daughter" of 1994, for example!) and Susie Amy's unfortunate accent grates every time she opens her mouth, but as modern-day swashbucklers go, it was refreshingly free from knowing allusions and would-be updating of the genre. It was just played straight out for the adventure, and all the better for it.

The 'younger generation' - the sons of Athos, Porthos and Aramis - were well-written, acquiring individuality of their own even before we found out who they were supposed to be, and not just clones of their respective fathers. I loved Aramis's offspring as a devout gambler, and Athos' as a cocky womaniser... The Musketeers themselves I thought bore relatively little relation to the characters of the book, with the exception of Michael York's very welcome reprise of his classic role as D'Artagnan. Experience really does show, I'm afraid; he completely acted Susie Amy, for one, off the screen. I'd far rather remember him this way than in the terminally un-funny 'Return of the Musketeers' from 1989 -- a corpse that should have been let lie if ever there was one -- and was extremely appreciative of the opportunity.

I watched the first episode on a whim. I was sufficiently hooked to bother to video-tape the following one when I knew I was going to be out... and bother to watch it immediately I got back, an accolade if ever there was one!

An attractive-looking cast. Good comradeship, avoiding too-obvious romance. Depardieu, playing an Italian-speaking character in a Francophone milieu with a heavy French accent, was out of place, and poor Susie's lower-class London tones were equally inappropriate. Not a classic... but far from the embarrassing mess it could have been.

Valentine D'Artagnan joins up with her dad and his three comrades, plus their sons, to save Louis XIV from Mazarin's scheming

[Terrell-4 · 7/10 · 3 May 2009]

In this Hallmark TV production Louis XIV is still under the thumb of Cardinal Mazarin (Gerard Depardieu). It's 1660, and the Cardinal will brook no opposition. Mazarin sees personal advantage in continuing the war with Spain, but the callow Louis is beginning to think otherwise. Then there's the king's arranged marriage to the Spanish Princess Maria Theresa, the pesky possibility that Louis just might not be rightful king of France and the festering resentments of Mazarin's deadly creature, Francois Villeroi. A certain letter is all Mazarin needs to keep Louis under his control. Cardinal Mazarin doesn't hesitate to turn those who oppose him into angels.

All this has nothing to do -- yet -- with Valentine D'Artagnan (Susie Amy), who was taught to fight with a sword by her father and who is determined to be accepted as a Musketeer. D'Artagnan (Michael York) sends her off to Paris with his encouragement. "You've got two good reasons to be brave," he tells her. "First, you're a Gascon. Second, you're my daughter. Always fight at the least provocation and never submit to insults or edicts. Above all, remember who you are...a D'Artagnan!"

It's not long before Valentine is up to her pommel trying to save the king and to foil Mazarin's schemes. She is accused of murder by Mazarin's beautiful agent, Lady Bolton (Nastassja Kinski) and must rescue the Princess. Valentine often skewers members of the Cardinal's Guards. Even with the aid of the three sons of Porthos, Athos and Aramis, who have just been accepted as Musketeers themselves, all looks like France might be lost. But then the old men show up. With Valentine and their sons by their sides, they show how it's done. Although we're an hour into the 170 minute production before they appear and the movie isn't about them, there's something poignant, amusing and inspiring when we see the aging D'Artagnan, Athos (Christopher Cazenove), Aramis (Alan Corduner) and Porthos (John Rhys-Davies), heavier now, gray, a little slower and often used for comedy relief, answer the call to honor and arms. We don't see as much of the four as we'd like, but they help make the movie.

On the TV movie's plus side: Those actors who can actually act -- mainly the older ones -- do a fine job. The production values are high. The story, however drawn out it becomes, still contains enough of Dumas' great swashbuckling tales of derring-do, evil, honor and action to be entertaining. Bringing in the sons of those three musketeers, then their fathers plus D'Artagnan himself, gives a nice glow to the story.

On the minus side, too many of the under-30 actors have that wrinkleless, earnest and unexciting talent found in network television comedies. Depardieu, while one of the world's great actors, has never been at his best trying to act in English. This movie is no exception. And there are all those corny back flips, rollovers and sword twirling during fights, usually by Valentine. The great weakness, however, is the lack of style. The production is pleasant but, as Cyrano would say, it has no panache.

