La maschera di ferro

When this film started playing in theaters in March 1998, I thought: this is going to be another overrated film that Leo Di Caprio is in...so I avoided going to see it. But I decided to rent it yesterday, since I was in the mood to watch a period film. Was I surprised! I really enjoyed watching this film. Although it did have a few flaws here and there, it is still a very worthwhile and enjoyable film. The costumes were nice, yes, but the sets were even better. The cinematography was outstanding. Who cares if it "was not true" to the Alexandre Dumas novel--film adaptions of famous novels never are true to the books. This film didn't do so well at the box office because it started playing in theaters at a time when all of the Titanic hype was still taking place. Perhaps The Man in the Iron Mask should've been released in the fall of 98--I bet more people would've gone to see it in theaters. If you haven't seen this film, rent it. It's both an enjoyable story and a visual wonder. See it at least twice!

One either really likes this movie or really hates it. There's very little grey ground.

This movie takes some names from history and recreates an entirely novel, interesting, sad, dramatic tale. Was it merely another vehicle for Decaprios fame to grow? Maybe. Probably. But it was still entertaining, if for nothing else the amazing wardrobes.

I really like all the guys in the cast - Irons is always good. And finally some cast director recognized how much Saarsgard channels Malchovich in looks, voice and speaking, thus perfect as his son. I enjoyed Depardieus comedic relief. I like Byrne's - but I thought he looked way too old as D'Artagnan - it was a little off-putting. But his great acting helped.

I also thought the girl who played Christine (did a fairly good job) but should've been someone much more well known. Here were all these well known legends, & popular, up & coming young guys, & then her. Seemed a little unbalanced.

The varied accents for some reason, didn't bother me in this particular movie. I prefer actors who say their lines realistically rather than wrestling an accent. Doing accents is great in movies, but if not trained perfectly it can really take you out of a movie worse than no accent. However, as is, I also understand why some viewers would be bugged by the various accents.

I thought the story was interesting & appealing, and Decaprios dramatic reactions as both characters was incredible. Upon removing the mask & his tentativeness & humility, as well as his dramatic role as the hateful & entitled young King. Quite a feat to pull off two distinctly different people, who simply look just alike.

Basically an entertaining movie night. Dont get bogged down by reality or be history minded. Just enjoy this as a fairy tale.

Without it being the best movie I have ever seen, I actually liked this film. I wasn't expecting a masterpiece, and I didn't get that. Instead I got a fun film, with flaws, but it was enjoyable enough.

Starting with the many good things, the cinematography is superb, as is the lavish scenery and costumes. The music is very rousing and moving, and the sword play is energetic. Also I thought the direction was fine, same with the acting. Gabriel Byrne is surprisingly good as D'Artagnan(much more suited to the part than Chris O'Donnell-the worst D'Artagnan, though I actually liked the movie- was). Even better were Jeremy Irons and Gerard Depardieu as Aramis and Porthos. John Malkovich was good too, if perhaps a little too fey to start with. Leonardo DiCaprio was somewhat uneven in his performance but he was good on the whole, personally I felt he was better as Phillippe in alternative to Louis, he never quite convinced me playing an arrogant king whereas he succeeded with Phillippe because of that spontaneous boyish charm he has.

However, the film is a little too long and the pacing is also uneven, I felt the film dragged in the middle and then it felt a tad rushed at the end. While the story is solid enough and sticks relatively faithful to the story, which is brilliant on a side note to those not familiar with it, it can get implausible with one or two soap-opera-ish qualities about it. Finally, the script does have one too many weak spots, one or two parts are a little too cheesy for my liking.

On the whole though, this is an above average and fun film. Maybe not the best for those who adore the book, but as an introduction to the story it is good enough. 7/10 Bethany Cox

I only first watched it a year ago, and wasn't sure I would like it at all. Although it had some of my favorite actors (John M. Gabriel B. ..and so on) it also held some of my least favorite actors (Leonardo D. ..and that's it). I watched it, and loved it! There is comedy, romance, adventure, drama, some educational value, and it holds the oh-so-fine Jeremy Irons. I found it captivating enough, interesting so to speak. It doesn't have any of those "Is it over yet? Should I wake my legs now?" scenes. I don't recommend it for little kids, though.

This 1998 movie provides everything a swashbuckling cape-and-sword flick should - legendary heroes, a cruel villain, noble sentiments, touches of love and sex, some slapstick, picturesque scenery, sumptuous interiors and of course dashing swordplay (the last perhaps a little limited by the maturity of some of the principals).

It has also some reasonably intelligent dialogue, provided by writer/producer/director, Randall Wallace, and spoken in part by two of the finest voices in the business - Jeremy Irons (Athos) and John Malkovich (Aramis). Gerard Depardieu (Porthos) and Gabriel Byrne (D'Artangnan) are the other two of the original 3 + 1 Musketeers.

The villainy of the young King Louis 14 is provided by Leonardo DiCaprio, who may be too wishy-washy for some tastes, though he certainly has the veneer of elegance needed for the part. One niggle I have is, that it would have been better if he had been instructed to pronounce Athos either with a short a or a long a (preferably the former) and not alternate between the two.

The plot, like the Dumas novel on which it is based, has no less, and no more, credibility than is appropriate for this type of film - for anyone interested in the real events and rumours surrounding the Man in the Iron Mask, I recommend this website - http://www.royalty.nu/legends/IronMask.html

One aspect of the film I find amusing is that in this version of a quintessentially French story, the only French actor in the quartet of heroes, Gerard Depardieu, plays the part of a uncouth, lecherous buffoon; while an Englishman, an American and an Irishman provide the grace, heartfelt speeches and depth of character. I wonder how that went down with the audience in France.