Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Pikes, Muskets and Flouncy Shirts => Topic started by: Lowtardog on 20 January 2014, 09:21:44 AM
-
Watched it last night, not dreadful however a few bits which were a little puzzling; Why are they all wearing leather, whats it with the shoulder pads denoting which regiment they came from?
the usual swashbucking one would expect. I did like the fact the weapons were pretty accurate including the pistols and musket, did cringe at the unifomrs though, BBC drives you nuts since they made Robin hood whihc should have been lost in the archives as a dire liberty ;D
-
lowtardog...............the opening music catches your attention and for me it had a spaghetti western romp feel about it which i enjoyed. The leather
"biker" jackets do jar a bit but on balance pretty enjoyable.All the characters are intersting though the king was a little too wimpy for me
and would be better as slighhtly more "awe inspiring"!!
worth watching for sure................. :D :-*
good to see they have made a big effort with the weapons..nice!!
regards
Ged
www.gringo40s.com
www.gringo40s.blogspot.com
-
Accurate weapons mean squat of course when faced with the complete fiction and jarring anachronism of the clothing. :(
-
Accurate weapons mean squat of course when faced with the complete fiction and jarring anachronism of the clothing. :(
The clothes are pretty accurate in style ...just seem to be lots of leather!
-
Well put mate :D
Actually, not as bad as expected, but to paraphrase most comments on the BBC's old points of view: 'Why oh why oh ****ing why' do they insist on dressing the heroes so badly.
As you say, all that leather - more like an attempt at a C17 Village People, and those shoulder pads seem to owe more to Warhammer than any historical reference.
I wonder if the producers think that to dress them as 17th century soldiers from a well-off background wouldn't make them look "ard" enough? At least they didn't go down the usual idiotic route of not letting important characters wear hats >:(
Other than the main characters, the look wasn't as bad as I had anticipated. Nothing near as bad as the appearance of each and every character in the Robin Hood series you mention :( where as well as going to film in the former eastern block to save money, they also seem to have dressed everyone from charity shops and army surplus lol
What I found most irritating was that, as the plot hinged very much around the baddies nicking the uniforms from murdered musketeers in order to carry out their dastardly deeds, and those "uniforms" being refered to regularly through the script, wouldn't this have worked better if some element of uniform (the well known blue tabards?) had been used? Some of the musketeers seem to have slung on a blue cape instead once in a while, but maybe they could have splashed out on at least the relevant Osprey book to use as a bit of a guide - or something better!
Still, I'll no doubt watch the rest of the series as OK, resenting the fact that it could have been almost brilliant with a bit more care about the look.
Cheers,
Lance
-
The BBC costume department are obsessed with putting actors in leatherette for any period piece pre-Jane Austen.
I think they think it looks exotic and immediately provides a convincing look of 'period-chic' whilst still possessing a modern-day vibe, thus making these 'historical' characters somehow more accessible and relevant to the present day viewer. Patronising, isn't it?
It looks naff and anachronistic - but they keep on doing it.
The down-with-da-kids 'Robin Hood', as mentioned, the execrable 'The White Queen', and now 'The Musketeers' - all dashing around in faux-leather gilets and tight leggings. It may look sexy and tres moderne, but it is also faintly ridiculous. But it's clearly a groove the BBC are into at the moment when it comes to historical dramas...
:(
-
I think these boys got there first - http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=60804.15
-
True enough, but I think that thread had sunk way down the board until AEG (quite justifiably) just bumped it.
Good idea to have just one discussion on this programme though, where we can all vent about how much we hated it (while secretly enjoying it) ;)
I'll lock the other thread to concentrate fire on this new one...
Thanks.
-
And another thing :D
Yes, pretty good use of weaponry I thought, and nicely put in the interrogation in the barn - but, when the musket "failed" to ignite (deliberately) it would have actually made sense if he had said he had forgotten to prime it, rather than forgotten to load the ball, as without the ball, all concerned would have known that matchlock would still have ignited and done the prisoner no good at all at that range. Just a small point, but when you're a bit of an obsessive almost lifelong target shooter and re-enactor.... ::)
Overall, could have been a lot worse (as I suspected it would be) some of the settings were very nice.
