Blu-ray Review: Three Musketeers

The Three Musketeers (Special Edition) [Blu-ray]

Studio: Summit Entertainment
List Price: $30.49
Street Price: $18.99
Amazon.com: $19.98
Release Date: Mar 13, 2012
Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
Running Time: 110 minutes

4.8 Stars (out of 5) - Rated

Synopsis

The original three musketeers are past their prime and working menial jobs in Paris when their friend D'Artagnan rallies them to defend the nation. To do so, they must undermine Cardinal Richelieu's plot to have himself crowned France's next king.

Starring:

Juno Temple, Logan Lerman, Milla Jovovich, Orlando Bloom, Ray Stevenson, Christoph Waltz, Luke Evans, Matthew Macfadyen, Mads Mikkelsen, Til Schweiger

Director:

Paul W.S. Anderson

Blu-ray Release Date:

March 13, 2012

Subtitles:

English SDH, Spanish

Rating

Overall rating weighted as follows:

Audio 40%, Video 40%, Special Features 20%, Movie - its just our opinion so take it with a grain of salt

Audio 5.0 Stars (out of 5)

Dolby and DTS Demo Discs used as basis for comparison

? Subwoofer – 5.0 Stars

? Dialog – 5.0 Stars

? Surround Effects – 5.0 Stars

? Dynamic Range – 5.0 Stars

English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1, Spanish: Dolby Digital 5.1

I didn’t expect a movie about fancy dressed sword fighters to sound so good. Three Musketeers has an amazing DTS-HD presentation. Surround effects are constantly filling the room with ricocheting bullets, sharp sounding clanging swords, creaking boats, high speed wind, and cannonballs that sound like they fly past your head. Dialog doesn’t lost in the action, the clarity of the mix is outstanding. Low end sounds are never forgotten thanks to a musical score filled with heavy rumbles and sounds of black powder gunshots, crashing boats, thuds of action, and tight sounding explosions. The subwoofer is so active that at times it almost seams like it’s overused, but it’s hard for me to complain about it because it sounds so good.

Video 5.0 Stars (out of 5)

Spears & Munsil Benchmark Blu-ray Edition used as basis for comparison

? Color Accuracy - 5.0 Stars

? Shadow detail – 5.0 Stars

? Clarity – 5.0 Stars

? Skin tones – 5.0 Stars

? Compression – 5.0 Stars

Codec: MPEG-4 AVC, Resolution: 1080p, Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1, Original Aspect Ratio: 2.39:1

Vibrant colors and a clean presentation give this film a great look and make it one of the best video presentations I’ve seen in a while. All scenes have warm and vivid colors and still remain to look natural. The bright red robes of the cardinal, the green lawn on the palace, and the rich colors of the king’s various outfits keep your eyes busy with lush colors. Skin tones are natural and dark scenes never loose details, or show any signs of compression. Clarity is crisp and clean and bring out the fine points of the intricate stitching on clothing, details of amazing building architecture, cobblestone roads, and even individual strands of hair.

Bonus Features 4.0 Stars (out of 5)

? Audio Commentary: Director/Producer Paul W.S. Anderson and Producers Jeremy Bolt and Robert Kulzer.

? Access: Three Musketeers: This picture-in-picture feature delivers "access to cast and crew stories, insider information about the making of the film, and more."

? Paul W.S. Anderson's Musketeers (1080p, 2:29): Cast and crew discuss updating the story for a new generation.

? Orlando Bloom Takes on the Duke (1080p, 1:59): A look at Bloom's role in the film.

? 17th Century Air Travel (1080p, 2:20): The director discusses creating the scenes featuring aerial warships.

? Uncovering France in Germany (1080p, 2:14): A short feature about shooting in Bavaria.

? Deleted & Extended Scenes (1080p, 14:18): Over 6 deleted scenes are included.

Movie – 2.5 Stars (out of 5)

Review

The Three Musketeers has been adapted into movies over 20 times. This version swings for the fence by making it an action heavy film and by adding elements of flight. Unfortunately the talented cast cannot save this film from its ridiculous script and substandard direction. It seems like the script was written to be funny, but it comes off as silly and rarely earns a giggle. Paul W.S. Anderson does a great job directing action, but seems to have problems with comedy and elements of drama. The action in this film is over the top but fun. It reminded me of watching a Pirates of Caribbean movie. The movie also suffers from lacking emotional appeal, it seemed like they just moved the story along enough to get to the next action set-piece. This made me uninterested in the characters and the story in general. Even though I didn’t enjoy the film as much as I wanted to, I might find myself watching it with the kids or using it to show off my home theater system to friends because the audio and video presentation is top notch.

