Cuplog

What would happen if you combined a film adaptation of the greatest swashbuckling epic of all time, Alexandre Dumas’ The Three Musketeers, with a Chinese kung fu flick? Apparently the makers of The Musketeer (2001) asked such a question, and the answer is nothing good.

The stunts, which are likely the reason (or excuse) for the film being made at all, are intended to awe and amuse the audience, but merely bore with their ridiculousness. There are two basic schools of martial arts films. One emphasizes the true physical mastery of the martial artist (such as Bruce Lee or Tony Jaa); the other emphasizes the martial artist as a fantasy hero, with wires to enable the characters to perform superhuman feats and various techniques to convey superhuman speed and agility. The greatest swashbuckling movies, for the most part, can count themselves as kin to the first type of martial arts movie, going all the way back to the derring-do of Douglas Fairbanks Sr., with stunts that were all the more shocking for their audacity because they were real. In much the same way that one is astounded by the skill and courage of trapeze artists, the best of the classic swashbuckling films had actors who did all their own fencing, climbing, leaping, diving, chandelier-swinging, and precipice-balancing. Replace all that with wires, stunt doubles, and very careful editing, and you rip the soul out of swashbuckling. And you get The Musketeer.

The inappropriate stylings of stunt choreographer Xin Xin Xiong aside, The Musketeer manages to reduce its greatest strength, its source material, to a bland and predictable tale of revenge, halfheartedly and wearily performed by its better actors (Catherine Deneuve) and woodenly performed by its lesser actors (the rest of the cast). Characters who had a richness of complexity are impoverished by the writers to a state of two-dimensionality that could have been just as easily fulfilled by cardboard standees. Whether assessed as an adaptation or revision of The Three Musketeers, The Musketeer is a uniform failure.

1. Writing: Terrible
2. Directing: Mediocre
3. Acting: Poor
4. Cinematography: Fair
5. Stunts: Poor
6. Swordplay: Mediocre
7. Panache: Terrible

Overall Rating: Poor
Swashbuckling Rank: Poor

If any film could be declared the ultimate swashbuckling film, Scaramouche (1952) would easily qualify as a contender for the title. It is said to have both the longest duelling scene and the greatest number of duels of any movie. Whether this is true or not, the duels are a marvel of fight choreography. Both Stewart Granger and Mel Ferrer performed all of their own duels and stunts, which is all the more remarkable when it is discovered that their duel on the railing of a theatre balcony was executed without a net. The action is spectacular, but the drama and the comedy (essential to a film named after the clown of the Commedia dell’arte) give the film its impeccable balance. Scaramouche is truly one of the great masterpieces of the genre.

• Writing: Great
• Directing: Superb
• Acting: Good
• Cinematography: Great
• Stunts: Superb
• Swordplay: Superb
• Panache: Superb

Overall Rating: Great
Swashbuckling Rank: Superb

One of the most entertaining courtships in the history of swashbuckling films is that of Tyrone Power as buccaneer Jamie Waring and Maureen O’Hara as Lady Margaret Denby in 1942’s The Black Swan. Although opposites attract, and socially they could scarcely be in greater opposition, they are far more similar in temperament, which leads to an amusing tug of war amongst the backdrop of warring pirates and privateers in the Caribbean during the reign of William III in England and Captain Henry Morgan in Jamaica. The fencing is excellent, as can be expected with Tyrone Power in the lead, although it suffers in at least one scene from the film having been unnecessarily sped up, which is certainly dismaying for those who appreciate Power’s swordsmanship. Beautifully filmed and scored, The Black Swan ranks as one of the genre’s enduring classics.

• Writing: Good
• Directing: Good
• Acting: Great
• Cinematography: Great
• Stunts: Great
• Swordplay: Great
• Panache: Great

Overall Rating: Great
Swashbuckling Rank: Great

Captain Kidd from 1945 is a lopsided classic of the pirate genre, with the bulk of its favor being the weight of Charles Laughton’s highly entertaining performance as Captain William Kidd. Although it departs from historical accuracy more often than not, it stands as a classic pirate movie with buried treasure, brazen treachery, terrible butchery, and sea battles galore. Some of the roles and those cast to play them are weak and workmanlike, but Reginald Owen complements Laughton nicely as Kidd’s manservant, Shadwell, employed to teach his master the social etiquette he aspires to use in his climb to the peerage, and Henry Daniell succeeds is giving his role as King William III a convincing air of authority and royal puissance. Captain Kidd would have profited from more appropriate casting (Randolph Scott was not the optimum choice for the part of the hero, Adam Mercy), and a few more examples of bloody mêlée would not have gone amiss, but all in all it is worth watching just to see Laughton strutting the deck on the high seas again.

• Writing: Fair
• Directing: Fair
• Acting: Fair (Mediocre to Good)
• Cinematography: Good
• Stunts: Good
• Swordplay: Fair
• Panache: Great (Laughton), Fair (Scott)

Overall Rating: Good
Swashbuckling Rank: Good

The Adventures of Robin Hood from 1938 is a film that owes its reputation, I believe, to faulty memories. This is a film I would like to like. But I can’t. It ought to be a great film. But it isn’t. Errol Flynn as Robin Hood and Basil Rathbone as Sir Guy of Gisbourne are both excellent in their roles, and the legend of Robin Hood is rich with possibilities for tales of adventure, romance, treachery, and heroism. Alas, this version is a drudgery to behold, nay, a torture. Claude Rains’ talent as a general anaesthetic permeates the film until the last scene. Flynn may be charming as the hero, but the combat scenes defy believability even for swashbuckling fare. (No, that type of fencing did not exist in 12th Century England, and they didn’t use swords of that sort.) I’m sure the garish Technicolor was dazzling in its day, but the film never gives one a sense of place other than that of a Hollywood set. The writing is unforgivably bland, the directing is uninspired, and the all-around inferior quality of the acting is a sad consequence of both. Somehow, though, Flynn’s panache shines through the dismal shambles in which he finds himself, and perhaps it is this alone that has contributed to this film’s undeserved status as a classic. At all other levels, one can’t help thinking it could have been done better — much better.