For me though, the old 70s movies with Olly Reed et al have still to be equalled 8)(though I speak from a slight position of ignorance, having refused to watch the Brat Pack version some years back due to the seriously bad appearance of the main characters trousers tucked into boots in place of breeches etc :'( )
Cheers,
Lance
www.gallopingmajorwargames.com
-
The BBC costume department are obsessed with putting actors in leatherette for any period piece pre-Jane Austen.
I think they think it looks exotic and immediately provides a convincing look of 'period-chic' whilst still possessing a modern-day vibe, thus making these 'historical' characters somehow more accessible and relevant to the present day viewer. Patronising, isn't it?
It looks naff and anachronistic - but they keep on doing it.
lol lol lol 8)
-
the fact is leather excess..and "overmodernisation" creates and inspires
a wealth of opinions and publicity for the show and has stirred many
"experts" on the 17th century to head to the forums, and like they say
all publicity is good even if the comments are bad!! :o ( i dont mean any of us here!!).....................and im sure a New Range of 28mm figures
will appear...(tempted...as always!) and i have no doubt we will all watch
the show till the end....
would have been good to see a blue tabbard or two with a nod to the
real guys.Still im hooked 8)
Ged
www.gringo40s.com
-
For me though, the old 70s movies with Olly Reed et al have still to be equalled 8)(though I speak from a slight position of ignorance, having refused to watch the Brat Pack version some years back due to the seriously bad appearance of the main characters trousers tucked into boots in place of breeches etc :'( )
Agreed, without doubt my absolute favourite version and as far as I am concerned the best cast ever: Spike Milligan, Roy Kinnear, a cameo appearance from Captain Peacock ;) and not forgetting Raquel's ample bosom ;D)
-
For me though, the old 70s movies with Olly Reed et al have still to be equalled
Hear hear! Although I would like the third film - The Return of the Musketeers - to appear on dvd as I can't recall ever having seen it.
-
Hear hear! Although I would like the third film - The Return of the Musketeers - to appear on dvd as I can't recall ever having seen it.
I still have it on VHS, I too haven't found it on DVD - let me know if you do :D
www.gallopingmajorwargames.com
-
Agreed, without doubt my absolute favourite version and as far as I am concerned the best cast ever: Spike Milligan, Roy Kinnear, a cameo appearance from Captain Peacock ;) and not forgetting Raquel's ample bosom ;D)
Too right, and who could forget the last item ;)
Ged -you're right, I'll continue watching :D
www.gallopingmajorwargames.com
-
True enough, but I think that thread had sunk way down the board until AEG (quite justifiably) just bumped it.
Good idea to have just one discussion on this programme though, where we can all vent about how much we hated it (while secretly enjoying it) ;)
I'll lock the other thread to concentrate fire on this new one...
Thanks.
sorry, I short cutted to it... :D
-
No problem. Just keeping things tidy :)
-
Yeah, the 70's version is the dog's doo-dah's, even if they do have Athos as being the big strong one instead of Porthos. But who can deny Olly Reed's brilliance as the brooding borderline psychopath?
I quite enjoyed the older version of the musketeers in 'The Man in the Iron Mask' (1998), with Gabriel Byrne, Gerard Depadieu, John Malkovich and Jeremy Irons. It seems to have been the best cast of the various incarnations I've seen.
-
I quite enjoyed the older version of the musketeers in 'The Man in the Iron Mask' (1998), with Gabriel Byrne, Gerard Depadieu, John Malkovich and Jeremy Irons. It seems to have been the best cast of the various incarnations I've seen.