To see a first-class version of what the daughter of D'Artagnan, aided by her dad and his old comrades, can accomplish with great style, humor and adventure, watch Bernard Tavernier's La Fille de D'Artagnan, renamed Revenge of the Musketeers for the U.S. DVD release. Sophie Marceau plays an energetic Eloise D'Artagnan and Philippe Noiret is her father. When she recruits him and his three comrades to save Louis XIV, look out. Eloise is almost as good with a sword as they are. And they, although sometimes out of breath, are still the best around.

Don't know why, but...

[smartydaren · 7/10 · 21 January 2005]

I don't know why but I actually liked this show. It was entertaining, funny, sexy and overall fun to watch. John-Ryphus was great in it, I haven't seen enough of him and it was a refreshing thing (and appropriate) to see him in this. Usually shows coming from this network are a bit on the lower end-scale, but this one was better. I gave it a 7 out of 10 which as i mentioned for this network is good. I usually do not rate their work this high. This is an old story told a thousand times by a thousand different filmmakers and for some reason I actually enjoyed this one. Anytime La Femme is used in a title, I have found it to be something worth watching for one reason or another.

Entertaining 2-hour movie on a 3-hour US DVD.

[therica · 12 August 2004]

An entertaining 2-hour movie, fluffed to 3 hours on the US DVD release. It's rather entertaining, for the most part, except that there are great lulls in the action as well as the main plot.

The movie frequently pauses on trivial scenes which focus on unnecessary personal interactions between characters. I suppose if they cut those parts, the original movie might have moved more quickly and yet possibly too quickly for younger child-audiences, and since this is indeed a Hallmark made-for-television mini-series, it's understandable and somehow tolerable.

All of the action/fight-scenes are in frame-flicker-mode, disguising these through safely- and slowly-filmed sequences which are then speeded up, much like old Asian martial-arts films that make everyone laugh, these days. Some of these are well-done, but after a while they become rather irritating, and some still appear to be in fast-speed, despite the attempts to use the frame-flicker-mode.

The old characters from the original Three Musketeers story are brought into the action later, including Michael York reprising his original role from the very popular 1970's Three Musketeers and Four Musketeers movies.

Overall, it's great watching for fans of those 1970's versions, as well as young feminist-heroine fans, and appropriate for younger family members, a rarity these days.

Not for Classic Musketeer Fans

[brescia3701 · 4/10 · 7 March 2005]

The reason I gave this awful film a 4 instead of a 1 is the wonderful cinematography. This film is beautifully captured in its brilliant colors and wonderful landscapes. Unfortunately, the main character in this is practically unwatchable. The first time you notice that something is wrong is when we get our first closeup of our heroine. For living out in Gascony, France in the late 1600s, why is Valentine wear heavy eye-shadow, cheek blush, and bright lip stick? She does the best she can with the dialog she's given but ohhh, such dialog. Then, in a society that is 200 years away from Women's Suffrage, she expects... DEMANDS... to be treated equally with the men without even proving herself. She even rudely bursts into the Musketeer Commander's office and demands to speak with him. He rightly should have thrown out anyone who tried that except the King. She takes it as an insult that he is not impressed with her. She doesn't try to hide her feminine side at all including having a tailor made, curve hugging Musketeer uniform. This would have worked out better if it was more a "Connecticut Yankee" type where a modern woman is sent back in time but her modern sensibilities are entirely out of place in this film. I'm not sure why a great talent like Michael York agreed to appear in this travesty but I guess a paycheck is a paycheck. If you want to watch a film where a woman takes on a man's world, try Disney's Mulan. The story and acting are much better.

Entertaining and fun

[HotToastyRag · 7/10 · 21 August 2019]

In this three-hour Hallmark presentation, Susie Amy stars as the title character, the daughter of D'Artagnan, played once again by Michael York. It's pretty cute to see him reprising his role from for the fourth time, and while Susie does tease him and call him "old man", he still has a twinkle in his eye and has enough spunk to spice up some romantic scenes with his wife, Susan Brown.

Similar to the original musketeer story where D'Artagnan sets up multiple duels in the afternoon, then ends up banding together with his challengers to fight off the cardinal's guards, Susie sets up a duel with musketeer Casper Zafer. Just as they start to fight, their identities are revealed. All four children of the original musketeers are reunited, ambushed by the cardinal's guards, and band together to defeat them again! While the younger musketeers are busy trying to uncover a plot by the evil cardinal, King Louis, played by Freddie Sayers, juggles his mistress, Clemency Burton-Hill and the political ramifications of marrying his betrothed, Kristina Krepela. Gérard Depardieu doesn't reprise his 1998 role as Porthos, but instead plays the chief bad guy, the cardinal! His cohort is Nastassja Kinski, but if you've seen any musketeer movies, you know that they're not the pair to root for.

