Friday, March 25, 2011

Somehow, NOT a joke...

"The Three Musketeers" - now featuring all the slo-motion aerial kung-fu, retro-futuristic steampunk flamethrowers/gun-turrets and (what appear to be) Final Fantasy-style airships Dumas surely always intended. In 3D.



Paul W.S. Anderson: The master of making ACTUAL movies that look like fake movies from parodies about how shitty movies are getting.

27 comments:

Willingdruid said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Willingdruid said...

Nothing to do now but just sit back and watch the train hit the wall.

Christopher said...

Oh joy, a no-talent hack gets to obliterate my favorite piece of classical literature.

akkuma420 said...

lol... WTF.
Not a good LOL by the way, the kind that makes you wanna laugh hysterically while grinding your teeth and scratching your eyes out...

Ezenwa said...

And people complained that Zack Snyder was doing severe harm in the realm of film making, as stated in an article. Here's one of the usual suspects I mentioned in another post, hard at work destroying a classic. Anderson, you hack!

CraftyAndy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
CraftyAndy said...

eh can't be as bad as the last one. looks good like sherlock Holmes. Don't see what's wrong with telling the same story with some imaginative (creative would be a good story.. yet to see that) flare. Like how Avatar is better then Dances with wolves because it's sci-fi fantasy. Down to Earth VISUALS is just boring, as long as the story in all it's themes itself remains down to Earth who cares. I just wish they would call it something else but whatever gotta name it three musketeers to get people in the seats.

I didn't here anyone complaining that 300 wasn't fully historically accurate, as long as it's about a bunch of men in that era standing up against the odds in the wake of a enemy invasion who cares if they have elephants and monstrousaties attacking them.

Tim said...

"about how shitty movies are getting"

This coming from the guy who liked Sucker Punch.

Reverend Allan Ironside said...

So this is a prequel to LXG, right? Looks like it.

Arturo said...

For what it's worth, I thought AVP and the remake of Death Race were sweet B movie thrills.

Adam said...

*Watches*

...I think it's time I buy one of those "Classic old time movies that everyone needs to see" books.

O.T said...

Looks like a lot of fun, which is good because Wes Anderson forever owns my devotion for Fantastic Mr. Fox (Thats the Anderson we're talking anout right?). Although the lack of plot details worries me.

@Tim
He was talking about the parody skits that make fun of today's mainstream cinema.

Scott Glasgow said...

actually I'm pretty enthused for this one.
It's not often that the steampunk/starjammers thing gets the big budget treatment it needs. Even though it's probably gonna skewer the source material it looks to be a really fun movie.

Except for Mila's action scenes... even in the trailer they seem forced in there.

Jwillx70 said...

I have to agree with Tim here Moviebob. How exactly is this different from Sucker Punch? Both appear to be over the top fantastical thrill rides involving swords and super-science relative to their eras. So how can be awesome and the other be shit?

Puhnkss said...

"ACTUAL movies that look like fake movies from parodies about how shitty movies are getting."

...Is what I see in this trailer too, especially the parody part. And somehow, I still feel like I could watch it. (not pay in to see it though, cause I'm unemployed scum but still...)

Tim said...

@O.T.: This is not Wes Anderson. This is Paul WS Anderson. The director of Resident Evil. Yeah...

And no he wasn't. He said that this movie looks so shitty it almost looks like a parody of shitty movie.

MOVIE LIKE SUCKER PUNCH!

Dave Cesarano said...

@CraftyAndy-- Dude, I cannot disagree more. First, 300 cannot be compared because the aims of the film were different. 300 was based off a Frank Miller comic, in which Miller deliberately took real guys and used the superhero trope of the comic book medium to make them larger-than-life. He also drew stylistic cues from Greek vase art depicting ancient Greek "superheroes" (i.e. demigods) like Achilles and Heracles. The film channeled a lot of that energy. It wasn't about historical accuracy, but an experiment with style and visuals. Ironically, the dialogue was actually quite accurate.

This new Musketeers film has none of those aspirations. Instead of being a meditation on the concept of the hero at the foundations of Western tradition, it's a cash-grab that is basically raping a classic piece of literature. I can see the brainless studio execs talking about how "extreme" they can make this film, and how "exciting" it will be. Action films these days have such weak plots that the Schwarzenegger films of the '80s look like Dostoevsky in comparison.

