One of the most popular adventure novels of all times is arguably The Three Musketeers by Alexander Dumas. It has been read and reread by people for over one hundred and fifty years. Many movies have been based on this book around the world. However, most of those movies haven't been overly true to the original story line. As we all know, Hollywood tends to butcher everything. Movies are rarely true to the original, and therefore when the trailer for The Musketeer appeared in theaters I wasn't expecting it to follow the book too closely either. It was obvious from the trailer that the fight scenes were going to be completely unrealistic, but I could not pass judgement on the story line yet.

      When the movie came out and I went to see it in the theaters, I witnessed the most thorough destruction of a book converted to a moving picture ever. What's more, not only was the story line not followed at all, but the filmmakers re-arranged and even created many historical facts as well.

      I raved considerably about this to jdb_educator right after seeing the movie, but decided to forgo writing a movie review at that time. Now the movie is out on video and the radio advertisements have sparked my fury once again.

      Just the introduction to the movie told me that it was going to be a total failure, for me, at least so far as story line is concerned. The movie opens up with the statement that the Cardinal Richelieu was "the head of the Catholic Church." It is, of course, common knowledge that the Pope is the head of the Catholic Church, elected from the Cardinals by the Cardinals. Further, at no time were the musketeers disbanded or outlawed either. Finally, the only thing the movie does have in common with the novel is the names of the characters. And that's it. The family history of D'Artagnan is completely revised. Not only was his father not killed by Rochefort, he was not killed at all. D'Artagnan left home because he was determined to become a musketeer. Planchet was a servant for hire, a valet that the three musketeers hired for D'Artagnan when he arrived in Paris. He was never a military man, let alone an ex-musketeer. As for the three musketeers themselves… It seems that the roles of Athos and Porthos were switched around. Not only is Athos a French Count (an article of his past life that he hides for most of the novel), he is also one of the most educated men in France at the time (according to the book, of course) and is well respected by everybody, both friend and foe. He is depicted as a drunkard in the movie, and although he did drink a lot, he rarely appeared to be drunk, and remained dignified even when he was. Porthos, on the other hand, was a braggart and a fop, and was by no means the brains of the outfit or the cool headed leader the movie tries to portray him to be.

      Now let me get to the point around which the movie is being advertised. The fight scenes. A quote from a radio commercial has prompted me to write this review: "breathtaking martial arts fight sequences unlike any you have seen before." Martial arts in 17th century France? Of course, it is obvious that every new musketeer was taught the finer points of Asian martial arts disciplines, and all had a copy of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon DVD hidden under their pillow. Give me a break. The movie was made not only with total disregard for the original story line, but also has treated world history with the same contempt. This could have been at least slightly forgivable if the movie was great, but it wasn't so it isn't. In changing the story line, the writers turned a great adventure story into one very sorry excuse for badly executed - you can hardly see anything - fight scenes. And by rewriting history, they have made a mockery of the book, movie, history and any one who appreciates truth.

      As a final note I would just like to say that if you haven't read the original book do so. Its interesting and entertaining light reading and it will offer a lot more enjoyment than watching movies like The Musketeer.