Full of fun fight scenes, an interesting swashbuckling story, and a beautiful leading lady to look at for three hours, La Femme Musketeer is very entertaining. It's not too violent, since it's Hallmark, so you can watch it with the whole family and have a nice evening.

DLM warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. Some of the fight scenes use a handheld camera and it will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

Hallmark drops the ball.

[Blueghost · 2/10 · 3 March 2012]

I'm a big fan of the 1970's Salkind Musketeer productions, and this installment is so poor in execution that it's hard to fathom how this got by the production meetings at Hallmark Home Entertainment, a production company known for quality product.

The problems with this production are mostly technical. Poorly directed by a man whose forte is staging action sequences, the dramatic potential is wasted and never fully realized in any of the scenes. The lead actors are mostly "pretty" models, with little performance potential, and even less acting ability. The veteran thespians hold their own in the support roles, but they're so horribly shot that whatever talent they bring to the film is wasted, that's on top of a lack of direction.

Technical merits DO NOT pass muster. Props and costumes are hit and miss, the lighting is unnatural (a reverse from the classic Lester productions), and the lensing is the absolute worst imaginable. It's as if the DP used one lens for the entire production (medium focal length no less), a far cry from the dramatic and sumptuous cinematography from David Watkin ("Chariots of Fire", "Moonstruck", "Catch 22", "The Memphis Belle") . It looked like the Hallmark people dumped a lot of money into sets and locations, but it's all positively wasted. You can see where the money was dumped into this production, but it doesn't shine in the least.

What we have here is another Hallmark mental-health-film, with the theme here touching on womens'-lib and tomboy issues regarding cross pollination of females crossing into male dominated roles.

For all of the opulence presented on screen in terms of set design, makeup, costumes, and locations et al, absolutely none of it works. Poorly directed, poorly shot, an unbridled placation to the female demographic, this production is so bad that it's no wonder the DVD wound up in the bargain bin. Look, I'm all for female themes in action films, but this is none of the kind. This is an exaggerated faux-romance married to one of the worst productions ever launched.

Yes, I could have shot a better film, and I say that without reservation. I never will, which is more the shame, but such is life. I can see how this thing was greenlit, but I wonder who was supervising production, and why no one took the time out to get some second opinions after watching the dailies. Again, I hate to sound like a broken record, but for all the money injected into this production, how is it the final product is so poor? The period is not captured in this period piece, and is in point and fact a real insult to producers from the 70s whom one would have thought impossible to insult given their own mercenary background in film production. However low the Salkind family is on the social ladder (because they are scum), they at least cranked out some really first class movies with their musketeer films.

As for the Hallmark folks, they may be first rate and trustworthy in business and all other matters, but on this particular production they failed. It's not entirely their fault, one guesses. They were probably sold on a director whose skills are supporting directors with a complete vision from drama, as opposed to investing in a veteran director and DP who could have brought a first class dramatic presentation to the small screen. And perhaps that too was another fatal mistake, for they should have gone for a theatrical release as opposed to a made for TV production. But I suppose that point has been rendered academic, for the film is what it is.

Watch at your own risk.

Good

[alinutza_love4u · 7/10 · 26 December 2003]

I liked the script, but some of the actors are not so good. The battle scienes weren't good at all. And one more thing: in the book Athos was very quiet, but in this movie he is very talkative. Anyway I recomand you to see this movie for fun.

The Worst of the Worst

[Pickwick12 · 2/10 · 24 June 2004]

I one reviewed a movie on IMDb and said it was the worst I had ever seen, but this movie has superseded that one to become the worst.

1. The movie was not historically accurate. There were several severe problems with accuracy. The idea that a woman, without at all disguising herself as a man, could have ever become a musketeer is awfully presumptuous to begin with. Next, all the characters were CLEAN throughout the movie. The time period in which it was set ought to have clued in the filmmakers that a little dirt was in order, since people rarely to never bathed. Also, almost all of the French characters spoke with British accents. The costumes looked new, like they had never been worn before.