Posted by The HT Guys, March 23, 2012 9:15 PM

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

The Big Three Networks

Everything seems to come in threes. We had the Big Three Automakers in Detroit. There were those little pigs. And then there were the major television networks: Netflix, Amazon, and Google.

Wait a minute; what happened to ABC, CBS, and NBC?

From where I sit, that is ancient history. The traditional networks are dead men walking, and just don’t know it. They are trying to stick with the old models of providing the conduit for video entertainment, and they are failing. Streaming content over the Internet bypasses the traditional network, making it an unnecessary intermediary in the system between content producer and consumer. And it may also squeeze out the traditional role of “advertiser” at the same time. If we have learned one thing from the Internet, it is death to the middleman; Amazon Kindle, Square, and Zappos are just a few examples.

Most of the content shown on online systems such as Netflix and Amazon are reruns. The traditional networks and Hollywood movie studios try to wring out some additional value from these leftovers so they license the content for streaming. And in the process, they have sowed the seeds of their own demise. They have provided the fuel for the fire that is the consumer demand to watch what they want, when they want, where they want. And that is a fire that can’t be put out at this point.

But can the networks be replaced? Netflix has launched its original content with the series “Lilyhammer” and will follow up with “House of Cards” with Kevin Spacey and a revival of the popular “Arrested Development” next year. Google’s YouTube is investing in original content as well, and is providing full-length programming of all sorts.

And here comes GigaOM with a breaking story that Amazon has posted job openings for creative positions with the goal of creating its own content. The service is a bit of a sleeper in the streaming video arena at this point, but its Amazon Prime members get to watch all sorts of content for free (along with many other useful bonuses) in return for a Netflix-like monthly fee. Many consumers may find that they can get a better combined value from Amazon, and if the company starts producing compelling content, it could be a major force.

The new world of video entertainment is going to require a new world of ways to pay for the content’s creation. Who do you think is in a better position to deliver a new model: ABC, CBS, and NBC, or Google, Netflix, and Amazon?

I rest my case.

HDTV Almanac - The Big Three Networks

Everything seems to come in threes. We had the Big Three Automakers in Detroit. There were those little pigs. And then there were the major television networks: Netflix, Amazon, and Google.

Wait a minute; what happened to ABC, CBS, and NBC?

From where I sit, that is ancient history. The traditional networks are dead men walking, and just don’t know it. They are trying to stick with the old models of providing the conduit for video entertainment, and they are failing. Streaming content over the Internet bypasses the traditional network, making it an unnecessary intermediary in the system between content producer and consumer. And it may also squeeze out the traditional role of “advertiser” at the same time. If we have learned one thing from the Internet, it is death to the middleman; Amazon Kindle, Square, and Zappos are just a few examples.

Most of the content shown on online systems such as Netflix and Amazon are reruns. The traditional networks and Hollywood movie studios try to wring out some additional value from these leftovers so they license the content for streaming. And in the process, they have sowed the seeds of their own demise. They have provided the fuel for the fire that is the consumer demand to watch what they want, when they want, where they want. And that is a fire that can’t be put out at this point.

But can the networks be replaced? Netflix has launched its original content with the series “Lilyhammer” and will follow up with “House of Cards” with Kevin Spacey and a revival of the popular “Arrested Development” next year. Google’s YouTube is investing in original content as well, and is providing full-length programming of all sorts.

And here comes GigaOM with a breaking story that Amazon has posted job openings for creative positions with the goal of creating its own content. The service is a bit of a sleeper in the streaming video arena at this point, but its Amazon Prime members get to watch all sorts of content for free (along with many other useful bonuses) in return for a Netflix-like monthly fee. Many consumers may find that they can get a better combined value from Amazon, and if the company starts producing compelling content, it could be a major force.

The new world of video entertainment is going to require a new world of ways to pay for the content’s creation. Who do you think is in a better position to deliver a new model: ABC, CBS, and NBC, or Google, Netflix, and Amazon?

I rest my case.

Posted by Alfred Poor, February 15, 2012 5:00 AM

Re: HDTV Almanac - The Big Three Networks

videograbber • Feb 15, 7:51am
> And then there were the major television networks: Netflix, Amazon, and Google. Wait a minute; what happened to ABC, CBS, and NBC? From where I sit, that is ancient history. The traditional networks are dead men walking, and just don’t know it.

Wow. That's quite a leap. Usually I can't find too much to fault in your commentaries, Alfred, but you're way off base with this one, IMO. Why do I say that? Because content is king. And your new, so called "big 3" haven't got any. How much content do I watch each week from the "dead men walking"? About 30 hours. How much from your trio? Zero.

Why do you think the big whoop-de-do launch of Google TV fell flat on it's face? And the hardware products got withdrawn or flushed at fire-sale prices? No content. Sure, I can see that your trio is making the very first tentative steps in that direction (developing their own content). ...