That's a good one too :)
-
sorry, I short cutted to it... :D
Woops sorry, I tend to search through unread posts hence my haste ;D
and Yup the McDonald Fraser Musketeer films cant be beat. Ifact if you want something in a rather anachronistic vein Frasers Reavers book/audio is of equal bizzare nature, more akin to yellow beard lol
-
This is just the latest case of recreating old stuff for a new generation......... 8)
-
I fully agree that the 70's versions (the Three and Four Musketeers - which was originally intended to be released as one movie) remains the best ever done - screenplay and wonderful dialogue by George McDonald Fraser; fine cast (Christopher Lee as Rochefort !); true period costuming (contrast that with the bad Ye Olde Renaissance Faire look of the modern version leatherette), weapons, and even background details (check out such small details as the games being played in the taverns and by Rochefort's toadies; the "human hamster wheel" treadmill to raise heavy loads above the first floor; the sedan chairs); and a fine score. Why watch the poor modern version (likewise, why watch the stupid modern Spartacus, when the Kirk Douglas version is near perfect)?
-
Actually, what I should have said, is that apart from the silly costumes and the clanking anachronisms of some of the very C21st streetwise quips and asides, I quite enjoyed the new BBC version. Nice buildings (eastern Europe, obviously), quite liked the music, and I thought there was some good acting and characterisation, even if it was all a bit panto. Thought Porthos was completely wrong - not because of his ethnicity, but because of his accent. Bit like Ray Winstone's Henry VIII... A musketeer wiv a London accent innit. Hopeless. Thought Aramis and Athos were pretty good though. The main problem with it is the current vogue for period dramas to pretend these are modern people in period dress. Obviously people 400 years ago, fictional or historical, were not modern people, and did not have the same turn of phrase, attitudes or sensibilities. So it's just the latest conceit in Telly-land.
Set that aside, and it's all good fun and reasonably well done.
Not HBO though, is it?
-
I thought it was quite good apart from the uniform.
I will be watching the rest of them.
-
I enjoyed it and the ladies are very easy on the eye...
-
I enjoyed it and the ladies are very easy on the eye...
Yep, seconded, especially Milady ;)
-
now now Nick remember your blood pressure!! lol
-
Not seen it yet (we recorded it) - so I will hold back on any discussion.
Tony
-
I enjoyed it and the ladies are very easy on the eye...
Yep, seconded, especially Milady Wink
Easier than Raquel Welch? :o
-
Easier than Raquel Welch? :o
Never! lol
-
The main problem with it is the current vogue for period dramas to pretend these are modern people in period dress. Obviously people 400 years ago, fictional or historical, were not modern people, and did not have the same turn of phrase, attitudes or sensibilities. So it's just the latest conceit in Telly-land.
I quite agree, Captain. I did enjoy the programme more than I expected to but I felt at times that the characters behaved as they do in all 'historical' bbc dramas and I could have been watching, 'Ripper Street', 'Peeky Blinders' as the men are all swagger and cocksure 'almost like they are in a rock band, whilst the ladies are all feisty with heaving bosoms and ready to fall into bed with the heroes at the drop of a hat... At least it was not as dire as the terrible 'Atlantis'
It is worth considering that on the subject of historical accuracy, there is no history not be accurate about so to speak, as Dumas based his stories on several earlier texts, but wrote them in the 19th century 'stretching historical accuracy to the limits' as it says in my 'Radio Times'. It is a 19th century story set in the fictional 17th century.
Do musket balls spark when they ricochet though? that is what I wondered??
I we keep watching just to see how evil milady gets...
-
Do musket balls spark when they ricochet though?
They are lead, so more likely to flatten on impact and drop on the floor.
Not sure that the slow velocity of these weapons would allow it to ricochet, anyway.
-
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/bbcs-musketeers-adaptation-slammed-for-not-having-any-dog-characters-2014012082739
-
I so remember Dogtanian! :P
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/59/DogtanianLogo.JPG/240px-DogtanianLogo.JPG)
-
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/bbcs-musketeers-adaptation-slammed-for-not-having-any-dog-characters-2014012082739
I get all my current affairs updates from the Mash. Its more reliable than the sh*te we get fed to us from the BBC etc
-
They are lead, so more likely to flatten on impact and drop on the floor.
Not sure that the slow velocity of these weapons would allow it to ricochet, anyway.
Thanks @Joroas, that is what I thought so I was surprised to hear the wild west style 'peeow!' and see the ricochet sparks beloved of filmmakers when watching The Musketeers... ::)
-
It would be interesting to hear what a re-enactor has seen. Soft metals, like lead and copper, don't spark with friction, like iron and steel.