In case you haven't noticed lately, in the past decade or two plenty of films that feature great visuals often completely fail as stories. And Avatar wasn't better than Dances with Wolves, sorry--the former was completely soulless regardless of how pretty and fun it was. You ought to watch Red Letter Media's Plinkett review of Avatar, it's quite revealing.

Rob said...

Greeeat, Rennaisance Resident Evil...

Sofie Liv Pedersen said...

Dammit, it's one of those movies I personally really want, as I am longing very much for a comeback of the classic swashbuckler genre, still I am very astounded no one picked up on the classic style Pirates of The carribbean dished up with, and the audience obviousely love.

This honestly looks like pure shit.

The highlight for me is differently that Bloom looks like he is playing a creepy ass villain, something I have never seen but actually have been wishing for for quite a while, to see him in something different and over the top, I honestly believe that he would be good at it.

Chris Cesarano said...

Oh, it's Paul W.S. Anderson? Jesus, that explains everything.

I saw my brother post this trailer and everything about it just felt generic. I'm not even talking the movie, but the way the trailer is cut. Right down to "Only 40. Today was an off day".

HA HA HA HA HA WHAT SHARP WIT

The film itself looks like they just want to make the average attempted blockbuster where the focus is maybe style, action and oh, hey, we need a plot don't we? But hearing that it is Paul W.S. Anderson? That explains the ninja with the gun.

Someone mentioned Sucker Punch, and again, haven't seen the film yet, but just going off of trailers here are the differences I can glean.

1) Sucker Punch didn't need a generic trailer mash-up, to hit "Make Movie Trailer" in Adobe Premiere. All the mash-up of what many are calling "fanboy fantasy" was also at least shown in a dream world. The point of it is to be surreal and fantastical, rather than taking a time-period and deciding it would have been way better if you threw in some ninjas. In fact...

2) Just from the trailers I can tell that, in Sucker Punch, the dream sequences aren't just meant to be entertaining, but are meant to be symbolism for the struggles the characters are going through. Know what else used physical conflict to display emotional conflict? Scott Pilgrim, and that was all the better for it. This film trailer seems to use physical conflict with no other purpose but to "be bad ass", and now that I know it's Paul W.S. Anderson I know that this is the only purpose.

3) Even if it does turn out that Sucker Punch sucks, at least it has the decency to be an original creation. In fact, Zack Snyder has ultimately been faithful to his adaptations, even though they are comics rather than a piece of literature. Paul W.S. Anderson is fucking up a piece of literature. Before I watched the trailer I told my brother "That's okay, Disney ruined it back in the 90's but that film turned out alright". DAMN was I off the mark.

I won't know much for certain until I see Sucker Punch today, but yeah, the difference between the two is large enough just to glean from the trailers.

amyrat151 said...

You know what, I actually think this looks like more fun that the fourth Pirates of the Caribbean movie. That isn't saying too much since I'm really demotivated to see PotC 4. This is really sad because I used to really love those movies. But anyways, I know this movie is nothing but a cash grab and I'm sure come the months after its release people will be crying out that it is an insult to the source martial. However, since I never really cared about the Three Musketeers in the first place, I think this movie looks like something I just might enjoy the crap out of. Course, this does not mean I'll be standing in any lines for this, but hey, there's always my local budget.

The Dude said...

Considering that Ridley Scott made a boring as hell, long as hell, and down to earth as hell (I.E. everyone was covered in mud) movie about Robin Hood last year, I think it's worth giving this one a shot. Besides, the action doesn't look as bad as in the Resident Evil movies which is a huge improvement for W.S. Anderson.

bigjkt said...

I think this movie will make the Musketeer look like Casablanca.

LK said...

Didn't they already try something a bit like this, back when The Matrix made it cool to have wire-work martial arts all over the place? In fact, wasn't Woo-Ping involved?

bigjkt said...

@LK yeah the Musketeer, men in feathered hats fighting on sea-sawing ladders and crap like that.

Luc said...

I'm sorry, but I cannot watch this. I can't stand movies that have Director/Actress/Husband/Wife duo films, regardless of the genre.

Lightsier said...

I dunno, after the Resident Evil movies I think I'm Paul W.S. Andersoned out.