The Three Musketeers (1935)

That was an excellent one.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Cocky young swordsman D'Artagnan (Walter Abel) arrives in Paris and is taken under the wing of three musketeers (Paul Lukas, Moroni Olsen, Onslow Stevens). First English-language film version of the Alexandre Dumas story. It's pretty dull stuff. Walter Abel is painfully miscast. This was his first starring role. He would have better luck in his career as a character player. Film debut of Moroni Olsen. Three Musketeers movies should be fun, exciting, and action-packed. This one's tedious. Even the action is unexciting. Max Steiner wrote the music and lyrics for the corny theme song. Hardly his best work. Watchable but forgettable.

The Three Musketeers was probably RKO Studio's biggest budget item for 1935. It's a condensed version of the classic novel by Alexandre Dumas and casts Walter Abel in the lead role of D'Artagnan.Walter Abel had a distinguished career as a fine character actor, but from this film he just not have the charisma needed to carry a whole film. Ironic that the three most obvious D'Artagnans all were not available in 1935. Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. was in Great Britain, Tyrone Power was a year away from his break out picture, Lloyd's of London and Errol Flynn was just being introduced at Warner Brothers in Captain Blood. Why none of those three ever got to play D'Artagnan is a mystery, especially Flynn who did do a version of The Three Musketeers as a radio play.The best bit of acting is from Ian Keith as DeRochefort. The novel has DeRochefort as Cardinal Richelieu's chief enforcer, but here he's a loose cannon with very much his own agenda. Paul Lukas makes a brooding Athos although the best portrayal of that role comes from Van Heflin in MGM's version in 1948.This is a decent version of the classic and far superior to what Darryl Zanuck inflicted on the public in 1939 with the Ritz Brothers as Athos, Porthos, and Aramis.

In 1625 an ambitious youth joins forces with THE THREE MUSKETEERS to save the French Queen's honor from the machinations of the cruel Cardinal Richelieu.RKO does Dumas proud in this rousing version of the ancient swashbuckler. Too long ignored or slighted as dull or drab, it is in fact lavish & lively, with dashes of welcomed humor, and should keep the interest of most uncritical viewers. The absence of any major stars is actually a benefit, as the plot is able to speak for itself without being sifted through the skein of celebrity.Initially, Walter Abel seems a curious choice for the impulsive D'Artagnan, but his exuberance & enthusiasm quickly envelop the role. Paul Lukas, Moroni Olsen & Onslow Stevens have fun as the title characters and the fact that there's very little reason to tell them apart does not detract from the overall enjoyment of the film.One could wish for a bit more screen time for Ian Keith & Nigel de Brulier as the villains de Rochefort & Richelieu respectively, but Margot Grahame makes the most of her opportunities as the evil Milady de Winter.Heather Angel provides the romantic stimulus for Mr. Abel, while Lumsden Hare as the Musketeer Captain & mild-mannered John Qualen as D'Artagnan's servant equip themselves well in small roles. Movie mavens will recognize an uncredited Lionel Belmore as an innkeeper.In his single scene as the Duke of Buckingham, British actor Ralph Forbes reveals the talent which, in a fairer world, would have made him a major Hollywood star.Not surprisingly, the original story has been streamlined & altered in various ways and at least a couple of notable deaths have been omitted, so as to provide a happier fadeout.*****************************************What were the facts surrounding the historical Richelieu & Buckingham? Since the novel & films make much of their rivalry, a closer examination is in order.Both men rose from semi-obscurity to positions of enormous power & influence in their respective kingdoms. Each found it necessary to dominate the weak sovereigns whose patronage they enjoyed. Both endured the utter contempt & hatred of powerful domestic factions allied against them. And were there ever a flirtation between the French Queen Anne of Austria and Buckingham, it was of a very mild nature. There certainly was nothing resembling The Adventure of the Queen's Diamonds and all the derring-do associated with it.Armand-Jean du Plessis, Cardinal and Duke de Richelieu (1585-1642), came from a minor gentry family which was saddled with enormous financial debt upon the death of his father. However, blessed with a very good brain & a manipulative mother, Richelieu used his intellectual charm to advance his ascent through the Byzantine levels of Church hierarchy. Once having caught the attention of Louis XIII Richelieu never looked back. Eventually wielding absolute authority, the Red Eminence took as his life's mission to thwart Spanish Habsburg hegemony in Europe and to crush all outbreaks of French Protestantism as they arose throughout the kingdom.For his part, George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham (1592-1628), had his extreme physical attractiveness to thank for grabbing the eye of James I - who liked to dance both ends of the ballroom - and later became the favourite of Charles I as well. The son of a knight, Buckingham soon rose to an eminence of power and angered the nobles by his monopoly of the king's affections and his arrogant accruement of great wealth. As a diplomat & military strategist, Buckingham was hopelessly inept and he needed the king's protection to save him from trial in the Star Chamber. Having failed disastrously in an attempt to succor the Huguenot of La Rochelle, France, he returned to England where he was quickly assassinated by a disgruntled naval officer. When news of Buckingham's death reached London the people rejoiced in the streets.

Of all the major American and British sound versions of the Dumas classic made up to 1999, this is easily the worst. The trouble is in the casting and the direction. Walter Abel was "introduced" in this film, although he had actually been in films since as far back as 1930, and because this was his first swashbuckling role, the producers didn't know what to make of him. He has none of the dash of Douglas Fairbanks,Don Ameche, Warren William, Cornel Wilde, or even Gene Kelly, and none of the charming awkwardness of Michael York, all of whom have played D'Artagnan in other films.In fact, Abel gives, in plain English, a bad performance, partly because he is so totally miscast. Film fans will recognize him as one of those actors whom you see often,but never know what their name is. He would give better performances later in his career as worried, nervous managers (in "Holiday Inn") or business executives( i.e. Gregory Peck's boss, who falls memorably out the window to his death in "Mirage"). The other roles are indifferently cast and performed--this could be any one of a hundred B-movies--even the villains,and that's the real problem. A swashbuckler is supposed to be exciting and thrilling,and this one is neither--it's as if director Lee just didn't care.