-
Enjoyed it for what it was....adaptation/dramatisation largely put out to get good viewing figures rather than keep historians happy
Will watch the rest
Flashing blade it ain't! ;)
-
'You've got to fight for what you want... ' ;)
Ah, those were the days...
-
'You've got to fight for what you want... ' ;)
Ah, those were the days...
Ah yes lol
-
Absolutely, and for the younger generation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-ZEDNkZ2L4
-
those shoulder pads seem to owe more to Warhammer than any historical reference.
I actually enjoyed it much more than I thought I would. Not as historical fiction but as enjoyable fantasy. In fact I was massively reminded of what Warhammer used to be like: lots of dirt, lots of fights, a fair bit of skulduggery, lies, plots and a good healthy dose of sauce. :)
Given how execrable Merlin, Atlantis and most of Robin Hood were, it was really rather good.
-
Im no history buff so I just enjoyed it ;D
-
Just watched the first episode on Iplayer and wasn't really impressed :?
Looked OK but none of the main characters really endear themselves, even Peter Capaldi wasn't brilliant.
I'll watch it again and see what happens.
And the shoulder guard thing is bollocks, having something hindering (no matter how little) your sword arm is a recipe for disaster. Having fenced a bit and taken part in re-enactment sword play you need as much flexibility as possible.
cheers
James
-
I have to say,you lot have put me off. Back to re-runs of Blackbooks I guess or at least Foyle's War(found Ripper St. ever so crap :o). lol
-
I think that as you become more knowledgeable, stuff that looks okay to Joe Public, looks trash to us. This is some exciting stuff to plug the gap between cookery and those awful celebrity (TM) programmes. Just who watches sitcoms like Benidorm? :?
-
I tried. I really tried. The camera work was fine, pretty pictures galore, beautiful weapons (if only a tad unrealistic in force; getting thrown back 5 meters by a pistol ball....) but the clothing was increasingly silly and the acting was plain sad. I surrendered after 15 minutes and turned it off.
-
it was dross, everything about it was second rate, everything the BBC makes is a disappointment.
Luckily Blackflag has started and that's already looking good.
-
I decided long ago, that there is too much good stuff out there to waste time on the lacklustre........
-
I decided long ago, that there is too much good stuff out there too waste time on the lacklustre........
I agree old son,life is too short.
-
Agreed, without doubt my absolute favourite version and as far as I am concerned the best cast ever: Spike Milligan, Roy Kinnear, a cameo appearance from Captain Peacock ;) and not forgetting Raquel's ample bosom ;D)
Are we quite sure poor old Olly didn't think it was real o_o
-
Well, he did get stabbed by Christopher Lee in the second one so why not lol
cheers
James
-
it was dross, everything about it was second rate, everything the BBC makes is a disappointment.
Luckily Blackflag has started and that's already looking good.
Not heard of that?
-
The BBC? been around for years mate,generally found on channel one on most TV's.............. ;) lol
-
Not heard of that?
oops, I meant Black Sails o_o
-
Just watched episode 2 on iPlayer. i've changed my mind. I quite like it :)
Yes, the Musketeers' costumes are a bit far fetched, but the locations are great, and I like the characters, even if the modern idiom strikes a bum note from time to time. But you can't really fault it for panache, and that's what swashbuckling is all about at the end of the day! Ne c'est pas? ;)
-
Echo captain blood...watched it on the train home tonight and almost missed my stop.
It's all good panto fun...have to say I think the sets are brilliant.
-
In an age when we are deprived of good old fashioned period adventures, I welcome anything that has some swashbuckling, sword fights, heaving bosoms and luxurious facial hair. :)
-
Did you mention
heaving bosoms
? :P
-
enjoyed episode two,good romp
doctor who needs to get nasty quick though turning a bit soft in this episode i thought
-
i enjoyed episode two as well....feel myself being drawn in after
the inital antileathrette outburst from me historically.it was fun :)
the clip from Episode three looks fairly gripping to be honest...
one for all and all to watch!!
regards
Ged
www.gringo40s.com
www.gringo40s.blogspot.com
-
i enjoyed episode two as well....
one for all and all for one - I don't think this statement has been voiced yet! Shocking
-
Was the cardinal on the same side as the musketeers in this episode or was he actually masterminding the theft of the crown jewels thoughts ???
