The Three Musketeers

Name: The Three Musketeers
Genre: Action, Adventure
Released: March 29, 1974
Duration: 106 min
Rating: 77
Cast: Christopher Lee, Frank Finlay, Geraldine Chaplin, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Michael York

1974

METASCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 11 Critic Reviews

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 10 Ratings

See All

7.2

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.2	Your Score
7.2	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 10 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Play Sound

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

The Three Musketeers

Now Playing: The Three Musketeers

Movie Details & Credits

CFDC-UGC | Release Date: March 29, 1974 | PG

Starring: Christopher Lee, Frank Finlay, Geraldine Chaplin, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Michael York, Oliver Reed, Raquel Welch, Richard Chamberlain, Roy Kinnear, Spike Milligan

Summary: A young swordsman comes to Paris and faces villains, romance, adventure and intrigue with three Musketeer friends.

Director: Richard Lester

Genre(s): Action, Adventure

Rating: PG

Runtime: 106 min

See All Details and Credits

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Glenn Kenny

The movie Musketeers most faithful to Dumas’ spirit didn’t arrive until director Richard Lester (A Hard Day’s Night) delivered The Three Musketeers and The Four Musketeers. Overflowing with Lester’s trademark irreverence and slapstick, these films still retain a vivid and bawdy period flavor. Read full review

Ted Mahar

Alexandre Dumas pere's 1844 novel has been filmed more than four dozen times, but this lavish and hilarious rendition is the pinnacle. [21 Sep 2007, p.38]

Michael Wilmington

Few adventure movies have such a heightened atmosphere of beauty, excitement and fun. [18 Apr 1999, p.34C]

Kevin Thomas

A superb bit of tongue-in-cheekery, stylish and fun but also deeply affectionate. [11 Aug 1985, p.5]

TV Guide Magazine Staff (Not Credited)

Here, writer Fraser and director Lester went back to the original and hewed closely to the source material, but adding a lot of fun. Some good slapstick combines with moments of real drama and menace to make this movie a winner. Read full review

Staff (Not Credited)

The cast is good (though it remains very much Lester's film), the fights appropriately energetic, and it all moves along at a fair pace, sprinkled with a number of good gags. Read full review

Pauline Kael

Lester's decorative clutter is the best thing about the film: he loves scurrilous excess. But the whole thing feels hectic and forced. You want some gallantry and charm; you don't want joke, joke, joke.

SEE ALL 11 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

Kai82

Jan 15, 2022

A really good adaptation of the classic “The Three Musketeers” from Alexandre Dumas. The book is a classic of world literature and one of the works which will be adapted time after time. It is a timeless story. This movie version has a great cast of actors, good humor and of cause transfersA really good adaptation of the classic “The Three Musketeers” from Alexandre Dumas. The book is a classic of world literature and one of the works which will be adapted time after time. It is a timeless story. This movie version has a great cast of actors, good humor and of cause transfers the story really well. It is the story of the young D’Artagnan who travels to Paris to fulfill his dream in becoming a musketeer. Because he makes some stupid mistakes early on he makes acquaintance with 3 musketeers and together they got drawn into an adventure that is far bigger than they imagine. The story is widely know and entertaining. It is well made into the movie and works from start to finish. I think this is even my favorite adaptation so far. A strength is the great cast with a lot of famous actors. We have Michael York as D’Artagnan, Richard Chamberlain as Aramis, Oliver Reed as Athos and Frank Finlay as Porthos for the musketeers. But it ends not here as we have also Charlton Heston as Cardinal Richelieu, Christopher Lee as Count de Rochefort, Geraldine Chaplin as Queene Anne and Faye Dunaway as Milady de Winter to name a few. I think this is nearly an all star cast and all actors deliver a really good performance. This makes the movie really good and I should praise director Richard Lester too. Without a good director the best cast can be not enough. I was always invested into the characters and they did entertain me well. This is a hallmark of a good movie. Other than that the sets and costumes look convincing for its time and the fights are immersive. I must also praise the humor which works well. Overall I see this as best adaptation of “The Three Musketeers” and recommend it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

FilipeNeto

Feb 14, 2021

I confess that I expected something more serious from this film, but it also didn't surprise me what I found. Of all, the Seventies is, for me, the decade where films were the worst and most unpleasant. This includes comedies like this, loaded with overt sexual hints and forced humor, thatI confess that I expected something more serious from this film, but it also didn't surprise me what I found. Of all, the Seventies is, for me, the decade where films were the worst and most unpleasant. This includes comedies like this, loaded with overt sexual hints and forced humor, that has aged so badly that it has virtually forgotten. The script is well known and adapts for the cinema, again, the novel by Alexandre Dumas in which an aspiring Musketeer needs to wage a palatial conjuration around the French queen, Anne.

The film tries to be funny, but it sucks. By choosing for easy and slapstick humor, with constant sexual allusions and dialogues full of double meanings, the film was spoiled. The fight scenes are terrible: everyone fights as if they had never seen a sword, were drunk or wagered on dismantling half the scenery by falling on it. Some characters, such as Planchet or Bonacieux, are stripped of dignity and turned into clowns. The three musketeers, who were supposed to be experienced fighters, look like pompous puppets and even D'Artagnan himself looks more like a stupid teenager, who thinks with his manly member and not his head. I could also mention the fact that Constance was originally Bonacieux's daughter and not an ardent and adulterous wife married to an old man... but is it worth it?

The best part of the film is, curiously, its luxurious cast, full of names that sounded at the time. The problem is that none of them received good material and are not able to show their talent! All characters lack development and sound worse than in a school play. Starting with the best, I can highlight Christopher Lee, who gave us a cold, dignified, chivalrous and elegant Rochefort; Faye Dunaway is just as restrained and threatening as Milady; Charlton Heston looks rather subdued but still satisfying in a Richelieu that sounds very old; Geraldine Chaplin does what she can but at times seems lost; Simon Ward and Georges Wilson also did well, but they don't have much to do and Oliver Reed is quite dignified when he's not doing comedy or pretending to be drunk. Having made these positive caveats, what remains are disastrous. Michael York is immature; Jean-Pierre Cassel is an idiot; Roy Kinnear and Spike Miligan tire the audience with so many boring jokes; Frank Finlay and Richard Chamberlain almost disappear from the film and Raquel Welch seems to have been cast for their role by the size of her breast and her ability to show them, in cleavage or through thinner fabric.

Technically, the film tried - and succeeded - to bring to the screen the beauty of the first phase of Royal Absolutism. Filmed in Spain - curiously, the birthplace of Queen Anne, one of the main characters - it takes advantage of the magnificent filming locations, such as the Palace of Aranjuez and the Alcázar de Segovia. The costumes are good, detailed, seem historically credible and go against Dumas' imagination. Of course, there are absurd situations, such as dog chess or that kind of "white party" at the end (I thought that white parties were a thing of decadent nightclubs with too much black light). Cinematography corresponds to the state of the art at the time and is quite dated, but I handled it well. The edition is not one of the most subtle, with the cuts being, at times, quite evident. The soundtrack makes an effort to be epic, but I hated hearing it "chew" themes like the triumphant march of the opera Aida, by Giuseppe Verdi.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

SEE ALL 2 REVIEWS