2. The acting was abysmal. OK, there were a couple of decent actors, but I can't imagine how they were convinced to be in this. The main actors, however, Susie Amy and the main musketeers, were severely lacking in acting skill. I'm not sure if this was their fault or the director's, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt. My sister's comment was that at the height of Valentine's emotional output, she looks like she has just broken a nail.

3. The story was extremely close to the story of "The Three Musketeers," where the musketeers must protect the queen from having her indiscretions become known. In this story, they are protecting the young king, but other than that, the differences are slight. Evidently the screen writer did not have the creativity to think up something actually new.

There was one thing I enjoyed very much about this movie. It gave us a lot of laughs. My sister and I muted the TV and made up dialogue to go with the terrible wigs and bad acting.

I would recommend this movie to anyone for a laugh.

Good film!

[caltechwomanalways · 7/10 · 27 September 2013]

It wasn't until the beginning credits rolled that the wife and I realized that this movie is mostly in Spanish with English subtitles. We hadn't noticed that here in a very wealthy Dallas burb, we were two of the very few gringos in the room. We decided to stay. Glad we did. Great movie. Great acting. This is not Cantiflas nor is it some of the really stupid stuff you see on Spanish TV.

This is not Three Men and a Baby or some piece of Adam Sandler poop. This is a great treatment of the plot of a single guy who finds himself in the possession of his illegitimate baby daughter.

No clichés. No Hollywood stupid. Just good acting in this dramedy.

I don't get the low rating. The theater was packed and people were standing in line for the next showing. We are glad we stayed.

Dartagnan has a daughter

[xen95 · 1/10 · 4 July 2012]

The wigs are amazing not, the plot was written by a five year old and most of the British and French cast struggle bravely giving this pile of mince a dignity it does not deserve. The music is poor and the lovely settings wasted. Susy Amy lovely girl rotten actress is the tarnished star in this shockingly bad effort. Other noteworthy performances come from two weak entries as mazerin's niece and King Louis they are two incredibly bad actors they are like first year drama students in a really bad play. The Musketeers are like the keystone cops running around not really doing much. The dubbed voices are poor and why they made this awful film is beyond me. One of the worst films I have ever seen and I saw green lantern.

Susie Amy was wonderful

[jamesdowning60 · 9/10 · 27 August 2004]

Really enjoyed this but especially because of Susie Amy who plays the lead character, she really held her own against some big names, and is beautiful.

It's an all round entertaining film, which I believe was made for TV. I completely disagree with some of the reviews here about the acting, the reviews at Amazon.com where I bought the DVD were really good.

I like this sort of film, it's easy viewing, not difficult to follow, the writing is very simplistic but the characters were throughly entertaining. Surprisingly I thought Gerard was one of the weaker performers compared to his usual standard.

Well worth watching if you enjoy all round light entertainment.

The She-Musketeer is average Hallmark feature, albeit far away to be bad even with ageing leading casting!!

[elo-equipamentos · 6/10 · 15 April 2023]

When I had faced some Hallmark Entertainment feature I've stay thrilled because so many finest offerings of this valuable Company, nonetheless this version of She-Musketeer doesn't drop very well to me, even has been enjoyable didn't pass on sound of ruggedness at all.

The entire storyline actually a new Musketeer generation of the original ones, even the old and powerful Cardinal name was replaced, although the main structure remains the same, a D'Artagnan (Michael York) daughter Valentine (Susie Amy) enters in the scene when France and Spain are in war whatever be the reason, the puppet King Louis (Freddie Sayers) is ruled by the evil Cardinal Mazarin (Gerard Depardieu) that holds the power at your hands and will.

The Musketeer's brotherhood are aware of the jeopardy that hangs over the France, even the Musketeer's Commander still intending intervene over the matter, withdraw Cardinal Mazarin's authority isn't not easy due the strength of church in such time, then Mazarin got a old letter that will proving that King Louis wasn't a really King, this letter was taken by the scheming Lady Bolton (Nastassja Kinski) at the behest of Cardinal Mazarin, also he has the most skilled swordsman of whole France at your service the dreaded Villeroi (Marcos Jean Pirae) nobody is the match for him, not even the Three Musketeer's sons.

