The Three Musketeers: Milady is a good movie? What do the viewers think about the continuation of Eva Green and Francois Civil?

The second part of Martin Bourboulon’s three musketeers diptych, Milady, hits theaters this Wednesday, December 13th, 8 months after D’Artagnan. The feature film, which still stars Eva Green, Francois Civil, Vincent Cassel, Pio Marmay and Romain Duris, picks up right after the events of the first opus.

From the Louvre to Buckingham Palace, from the underbelly of Paris to the siege of La Rochelle… In a kingdom torn by religious wars and threatened by an English invasion, a few men and women will cross swords and link their destinies. that France.

Inspired by the work of Alexandre Dumas, the first part brought more than 3.3 million viewers to French cinemas. If the director admits that he took into account the feedback from the audience of d’Artagnan about Milady, what do the first viewers think of this second part?

With 625 comments and 95 reviews to date, The Three Musketeers: Milady Has an average viewer rating of 3.7 out of 5 stars, with most 4 star ratings and no 0 star ratings.

“spectacular pictures”

Netizen Remil gives the film 4.5 stars, praising the intrigue, spectacular staging and acting. “The continuation of the first opus is a great success. Finally we depart from the great classic “The Three Musketeers” for an incredibly well-shot new story around the siege of La Rochelle. In the cinema: sit at the top of the room. To fully enjoy the fast scenes and grand shows. The images are often spectacular, the script lively and the actors Sensational. The saga is off to a really good start.”

The opinion is shared by Leo Dess, who writes: “This sequel is a success, almost like the first but with more action and scenes of cloaks and swords, great work by Martin Bourbulon, the actors are always extraordinary in their interesting roles. The music is catchy, you never get bored.”

On the other hand, AdamC prefers Milady d’Artagnan: “This opus is better than the previous one! More action, more rhythm, less length. The ending, the intrigue, the emotion. A great success “It is proud that France is able to produce quality blockbusters. Nothing to envy about Ridley Scott’s recently released Napoleon.

A film that will not envy American blockbusters

Mlcarl is of the same opinion and emphasizes that Martin Bourboulon’s film has nothing to envy to American blockbusters: “Having seen it in preview, I do not regret at all that I spent my money, if it is to get me out of such master classes! The story is really well done, the fights are as intense as ever and the humor adds a freshness that had the whole room laughing. (…)

François Civil is still incredible as d’Artagnan, the story of the conflict between Protestants and Catholics is still interesting to rediscover. Several dramatic moments silenced the room with the intensity of the emotions conveyed (…)

I, who am not a fan of French cinema (and especially because I am a young person who grew up on American blockbusters), I recommend that you go see it, because I find that it gives a lot of hope for the future. French cinema in the action genre. To me, it’s even better than the first one!”

“There really is no conclusion”…

Mr. Cinetoc, on the other hand, is less dithyrambling and finds his interpretationEva Green pushed too hard. “Not bad for supporting great French performances, but what a disappointment compared to the first part. An ending that will disappoint you in more than one way. After all, we are the opposite film. No panache, nothing epic, very dirty musketeers ultra-bright teeth Alexandre Dumas’ version is much more logical and It’s romantic (I hate this ultra-violent version of the movie that will destroy more than one person, especially the youngest).

And finally, Milady, who tries to convince him, because he makes a fuss with his grimaces at every line. A role that takes up too much space and suffocates us with its Machiavellianism. In short, let’s hope it works (a good fight scene with a lot of extras) for a more enjoyable third part, but I highly doubt it.”

The ending of the feature film clearly leaves the audience confused, as Cinemamemories from AlloCiné Club notes, “With or without a cape, with or without a sword, comes the odyssey of a young Gascon, romantic and desirous of the honorable title of Musketeer. However, the second episode announced by Martin Bourboulon is probably not the last of this emblematic work of Alexandre Dumas. (…) The Three Musketeers: Milady is definitely not a sequel or a conclusion.

For his part, Cinéjadore stated that he preferred the previous opus: “The first part was better than this one. It’s hard to be interested in a plot that is vague. A film with a lot of spectacle, but a sequence of battle scenes without any interest. A lot of brilliance. But I was not interested in this saga at all . Great filming locations, but it’s not enough to keep the audience interested. Too bad.”

Hervé Barkatz, on the other hand, gives Milled a rating of 1.5 out of 5 stars and expresses his disappointment: “Big disappointment! Badly written, badly directed, laborious and flat, which leaves you speechless, with an underexploited cast. Let’s move on. Attractive and narrow Francois On Siville, Athos, and Porthos with transparent emotions. But what is Romain Duris doing in this galley, whose springs are sewn with white thread. Only Eva Green (Miled) and Louis Garrel (Louis XIII) float in this sloppy second act, with pale and monotonous lighting. In short, awkward A movie that lacks breath.

But it’s best to form your own opinion! The Three Musketeers: Milady Must see in cinema.