The Three/Four Musketeers (1974) in 16x9!! (1 Viewer)

[Steve Phillips]

The third film was released directly to cable TV in the United States, but was intended as a theatrical release and was in most countries. It featured the same cast, playing the same characters, so that makes it the third film in the series.

I never said it was as good as the initial entries, but calling the set "complete" is incorrect and misleading. Of course, Anchor Bay doesn't shy away from incorrect and misleading statements on their DVDs...

 

[Paul McElligott]

The third film was released directly to cable TV in the United States, but was intended as a theatrical release and was in most countries. It featured the same cast, playing the same characters, so that makes it the third film in the series.

I never said it was as good as the initial entries, but calling the set "complete" is incorrect and misleading. Of course, Anchor Bay doesn't shy away from incorrect and misleading statements on their DVDs...

Except that the first two films were made together and originally intended to be one picture. The third film was an afterthought many years later, meant to cash in on the reputation of the original film(s).

This set is the "complete" Richard Lester film and calling it that is not the least bit misleading.

 

[Steve Phillips]

In your opinion.

I am well aware of the production history of the series. I can understand how it could be argued that the word "complete" refers to the long film that was originally intended, but still, the logic doesn't hold up.

One could use the same logic with the upcoming "Mad Max" film. If they released a set of the original films and called it the "complete" MAD MAX collection, that wouldn't be right, even though the new film is being made years later as an afterthought to cash in. Same for ROCKY V, etc etc.

I hope you are mature enough to handle the thought that someone might disagree with you.

 

[Paul McElligott]

At long as you're mature enough to realize that almost no one else shares your concern over this issue. (And I'm basing this on the fact that, in the months since this set was announced, you are the first person I've seen raise this issue). I, for one, am happy to have the orginal film with an anamorphic transfer and I wouldn't care if they called it "Melvin."

On a more prosaic front, it's highly unlikely that all three films will ever be released as a set, since the first two were Fox and the new one was MCA/Universal. So the point is pretty moot, anyway.

 

[Mike_Richardson]

Both THREE and FOUR MUSKETEERS should be 1.85. They weren't anamorphic 2.35 films, so DVDFile is wrong on that score.

As far as RETURN OF THE MUSKETEERS goes, it's not "an abysmal TV movie." It shot as a theatrical feature and was made by many of the same cast AND crew (including the same writer and director), and while it may not compare to the originals, it's certainly more than an "afterthought" that doesn't deserve to be included in the box set.

I agree that video legalities may be the reason for why all three may not be included in a box-set, but Fox has nothing to do with the ownership of THREE and FOUR MUSKETEERS -- they're both now controlled by Canal Plus (who acquired them from the Salkinds, I believe).

Universal only distributed RETURN -- I would assume there's a rash of foreign investors who were involved in that movie and that the Salkinds may have only been part owners there. The LD, anyway, is pretty decent looking and looks better framed in 1.33 than the originals.

 

[RickardL]

As I mentioned before, I haven't seen "The Return ..." and
I would not have objected at all if it was included in the set.
And seeing the familiar characters in a "new" adventure
alongside Kim Cattrall(!!) would have been nice.
But it is the "first" two that really belongs together,
the "third" would have been a bonus for those who cared
to watch it.
Anyway, that is not happening so there is no need to speculate more
about it.

Edit: What a wonderful tool IMDB is! I just checked what
all these three movies had in common in terms of cast
and crew. It turned out that there is 8 actors/actresses
that appear in all three movies, which most of us already
knew but I never thought that they had so many people
rounded up for the 1989 flick that had worked with the
other two in 73/74! It is 15 people and most have pretty vital
roles: director, writer, costume designer, editor, art
department, special effects, 2nd unit director, stunts,...

 

[Steve Phillips]

Guys, I never said I was complaining that the third film isn't in the set, and I understand that it is under different ownership and that a "complete" set from one studio isn't possible.

I was under the impression this is a discussion forum.

Apparently, some of you can't handle it when someone feels differently than you do, and feel the need to make juvenile statements about how "few care", and cap on those who might disagree with you. Please grow up. You can't go thru life getting upset when you encounter a different viewpoint. I for one, enjoy hearing other sides of issues, and respect others opinions even if I don't share them.

I am happy the set is coming out, I just thought that Anchor Bay might have used more care in the marketing. It is hardly a gigantic issue; and wouldn't keep me from buying the set.

I hope all of you (even the rude ones) enjoy the DVDs.

 

[Paul McElligott]

I think that we just need to agree to disagree on three points:

* That the Artisan set is or is not complete

* That anyone's opinion was "crapped on."

* That anybody needs to do any growing up.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

I think that we just need to agree to disagree on three points:
* That the Artisan set is or is not complete
* That anyone's opinion was "crapped on."
* That anybody needs to do any growing up.

Ok, but can we at least agree that the set is coming from Anchor Bay instead of Artisan.
...and that the cover art is kind of cheesy
...and that the 2.35:1 spec listed by DVD File is likely an error, and these titles will likely be either 1.66:1 or 1.85:1 anamorphic as they should be.
...and that everyone with a DVD player should buy this set on street date.

Regards,

 

[Paul McElligott]

...and that everyone with a DVD player should buy this set on street date.

 

[RickardL]

I just thought that I should add some final comments to this
fine DVD presentation. For a good review, I can recommend
DVD Savants; http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s726musk.html.
My additional comments are that this DVD package must not
be missed! If you ever enjoyed the films, they are a must!
Great picture quality, though not reference, but still
very good; I made a lot of beautiful screen caps at
http://user.tninet.se/~nrw952z/Musketeers.htm but be
warned if you have a slow connection, it's about 50
images in sizes between 13Kb to 87Kb...
The caps will be there for a limited time only.
The sound is mono but it does the work, nothing to
complain about there.
The extras are really good; recent interviews with cast
and crew as well as a vintage making-of.
The talent bios are among the best I have seen on DVD.
The DVD menues are also really good, the only letdown is
the rather simple text based chapter selection part.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

I'm thankful for the discussion in any event because I wasn't even aware there WAS a third film.