In this environment of war and conspiracy the mini-series is developing, the daughter of the famous and unbeaten D'Artagnan will be a key of the hard assignment of bringing a Spanish Princess Maria-Theresa (Kristina Krepela) to marry with King Louis a kind of settlement to stop the war and make King Louis got his real duties from the hands of the crook Cardinal Mazarin that aware of all and intent to break up the accordance between France and Spain in order to keep the France's treasury at your scope, sending half of taxes to Italy, his former country, it also not so easy many unexpected happenings coming soon.

Aside some points and strong ageing leading casting with solid family humor oriented this Hallmark presentation doesn't convince the viewers, shooting at Croatia sounds a little bit cheap production, the Female Musketeer somewhat didn't hit the target, albeit far away to be deemed as bad whatsoever, glad to see it due this DVD is a hard to find in Brazil, now I'd got my original copy!!

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 2023 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 6.5.

Sooooo boring

[nicholls_les · 1/10 · 29 March 2017]

Sorry those who enjoyed it but I found this movie tedious to say the least. I normally like this type of movie but I was so bored that I fast forwarded a lot of it and it still wasn't any better.

The acting was awful, especially Michael York and his on screen daughter played by Susie Amy was even worse.

Gérard Depardieu was miscast and was totally unconvincing as Cardinal Mazarin, although his nose should win best supporting part surely? The only good actors were in small parts but I doubt any of them could have saved this film.

Certainly not a movie I will be watching again anytime soon.

very little fun here

[jimakros · 18 September 2004]

This is another attempt to capitalize on the Musketeer theme,with some good things in it,but an overall mediocre result at best.

The good things are the bad guy,Villeroi,played by Marcus.j.Pirae,his performance is for a better movie.Also good is Nastassja Kinski as the evil lady Bolton. The European locations,scenic design and costumes are nice.

The bad things are the lead actress Susie Amy who is a very goodlooking girl but terribly wrong for this part.She just doesn't have the necessary "tomboy" personality to be convincing as D'Artagnan's would-be-musketeer daughter. Other major fault is that the swordfighting is shot very close and you cant really see what is going on,which is annoying. Michael York just makes fun of his earlier role and doesn't try to be anything like an aged D'Artagnan. Depardieu doesn't do much and basically just adds his name here.

Overall,its worth a look especially for fans of the genre but nothing more.

It doesn't get much worse than this...

[Bjecas · 1/10 · 30 May 2004]

HOW. HOW?!?!?!? How can a movie be so BAD?!

By the title alone, I wasn't expecting much out of it when I saw it in the shelve at the video club... But I figured, "it stars Gerard Depardieu, so it can't be all that bad." Big mistake. The only decent thing in the whole movie (for the full two and a half painful hours it lasts) was Depardieu's acting - and let me add, he plays a supporting role, so you don't see him much either. For the rest, you are left to stare, speechless, at a sequence of extremely dumb scenes, while you ask yourself what's the point in them. It's one of those movies where you know exactly what is going to happen next, with a lot of "secondary scenes" (by this I mean scenes that don't add up to the storyline, they're aim is to get you the most bored as possible), and did I forget to mention, it features some very, and I mean VERY lame actors. I was planning on going into more details, but I can't. My fingers won't let me. One final word: Don't even think about buying/renting/asking a friend/downloading/what ever, this movie. Unless you strive to finding out how bad can a movie be.

Wrong period costume hell again...

[gillian-holmes1633 · 1/10 · 27 December 2004]

For me it really grates when the costume department appears to have done no research what so ever! This is supposedly set in 1660. The costumes the French wear seem reasonably accurate, but when we skip over to the Duke of Buckinghams home in England the English are wearing Disneyland versions of the court fashions of at least ten years later.The Duke of Buckingham himself seems to have invented hair gel and be using it to excess on his most unlikely (for the period) hair style. Since the English court generally took its fashion lead from the French, on top of which the English monarchy had only just been restored it hardly seems likely their fashions would have been so far ahead! I'm sorry, I know I'm being pedantic but for me these things can ruin a film...

Good family fun!

[bigfatpig · 10/10 · 11 January 2005]

I watched this on TV at Christmas time and really enjoyed it. It's good family entertainment, thought the sword fights were great.

Really liked Susie Amy as Valentine, think she was good for the role, and Marcus Jean Pirae was good as well as Villeroi.

It wasn't brilliantly written, it was a bit 'storytelling' but the cast was great - Gerard Depardiu didn't do very much though - it seemed as though he was drunk from time to time!

