You won't hear me denying the timelessness of Alexandre Dumas' adventure tale, The Three Musketeers. However, I'm fascinated that Hollywood feels the need to endlessly adapt the novel. And by "endlessly," I mean this movie's been made a lot.
To name just a few, there's the 1993 version starring Charlie Sheen, Kiefer Sutherland, and Chris O'Donnell. Raquel Welch and Richard Chamberlain starred in a 1973 adaptation, as did Lana Turner and Gene Kelly in 1948. And then there's 1998's The Man in the Iron Mask which is essentially a "sequel" featuring the aging musketeers. Now this new version, announced today, "will trace how swordsmen Athos, Porthos and Aramis first banded together."
I've often wondered (especially recently with so many remakes in the works) why Hollywood insists on recycling old material over and over. Then I spotted this quote from producer Joe Gatt, who is behind this new Musketeers movie (along with the adaptations of Conan the Barbarian and Buck Rogers), and who puts it rather bluntly:
There aren't many branded properties like this out there, and it is a seller's market for the high-profile ones. You can either build one from scratch or find the ones that are available and of interest to audiences, which we did with Conan and Buck Rogers.
In other words, "building from scratch" is hard. Redoing old stuff is easy. Is this strategy just lazy? Or do you think each generation deserves its own Three Musketeers movie?
COUTURE COUTURE
Phi
Firetrap
Well, look at how many adaptations there are of Jane Eyre. Hollywood is just so desperate for material. There's no creativity anymore.
1Sorry. The only version I am ever going to like is the one with Kiefer in it!
2What we deserve is a Three Musketeers movie that is actually good.
3I agree, figurine. However, I seriously doubt that Hollywood can deliver us a decent adaptation of The Three Musketeers. Plus, everyone's heard the story a million times by now. I wouldn't see it in theaters and unless they cast some really big names that draw in fangirls, my guess is the film will be a flop.
4bring in Johnny Depp and I'm THERE!
5I thought the Man in the Iron Mask was REALLY good. But maybe that's because I don't have cable and it used to come on like every weekend on UPN. Definitely a weekend movie if you don't have cable.
6and when you consider that there are only 9 plots available, you understand why they would rather retale the same old thing than be creative and develop an intriguing twist on one of the 9 plots.
7and i loved the man in the iron mask. it was awesome. as was the count of monte cristo. i happen to be a fan of one of the most widely recognized black classical laureates.
8Hellf*ckingyeah I want to see more Conan the Barbarian!!
9The Man in the Iron Mask was acutally a separate book written by Dumas...even he reused the same characters. I have enjoyed the Kiefer, Sheen, Platt, O'Donnell version a time or two.
10I loved Chris O'Donnell! haha man that seems so long ago!
11Since Star Wars there's this trend of doing prequels for franchise...
12Yes Juicylemon, and now it needs to be stopped to a degree. Some of these movies do NOT need to be made. Some of them are purely awful.
13Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.