The day after the release of Houda Benyamina's new film, critics and the public are divided.
Announced as one of the potential surprises at the start of 2025, “All for One” – which offers a new female version of the three musketeers – was released this Wednesday, January 22 in French cinemas.
The pitch? Sarah, a Morisco woman held prisoner, is freed from her jailers by three musketeers (Athos, Porthos and Aramis), as she prepares to be expelled from the Kingdom of France. Indebted to her saviors, she decides to join them, but she discovers, not without surprise, that they are in reality… women disguised as men.
Supported by a choice cast, including two César-winning actresses (Oulaya Amamra and Déborah Lukumuena), this umpteenth adaptation of the legendary novel by Alexandre Dumas, revisited with a feminist twist by director Houda Benyamina, had everything to attract curiosity. At least on paper, because the day after its release, the feature film does not seem to have convinced the public or the critics.
What is the film “All for One” by Houda Benyamina worth?
First indication and not the least, the film has so far only obtained a poor rating (1.2/5) on the reference site AlloCiné, which acts as a barometer on the web. If Internet users do not seem excited, the same is true for certain media which are not kind.
So, ” nothing is going well » for the Huff Post which describes the film as a “ embarrassing storm » in which director Houda Benyamina « tangled in dialogue, story and tone “. According to the website, “ only an actress gets her head above water (…) Déborah Lukumuena “. But the media considers that we are all the same “ bordering on the grotesque ”, in terms of interpretation.
The story is much the same among our colleagues at Libération, who emphasize that “ the plot is reduced to not much ». « The promise is engaging but the film is strangely dull and inoffensive », says Didier Péron, deputy editor-in-chief of Daily Culture, who describes the film as “ sword stroke in water ». The World evokes, for its part, a “ perfectly predictable and formatted object ”, with actresses “ who go to great lengths to give a little depth to this dissertation ».
-Photo credit: Easy Tiger
For its part, Le Point does not beat around the bush and considers the film as “ missed », emphasizing that the director “ Houda Benyamina gets tripped up and misrepresents Alexandre Dumas “. The weekly also castigates actresses who “ are never credible » and evokes a feature film which “ navigates by sight, without ever knowing what it wants to be “. The film is “ definitely a UFO, but we would have done without it », concludes, scathingly, the magazine.
Photo credit: Easy Tiger
Only the Parisian seems to have (a little) appreciated, insisting on the fact that this film is above all “ a feminist and delusional parody “. Highlighting the offbeat and tinged style of “ big potashery », the newspaper thus asserts that “ some scenes are worth the detour » and that “ the actresses are all wonderfully daring and humorous ».
This review at least has the merit of proposing a different approach and suggests that we should perhaps approach the film without real expectations and with an offbeat perspective.
Everyone will therefore have their own opinion.