• Writing: Terrible
• Directing: Poor
• Acting: Mediocre
• Cinematography: Fair
• Stunts: Fair
• Swordplay: Fair
• Panache: Great

Overall Rating: Mediocre

Swashbuckling Rank: Fair Good

The Legend of Zorro (2005) is another example of the sequel that ought never to have been made. I ought to enjoy writing a review that eviscerates a film so deserving of it, for bad reviews are invariably more enjoyable both to write and to read, but in this case, I am merely tired. I am tired of seeing capable actors lowering themselves to reciting lines as if they were bored prostitutes. I am tired of screenplays that are nothing more than toothpick sculptures built to support a few over-budgeted stunts and script-doctored catch phrases with a bit of family-safe sentimental tinsel draped over it. I am also tired of unconvincing and uninteresting villains, which is a flaw that was present in its predecessor, The Mask of Zorro (1998), but which is even more egregious in this film. Without going into painful, fruitless detail, I will merely state that this is a disappointing and yawn-inducing film that seems better suited for the small screen with commercial interruptions, extended snack breaks, and serving as background noise as one makes unnecessary telephone calls or works on a crossword puzzle. If my attention had been more profitably engaged in such activities, I might not have detested this film quite as much.

• Writing: Terrible
• Directing: Mediocre
• Acting: Mediocre
• Cinematography: Fair
• Stunts: Fair
• Swordplay: Mediocre
• Panache: Poor

Overall Rating: Mediocre

Swashbuckling Rank: Poor

The Mask of Zorro from 1998 could almost have been titled, The Unofficially Adopted Son of Zorro. It doesn’t quite have the same ring, but that is essentially what it is. Anthony Hopkins plays Don Diego this time, carrying out what he believes will be his last adventure as Zorro, hero to the people. Without giving away too much of the plot, the film eventually jumps ahead in time, and we get to see the training of the Zorro who will replace him, Alejandro Murietta, played by Antonio Banderas.

Hopkins and Banderas are both quite good as the two Zorros. Their characters have greater weight than those in earlier Zorro films, and although stunt doubles undoubtedly performed the more difficult stunts, they convey a convincing air of capability and confidence. As with earlier incarnations, there is a sufficient amount of humor and plenty of exciting swordplay. The training of the younger Zorro, in particular, provides some of the most memorable dialogue and action of the entire film.

I referred to Banderas’ character as the “unofficially adopted son” of Zorro, since he becomes Don Diego’s pupil, but in this film Don Diego actually has a daughter, Elena, played by Catherine Zeta-Jones. Elena is a challenging love interest for Alejandro, as she believes she is the daughter of Don Rafael Montero, Zorro’s archenemy (played by Stuart Wilson). Zeta-Jones is an excellent choice for the role, and this time the leading lady knows how wield a sword, which is a pleasing change of pace.

The downside is that villains are not as interesting as the heroes, and that’s a pity. There is no one with the intensity and aura of danger that Basil Rathbone possessed in The Mark of Zorro (1940). There isn’t even a villain with the comic relief factor. No, the villains are boring, and that is the major flaw of the film. As a consequence, its action-packed climax is rather tedious, clichéd, and fails to live up to the expectations raised by its beginning and middle. It is the weakness of the villains that makes this a lopsided film — a good film, but nonetheless lopsided.

• Writing: Fair
• Directing: Good
• Acting: Good
• Cinematography: Good
• Stunts: Good
• Swordplay: Great
• Panache: Great

Overall Rating: Good

Swashbuckling Rank: Great

The Mark of Zorro from 1940 probably has the best fencing scenes of any Zorro film before or since. With Tyrone Power as Don Diego Vega/Zorro, and Basil Rathbone as the film’s leading villain, Captain Esteban Pasquale, this should come as no surprise, as they constituted two-thirds of the trinity of Hollywood’s greatest swordsmen at the time (Errol Flynn being the third). The climactic scene of the film is a breathtaking display of swordsmanship and drama as the two enemies duel, and it stands as one of the greatest single scenes in the history of swashbuckling films. In the tradition of its greatest forebearers, stunt doubles were neither used nor required in the fencing scenes.

In some ways, the film is standard Hollywood fare, although not offensively so. It manages to be inventive and spirited, despite a reliance on certain predictable conventions. Eugene Pallette, playing Fray Felipe, unfortunately reprises his role as Friar Tuck from 1938’s The Adventures of Robin Hood, which is perhaps the worst of the film’s imperfections. J. Edward Bromberg’s portrayal of the corrupt Don Luis Quintero, the despotic Alcalde, is a bit on the clownish side, but manages to be adequate.

The romantic scenes are a great improvement over the film’s silent predecessor, with Linda Darnell giving a fine performance as Lolita Quintero; the stunts are impressive without being over-the-top; and the banter is witty, but not distractingly so. All in all, it is an excellent bit of escapism, and the fencing is unforgettable.

• Writing: Fair
• Directing: Good
• Acting: Fair Good
• Cinematography: Fair
• Stunts: Good
• Swordplay: Superb
• Panache: Great

Overall Rating: Good

Swashbuckling Rank: Great