Porthos needs a lot of explaining I think .

What? Feminist bandwagon? That kind of attitude sets feminisim back. Not that it really matters seeing this is set back in the whatever hundreds. Wanting equality in teaching is important but she's acting like women have superiority over everything else. She's a total bitch in a different way from the Kings mum. Now Constance, Milady, The Queen and the Kings mother are all strong females. They all don't just believe in equality and a better life blah de blah blah they bloody live it without screaming in the faces of people.

And now she's snogging Athos's face off. 

Being a strong women doesn't mean having to act like a bigoted sexist male.

He should beat the shit out of her, horrible cow being mean to Constance. I don't get why these type of people have to be so cold to other people?

I'm back .

So this episode was great I really enjoyed it, other then the annoying women.




Can't wait for next week with this and Hannibal I'm in heaven on weekends at the moment! Mads Mikkelsen and Ryan Gage my life is made. And just like Hannibal I love trying to figure out what part of the original story they'll be at by next series! I'm not as sad as some that Peter Capaldi won't be around, I'm much happier I get a load more episodes with Gage, Cabrera, Burke and Howard who have all been so wonderful so far. I've found Richelieu to be very... Patchy. Though maybe that is purely because it is so close to when Waltz played him (I will admit bias in that I'd LOVE to have seen Waltz play Richelieu in stories like these over that film!)

BIB now that I would love to see. I'm not sure though, a lot of what I see Waltz in is semi-comical, even Landa isn't totally a straight character (it is why I find him so intense.) Capaldi is playing him very straight and very menacing but with the eye on making us remember that the Cardinal REALLY TRULY believes he's doing what is best for France. He's very protective of the King, even if it is purely down to the fact he knows he can mold the King to his thinking. I would have loved to have seen Waltz doing something more with his Richelieu. 

That being said this cast is superb. I'd never heard of any of the cast before, though obviously I HAD seen Santiago Cabrera in something, though I would never have guessed he was Isaac Mendez in a million years. His performance of Aramis is so much better then in Heroes, he's really grown to be a great actor and he brings so much depth to Aramis. Ryan Gage is great as the King. Tom Burke could be so much better as Athos but he's given so little to do at times other then sulking in doorways. Howard Charles is amazing as Porthos though I'd like to see a little bit more of the brute strength of Porthos, Charles is built well enough that he looks imposing but I'd like to see more of it.

It seems we get to see a little development on d'Artagnan's standing in the group next week. I don't know why but I prefer him being a "trainee" Musketeer. The moment he becomes equal to the rest of them I don't think I'll like him as much. At the moment they treat him like a equal but they could go the wrong way with him, instead of treating him like a naive character he'd become too full of his own self importance and left that way.

The only character I missed this week was Treville but as I don't think he's technically a main character I guess that is to be his fate at times. I really do enjoy him though, he's got great presence and steals the scenes he shares with the Musketeers. He's a great adversary/reluctant ally to Richelieu and a great choice in actor once again.

The Queen is still a bit annoying but I'm liking her more and more.

It finally feels like they are leading up to something quite dramatic though.

I personally have been a little let down by Capaldi's Cardinal. I don't know but the menace hasn't been there but it hasn't really been replaced by enough either. 

I think Waltz (and obviously this is imaginary land 101) would have done it a little better. I don't think he's a much better actor then Capaldi but at times it feels like Capaldi isn't really engaging with the script. I think Waltz has a very menacing face but you can really believe at the same time that he cares and believes in whatever he's doing. Capaldi... Not so much. To be honest I'd have loved to have seen that whole cast in something much more like this then what they did get given. They were really good as a cast but the stories in this series are just better.

We do have a great cast in the show though. The only one I don't really like is Milady. I've grown to like the Queen, she can be annoying but she plays the part well and you really believe she has strong beliefs even if it is annoying that what she believes is very naive. Ryan Gage is the stand out star, I don't care what anyone else says, I love his King. He's got the perfect face for anything like this, its so emotional. He'll make a scene just with one glance he's that good.

As for the Musketeers. I am in love with Treville, I don't know why but I do love him. Santiago is great, I do think he's getting the brunt of the scripts though, he's very much the Musketeer in the focus of everything. He gets the best lines and has the most rounded and interesting personality. Howard Charles is probably my favourite only because he's the perfect Porthos for me! I love that cheeky look he gets on his face all the time, and the fact just by the way he looks you can see his character is always listening and learning. He has a great human side to him which has a lot to do with his background. His back story had me in tears! Tom Burke? Grown on me. The big problem is Burke is AMAZING. Like the rest of them. But his Athos has been left standing about moping 90% of the time. I get it, Athos has a lot of baggage and a lot of emotional insecurities but given half the time, like this episode, and Burke can pull so much out with Athos. THE NEED TO STOP HIM BROODING ALL THE TIME! We get it! Stop it!

Then we get to Dogtanan. Pasqualino is by far the most likeable d'Artagan I've ever seen. The problem is, for me, d'Artagnan is always a dislikeable character. I wouldn't want him to become more then just an apprentice until the end of the second series to be honest. Like you it is for no reason really other then the dynamics. It won't really change because right now they are writing him as the whole of the team having the utmost respect for him and his opinions. Even the small moments of "you're young, you'll learn" could stick around because Aramis does it to Porthos enough as it is. I just want to see him pushed on his own a little more, for the whole story to be one of growth. At the moment he might as well have been a Musketeer from episode 1. I guess I want to see (and it looks like we'll get a little of it next episode) d'Artagnan fight to be a Musketeer, really be stretched and work for it. The proper dynamics of him being taught, the feel that it is building up to him joining them and THEN him joining them.