-
Was the cardinal on the same side as the musketeers in this episode or was he actually masterminding the theft of the crown jewels thoughts ???
The cardinal was for France and therefore the King, he would not have masterminded the theft. Therefore the Musketeers were useful to him in protecting the king.
-
The whole point in the story was to bring discredit on the Queen by exposing her relationship with the Duke of Buckingham after she GAVE him some of the diamonds. The Cardinal did this by suggesting that the King held a ball at which she was to wear them and, therefore, have to explain where the missing ones were.
-
The whole point in the story was to bring discredit on the Queen by exposing her relationship with the Duke of Buckingham after she GAVE him some of the diamonds. The Cardinal did this by suggesting that the King held a ball at which she was to wear them and, therefore, have to explain where the missing ones were.
Are they bringing the original story into this in a round about way then, good point as to me it seems that although I am quite enjoying it, its more like a weekly detective/secret agent story at the moment ;D
-
Yes, they are playing fast and loose with the original story... Basically taking the characters and dropping them into new stories.
-
The whole point in the story was to bring discredit on the Queen by exposing her relationship with the Duke of Buckingham after she GAVE him some of the diamonds. The Cardinal did this by suggesting that the King held a ball at which she was to wear them and, therefore, have to explain where the missing ones were.
Buckingham and the queens diamonds have not yet made an appearance in the TV series, as Richard says they are playing fast and loose with the story. I thought Eric the Sheds question was directed at the latest episode, not the book.
-
Aagh! So in true Hollywoody style, BASED on a true story............ vaguely!
-
I think the opening titles includes the fatal phrase 'inspired by' or something along those lines...
This is why screenwriters love old stories which are out of copyright. Basically they can pillage them to their heart's content... ::)
-
I recently watched Invictus, the story of how, with Nelson Mandela's support, they SA rugby Team won the World Cup. The title of the film is based on the name of the poem written by a 19thC. student from the school where I work, William Henley.
Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
While incarcerated on Robben Island prison, Nelson Mandela recited the poem to other prisoners and was empowered by its message of self-mastery. In the movie Invictus, Mandela gives the captain of the national South African rugby team the poem to inspire him to lead his team to a Rugby World Cup win, telling him how it inspired him in prison. In reality, as opposed to the movie, Mandela gave the captain, Francois Pienaar, a copy of the "The Man in the Arena" passage from President of the United States Theodore Roosevelt's speech Citizenship in a Republic instead.
So, the title of the film is wrong. The Man in the Arena would have been as good a title!
Why does Hollywood bugger about with history for no good reason?
-
Nicks right my question related to the episode - cant help thinking that Dr Who was behind the jewel heist - a to discredit the king b) to make money
Given his scheming nature why did he so freely walk with the king and not persuade him to halt his visit to Notre Dame. He probably knew the assassination attempt was a ruse !
-
Watched episode two and still not convinced :?
I've disconnected the association with the Olly Reed films (my favorite version and still the best) but it just isn't 'singing' for me. None of the actors stand out in any way and some of the acting is rather dubious.
It does look good though, sets etc but that's about it :(
cheers
James
-
None of the actors stand out in any way and some of the acting is rather dubious.
all of the acting is rather dubious. And all of the script IS dubious.
You could take any of the lines and give them to any of the characters and it wouldn't make any difference.
No characterisation, mediocre plot lines and second rate film making usual BBC fare.
-
Certainly ain't no peaky Blinders...
-
I'm just going to buy the Oli Reed films :)
-
I'm finding it quite enjoyable as a bit of entertainment, even if it is not as well researched or acted as say, Sesame Street (though Elmo as D'Artagnan, Cookie Monster as Porthos, Grover as Aramis, and Telly as Athos, would be well worth watching!). I'll keep watching as long as it is fun. It doesn't do my head in like the White Queen did, though that may be partly because I knew more about that era. At least (so far) there are no airships or Orlando Bloom!