Barely eight months after the release of d’Artagnan, the second film in Martin Bourboulon’s diptych, entitled Milady, is in theaters. Virile friendship, swashbuckling movements, humor and witty one-liners took pride of place in the first part which attracted more than three million spectators. If these ingredients have not all deserted, this second part, where Eva Green reigns as an incandescent intriguer, looks a lot like a demonstration of choreographic prowess. For some critics, the film hits the mark; others point to a sword thrust in the water.
For Le Figaro, Milady is – already – one chapter too many, while a third film is reportedly in preparation. Étienne Sorin deplores “adventures which follow one another without the breath of adventure. (…) We are not far from the invention of the swashbuckling film without swashbuckling.” The director struggles to convey on screen the depth and complex character of a “thick and tortuous” novel. If “the first part was an illusion”, this one looks more like a “costume blockbuster”, whose open ending “leaves the way for a third part. Enough to feed certain fears.”
Also read Notre critique de Milady: Les Trois Mousquetaires à bout de souffle
This feeling of confusion is also pointed out by Libération. Marius Chapuis regrets a film where “we get lost in the tangle of intrigues and dirty tricks”. “But as for the first part, the scale of the means, the attention to detail and the stylization of the characters (…) compensate for what we lose, unfortunately, in the readability of a dense romantic plot,” explains- he. He praises a “visually successful” second part which “marks with its hyper-choreographed duels and its refusal to create a Manichean story” but which shows itself to be “less fraternal, less sparkling and merry. Less lively too.”
It is the same for Le Monde, where Clarisse Fabre did not succumb to the charms of Milady: “The femme fatale finds herself swept away in a whirlwind of repetitive scenes (seduction, fights, escapes), one day as a brunette, another as a redhead… Too many gallops and hooves, shots filmed close to the animal’s legs, or overhanging, seen from the sky. » And to conclude: this second part of the saga “struggles to renew itself and fails to impose its female character”.
The poisonous vamp finds favor in the eyes of Télérama which salutes the “ardor” and “emotion” of Eva Green. And if Samuel Douhaire admits that it is “difficult (…) to appreciate the heavily explanatory dialogues of this adaptation with a big budget and big shoes”, he recognizes that “the job is well done, and rather better than in “ D’Artagnan” thanks to “strong, even spectacular action scenes”.
France Info adds from the pen of Jacky Bornet: “In her finery linking charm to a physical performance of which she has the secret, [Eva Green] bewitches, like a Gothic Morgana weaving a personal revenge which would shake the kingdom. She is the film.” “If the first part of this new version, adapted by Alexandre de La Patellière and Matthieu Delaporte, was a good surprise, their poisonous “Milady” surpasses it.” An opinion shared by Les Inrocks: ““Milady” even places itself a little above D’Artagnan, as this sequel resolves, on the one hand, certain formal crudeness of the first part”. Théo Ribeton rejoices: “Bourboulon proves that combining the support of the spectators, the density of the intrigue and the breath of History is not an insoluble equation”… before qualifying: “Two undeniable successes, nevertheless devoid of the slightest extra soul: it’s done. Three, or more: that will be too many.”
Les Echos, which titled “A film of cloak, dagger and bitch”, were also seduced by the acting of the “reptile and sexy” actress who eclipses her male partners and gives new energy to the saga: “ “Milady” is more of a spy film, with its treacheries and other twists.” But these assets are not enough to make Adrien Gombeaud dream, who decrees that “this diptych will enter the endearing family of films that children rewatch on the small screen, at holiday time, while waiting for the turkey and Santa Claus.”
A blow parried by Fabrice Leclerc of Paris Match who concludes, enthusiastically: “The casting remains flawless in this great show which takes responsibility for itself, pure entertainment soaked in a real love of chivalrous cinema.”