We'll just have to wait and see.

To be honest I can't agree with it feeling like its building up to anything. It doesn't. Compare it to Hannibal which after only two episodes feels like its building up to an Earth shattering conclusion and I really don't get the feeling with this series. If anything it feels a lot more like Doctor Who. It feels like each story is disjointed from the next, the only plot points I see going through the stories is Aramis/Queen Romance and Athos/Milady show down. I'd take d'Artagnan out of the Athos/Milady show down now because he's too busy with Constance, why would he get it on with Constance just to run after Milady again? As for Aramis/Queen.... Meh.

That isn't to say I dislike it. Obviously I've just compared it to my favourite show in the world. I just think it needs to get a story running for more then a episode so we can have quite an explosive finale.

Hopefully there will be a longer story during the second series that we can get lost in. Not that I'd mind the "crime of the week" type stories, it has been quite fun. I'm in two minds on whether this series does character building or story development best. I think its pretty strong in both areas but lacking in possibly the final moments of the episodes? 

I know this is going to sound rude, and you know I don't usually say things like this BUT you really can't have a fully formed opinion on those characters if you are just taking their first and latest stories into account.

EACH of them have had their stories elaborated and with Constance her gaining her own presence in the world is part of her story.

For example, the big fight Athos and Aramis get into in the Contessa's place, she stands at the side and lets the boys do the work, Constance wouldn't. Want proof? In her first episode she was attacked by d'Artagnan (yeah it was just a kiss but a kiss forced on her by a stranger) and her reaction was a knee in the wibbly wobbly bits. Last episode it was Aramis left holding the baby whilst Constance fought the guard. Constance ASKED d'Artagnan to teach her to shoot a pistol and sword fight and she's taken it seriously. She's been a part of many of their plans and even given them ideas and helped more then just being there. In this episode she is the one that helps Fleur, she's the one that instead of just winding a man up because that is what being a strong women is about, she talks to him. As I said earlier in this discussion the father/uncle didn't seem to be a bad person, the going to hit Fleur thing seems actually out of character for the rest of the character we saw. It took her seconds to change his mind with a reasoned discussion. She's looked down on by Fleur because she's married but that is what happens in those days. The Contessa's only answer to all her problems is to hide her away. That WAS against the law and it IS stupid. If someone so uneducated as Constance was able to change the mind of a man (and she's been seen to have her opinion respected by all the Musketeers including Treville) then why would it be so hard for a upper class lady to change his mind? A interdependently wealthy lady who could in a respect "buy" the kids off of their parents and give them their freedom? Again it didn't really effect Contessa, her character was WRITTEN to seem to not care. It seemed like a hobby. Her whole stance felt like "because I'm where I am I'll mess with the men around me by being everything they hate."

The Queen speaks up against everyone, her character is one of a believer in the goodness of humans. That doesn't make her weak, being married doesn't make her weak. She has spoken her mind not only to Aramis in this episode (yes they have a romance thing but its sweet and her character is FAR from being there just for that reason) but to Treville and the Kings mother. She pushes more dangerous boundaries in a more outwardly way then the Contessa.

Milady? Well she's the typical bad guy. She has layers of such. You are talking about a character that was written in the original to have her life intertwined with Athos. It doesn't mean that defines her. Again you are seeing only part of her story. She's a bitch! Her point isn't for her story with Athos but to give the Cardinal a trained killer. There hasn't really been a back story for her as such because her story is a mystery. THAT IS HER POINT! To unravel it all is to lose the mystery. But a women who is more evil then the actual bad guy is in no way a weak character. 

Plus you've missed the wealth of good female characters who didn't need to be rude to men and announce every ten seconds that she's intelligent and equal to all to actually LOOK equal and intelligent. You had Agnes in the last episode, Flea in the one with Porthos's back story, the Kings mother, the Kings sister... Even the annoying guys wife in the slave episode was strong and independent.

The thing is I'm not saying this is a problem per say with a character. It is the problem with the stories. Yes I love history and know the problems facing a women back in those times AT THE SAME TIME they never made a point of slapping us in the face every five seconds that these women are dumb, uneducated and forced into things against their will. These women might not be equal in society BUT IT DOESN'T STOP THEM BEING EQUAL. All are valued by the men around them. All have their own reasons for doing things. All have stories and are full and vibrant characters. Each one of them would do more for equality for women then a interdependently wealthy upper class snob who actually does little.

And the thing is going by your "I didn't see how these characters (in one episode) were meant to be strong" argument you CAN'T say from what we saw that the Contessa did anything other then preach philosophy at these girls. The theory that we are all equal, she had no comeback to Athos when he pointed out she should look out the window at the poor. We know that women weren't equal but she didn't do jack shit to MAKE women equal. And I find it hard to swallow when people THINK her character was this strong wonderful women because she was rude and obnoxious when we have the perfect examples of people changing the world in small ways RIGHT THERE ON SCREEN IN EVERY OTHER EPISODE!

If anything the CONTESSA was only there to be a love interest for Athos and to make it even more dramatic with the reveal that Milady is working for the Cardinal! 

Constance, The Queen, Milady, Flea and just about any other female character introduced in the episodes you haven't seen are worth more for equality then the Contessa.

The thing is right at the end when it looks like she'll do good and go teach, she's only really doing that because she's dropped from her lofty height of being able to preach at people.