This is a fascinating movie to talk about. It has innumerable points of interest: The Salkinds, The Salkind Clause, Richard Lester, all star casting, Superman, George McDonald Fraser, sequelising, Spike Milligan and more!
Long before they took the insane plan to make Superman into an epic two part motion picture experience the Hungarian Salkind brothers did it on a smaller scale for this adaptation of the classic Alexandre Dumas adventure novel 'The Three Musketeers'. This was an almost unprecedented move and became an even more ambitious feat of daring when an all star cast including Charlton Heston, Raquel Welch, Faye Dunaway, Oliver Reed, Spike Milligan, Richard Chamberlain and many others was assembled. It was an awesome endeavour.
I watched this movie many times when growing up and was eventually deterred by the highly comic tone, which I assumed was added by the Salkinds and their director (much as in the not personally liked Superman II) but no, having read the book then and now I realise that the comedy was there all along. Of course Spike Milligan is playing the fool and exaggerating his part but his role was already comedy-fodder to begin with. I was wrong. Corr blimey. On the other hand I always thought that Charlton Heston was being peculiarly static in his performance and it turns out that and self-righteous anger were his only two modes in anything. Oh, I must not get started on Mr Heston! Back to Milligan instead. Milligan's role as Monsieur Bonacieux forms one point of a troubling love triangle that is completed by Michael York as d'Artagnan and Raquel Welch as their shared love. I just can't understand Raquel Welch in combination with either. It boggles the mind!
The music for 'The Three Musketeers' is rather unremarkable. I wish I could say more but it is non-descript and perhaps a little over-grandiose. The production design on the other is impressive beyond belief and forms the major selling point of the whole movie-making enterprise. At no point does any lapse or anachronism occur. We are never plunged into the present day, or then present day, and the glorious mud of rural France is counterpointed by the shear, opulent, and ultimately self-destructive luxury of the French monarchy. Yes, there was live chess with monkeys on dogs as the pieces. Enough said.
Another failing of the film, which succeeds in this only marginally less than the novel, is in the depiction of the power struggle at the top of France's government of the time. The Cardinal Richelieu is opposed to the King, although he poses as an aide, and would like to destroy the Queen. Why does he wish to destroy the Queen? It's never explained. The novel hints at some things but doesn't explain in the portion of the novel that corresponds to the film. This film covers about the first third of the book while the second film covers maybe the last two fifths in detail. The book was adapted by George McDonald Fraser of 'Flashman' fame, and it is a magnificent job of capturing the humorous tone and somewhat epic nature of the narrative, as well as being faithful to the source text. Rather naturally this brings us to the Salkinds. Originally the two Musketeers movies were supposed to be one, note the weak ending to this and awful introduction to the next, but when they discovered they had enough material for two they split it and thus was born the 'Salkind Clause' in movie contracts. From then on, as the actors were rightly annoyed at being robbed of salary for a whole second movie, it had to be stated beforehand how many movies are being made in the contract, and that is the 'Salkind Clause'. Much could be said on the Salkinds but I won't pursue. Their limitations and flaws are more than compensated for by their audacity in securing excellent casts and proposing these projects.
There shall be more when we wander into 'The Four Musketeers'.
O.
PS Film Bin Commentary now available here.
No comments:
Post a Comment