The villages and the sets were beautiful and really perfect for the period. It was great to see Michael York back as D'Artagnan!

I would recommend this for adults and children, it's an adventure...

Great Family Entertainment

[VikB · 10/10 · 26 August 2004]

This is a story of a girls quest to become a Musketeer like her father D'Artagnan. It's very entertaining and suitable for the whole family.

We all like Susie Amy who plays Valentine D'Artagnan, very much. Thought all the young musketeers were great and it was a lovely contrast with the older characters, their fathers. I am a big Michael York fan so it was good to see him back as D'Artagnan.

It could be a bit storytelling at times, but that is needed for younger viewers. The fight sequences could be slightly repetitive and many of the action movies are, but they were well done.

Think from reading other information, this wasn't filmed as a movie but as a TV mini series so it is quite long to watch in one sitting.

But all in all, what you'd expect, not difficult to follow but entertaining viewing for the family.

Excellent, very enjoyable

[jenny1234 · 10/10 · 8 May 2004]

I really enjoyed this film, and I very much enjoyed the performances.

I'd recommend it to anyone who enjoys an adventure.

It was wonderful to see Michael York back as D'Artangen after all this time.

Susie Amy, who played his daughter Valentine is an actress that I enjoyed watching very much in Footballer's Wives and Echo Beach. Really enjoyed seeing her do something so different. She's very versatile indeed.

I wasn't wholly convinced on Gerard Depardieu's performance. He played The Cardinal. It was at times difficult to understand what he was saying because of his accent. He is a fantastic actor and yet this performance didn't hint at that at all.

All in all it's feel good film that would be suitable for viewers of all ages.

dreadful. truly dreadful.

[imdb-4974 · 18 November 2004]

the costumes and sets were lavish, the actors were top-notch, but MAN, someone needs to tell that director to get his hands off the reins!

the entire thing was so carefully scripted and orchestrated it approached farce.

also, there were some serious ouchies: she does a flip off something-or-other in the middle of a sword fight and we clearly see her hat flip down to cover her face. of course, when she lands, the hat is perfectly placed and her hair is immaculate. pretty amazing, considering the thing wasn't pinned down and it was pretty big.

little things like that -- i found myself watching in a kind of morbid fascination as it veered from extremely good scenery and gorgeous costumes to unbelievably stupid plotting. example: there's a scene in which she makes a huge fuss over having to wear a dress. she spends the movie running, leaping, and generally doing the Errol Flynn in a musketeer's uniform. so what does she wear to accept her reward from a grateful king?

a massive, gigantic, elaborate, silver ball gown, of course.

Very enjoyable movie

[nabor7 · 8/10 · 22 June 2004]

This is a very predictable movie yet at the same time very entertaining. I thought the casting was well done and that Susie Amy was a good choice for Valentine. This is a movie meant for entertainment and not for a deep socially redeeming value. I compare it to Cutthroat Island with Geena Davis. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the movie. When I watch movies of this nature I am looking for fun, some excitement, but mainly relaxation. This has all the qualities I look for in a movie. If I want to watch a more sophisticated movie then I am looking for different qualities, but this is good family entertainment with no explanation needed. My only problem with this movie and others that take place in a European country is that when all else fails, lets give them British accents. Depardieu, being French, had the only realistic accent in the movie.

Okay

[sb_girl500 · 10/10 · 28 June 2004]

Overall, this movie was okay. But the acting for the lead character, Susie Amy i think, was horrid! She was so stiff, and something about her grin instead of a smile, just seemed unrealistic, and it just rubbed me the wrong way. Gerard Depardieu was amazing in it, as usual. And, if you're like me, and are still young or even old for that matter, the guys, especially Casper Zafer(Gaston) and Nico Nicotera (Etienne) and some other young Musketeers are very nice eye candy :)! I liked John Rhys-Davies in it, as he is one of my favorite actors, but he must have still been in his Gimli stage when doing it because he came across with that sort of Scottish accent of the dwarf. I had trouble with the actors who played the original musketeers but that was no fault of the actors, as they were good, but I grew up on Disney's version with Keifer Sutherland, Oliver Platt, Charlie Sheene, and Chris O'donnell as the main characters. At times the movie seemed dull, but the fight scenes were good, but not bloody. Perfect for children, kinda lacking for the older crowd. But none the less, this movie wasn't too bad. I would recommend it for renting, but don't waste your money on buying it!