Orange Twofers: Three Musketeers - 12/10/11

[jacey]

While some people might measure a move of Three Musketeers against the book, I'm afraid I measure it against the 1973  Dick Leicester version, seen in my formative years and loved for Ollie Reed. Richard Clamberlain, Christopher Lee and the wonderful Roy Kinnear, not to mention Spike Milligan and Raquel Welch. I missed the chicken fight, for instance.

I was a bit wary of a steampunked Three Musketeers, but it wasn't a steampunky as the posters and trailers made it out to be. Not steampunky at all, in fact, except for a rather weird weapon seen once at the beginning but never again, and airships, supposedly as designed by Leonardo da Vinci. Literally wooden ships with hot air ballons instead of sails. It was more of a caper movie at the beginning and did have an Indiana Jones moment, too, but that's OK.

A few logic bloopers, but let's get the worst tech one out of the way first. Buckingham (Orlando Bloom), here much more the villain than in the Michael York/Richard Chamberlain movie from the 1970s, arrives in France in an airship to visit the king and anchors it by tossing out a heavy anchor which holds his ship to the ground. Yes, this very same anchor which has been on board the ship all the way across the Channel is now too heavy to let it float away. Duh! It's the 'skateboarding elf'' moment (LOTR Helm's Deep) that yanks you out of an otherwise engaging yarn.  Yes, OK, there was Athos' diving helmet in the opening scene along with the above  noted strange weapon of mass distraction, but it was the opening scene and quickly over.

So, the story - pretty much as I remember it from the 1973 much-loved movie with added airships and Buckingham cast as the sneering baddie. Orlando Bloom seemed to be enjoying himself chewing the scenery. Athos, Porthos & Aramis were well cast - though Luke Evans as Aramis was sadly way too much like Orlando Bloom, physically. They could have swapped roles and you might not have noticed. Aramis and Porthos were also a little under-characterised, perhaps, but no surprise there. It's Hollywood, right? There was only room for Athos' angst over Milady (well played by Mila Jovovich).

Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson in PJ and the Lightning Thief) made a good D'Artagnan - very much a cocky teenager. Pity about the American accent. And speaking of accents Mads Mikkelsen's (Rochefort) accent was very strange. Sounded southern American at times, but I see that he's Danish. Oh, well. Nowhere near as scarey as Chrstopher Lee's Rochefort in the 1973 version.

Plot? The queen's jewels to be retrieved from England. Entirely as expected, leaving room for a sequel, of course.

Surprise? James Cordon made a very good Planchet. Not quite Roy Kinnear, but good all the same.

Verdict. Forgiveable fun. Worth a trip to the cinema. la_marquise_de_ may not agree with me on account of this being her favourite book, of clourse. Yes they took liberties, but it was still an entertaining afternoon out.

Comments

[klwilliams.livejournal.com]

At least Logan Lerman didn't try to fake a French accent. Or an English one.

[annafdd.livejournal.com]

My physics brain is too fuzzy at this hour, but this is how anchor works, on ships.

[lil-shepherd.livejournal.com]

I always thought the anchor worked by drag - the hooks get caught in whatever is on the bottom and, even if it's sand, will hold the ship vaguely in place.

[annafdd.livejournal.com]

Yes, what I meant was, it's not the weight, it's actually how the chain lies, and the fact that the anchor lies flat so only one of the components of the force pulling the ship drags it, and it mostly stays in place. Damn, I studied all this in quite some detail, and now I've forgotten everything about it. Bah. Stupid brain.

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

As far as I'm aware a ship's anchor works because of the shape of it. Doesn't it drag and dig in? I may be wrong, of course, and there may be a difference between air and water and the way they act upon certain metals. (Gold weighing more heavily in water IIRC, which is deeply weird.)

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

As far as I know, yes. The drag on a ship's anchor will be horizontal and as it drags across the bottom, the pointy prongs will dig into the bottom, hence holding the ship in place.

I suppose, assuming the airship has no tendency to rise (neutral buoyancy), an anchor will work in the same way to stop it drifting away. However, I would have thought tethering it to something solid or hammering in stakes would work better than relying on an anchor, which might not dig into the ground very well, it being harder than the sand on the sea bed.

[charlieallery.livejournal.com]

*flukes* Anchors have flukes and on modern anchors they are flat and swivel on the shank rather than the curved stylised shape of the older, cast anchors. Yes, they work by drag rather than weight, or ships would sink, and the biggest issue is laying out enough rope/chain/cable so that the drag on the anchor is more horizontal than vertical. Though there must be a way to jettison an anchor if it gets snagged on a rough bottom.

Airships - tethers, yup. Heavy weight option, well ... given the time, if 'airships' are *hot* air balloons, as opposed to helium, then once you stop heating the contents of the balloon, they will become less bouyant. So theoretically, if you travel with frequent use of burners, then allow the air in the balloon to cool enough to let the balloon get down close to the ground - i.e. it's sinking (negatively bouyant), then dropping the anchor should allow the air to lift the balloon, but not the anchor. Occasional burning will keep the envelope (balloon) inflated, but not enough to allow it to lift the anchor, ready for a prolonged burn to generate enough lift to take off (including anchor) when you return to the balloon.

So, dropping an anchor from a (hot air) balloon that is heading for the ground, once it's close enough to the ground to reach it, probably *will* tether it to the ground while keeping it aloft. Helium envelope is slightly more complicated because it would involve releasing helium from the balloon/envelope until the density inside causes it to sink. In the same way if it's negatively bouyant and sinking, then 'dropping the anchor' *will* in fact allow the balloon/airship to rise against the anchor, but not to pull it off the ground. So a weight will work.

Taking off for a helium balloon will involve releasing helium into the envelope from compressed storage (steampunk rather than historical) and replacing air to decrease the density and thus creating enough positive bouyancy to lift both airship *and* anchor, which can be hauled aboard.

Hope that makes sense. If not, I'll have another beer and give it another go ... !! ;)

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

This particular anchor dropped on to a paved courtyard, then they hauled themselves down and landed.

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

And they kept the ballon inflated all the time while they waited for Buckingham.