O Homem da Máscara de Ferro

Pure excellence. Wonderful script. Production, directing and acting was superb. Great ensemble cast. What more can one ask from a made for t.v. movie? This one had all the qualities of a big budget film. Highly recommended.

This and The Count of Monte Cristo were both made for television in the late 1970s and starred the talented Richard Chamberlain. Yet, because they were originally made for TV, they seem to have vanished and I haven't seen either on TV since the early 1980s (though I did copy them to now worn out videotapes). It's a real shame, as they were first-rate and every bit as good as any Hollywood production--maybe better.

The Man in the Iron Mask was the better of the two stories, but both are about as good Alexander Dumas stories as you can find. This is due to the overall package--exceptional music, acting, writing and pacing. I simply don't know how you could have made them much better.

A young man (Richard Camberlain) is locked in prison without knowing why. It will take Musketeer D'Artagnan (Louis Jordan) and a lovely from the court of Louis XIV (Jenny Agutter) to solve the problem.

All the TV networks used to do very good (if often eviscerated) novels for television. One network even had the good idea of having one of the actors making a tag to recommend further reading, in the case of classics. For modern novels current-popular TV stars were good enough for their all-star casts, but costume-drama classics could draw bona fide movie stars, as this one did.

Of the superb cast, Chamberlain and Agutter are ernest. The great Ralph Richardson is low-key. Ian Holm might as well be twirling his mustache as a villain. Patrick McGoohan, however, rises above the screenplay and shines with his patented unusual line readings.

The Dumas story is really the last ride of the Three Musketeers, and I love Musketeer movies. Unfortunately, due to budget or time limitations the Musketeers have been reduced to Louis Jordan, who sounds peculiar in a French story with his French accent, as no one else has one.

Still, it's Dumas done with an A-list cast. Enjoy.

While watching this film it's hard at times to remember this was only meant to be a TV production. This must be the most lavish and successful television movie made in the 70's that I have seen. I saw it first time as a child and was much fascinated. Now almost two decades later I still love to see it again on DVD. Here Alexandre Dumas' classic story has received an equally classic adaption.

Richard Chamberlain in the double role of the royal twin brothers has often been compared favorable to Errol Flynn and I quite agree. It's not just the mustache but the swashbuckling and charisma also, not forgetting that he is a truly fine actor. Here it shows especially well because the whole cast is absolutely loaded with talent and presence; Ralph Richardson, Ian Holm, Louis Jourdan, Jenny Agutter and one of my favorite British actors, Patrick McGoohan as the most sinister minister. Mike Newell's directing combined with obviously a very healthy budget, handsome shooting and locations has worked wonders. The film does not only look wonderful, it also have a wonderful feeling in it. As a piece of classic romantic adventure stories in film from the last three decades I consider this one of the best.

Dumas' classic wonderful vivid novel sucks you in with its intrigue at the highest levels, the moral contrasts, the cleverness, the adventure.

I was very surprised at just how fine this was - the cast is of the highest caliber - Ian Holm, Patrick McGoohan, Ralph Richardson, Louis Jourdan - an extraordinary Richard Chamberlin and a very pretty Jenny Agutter (though her character is rather one note).

Note the movie is directed by Mike Newell - who would go on to direct Enchanted April, Four Weddings and a Funeral and many other fine movies.

I was also floored by the producers' settings: four chateaus, the real island referenced in the novel, Fontainebleau - this movie (though made for television) must have cost a fortune to produce!

I think the Frenchman's comment below is a bit sniffy.

First, this was not an American production - but an English one.

Second, this was not a distortion of French history -- Alexandre Dumas pere himself took many (wonderfully imagined) liberties in his novel - does anyone REALLY think Louis XIV was one of identical twins? Come on -this is a novel!

Thus, the complaint that Louis XIV did not after all remain faithful to this mistress (as one would expect from the movie) is an objection to the historical truth of the novel, not its faithful adaptation to the screen. This movie well captures the flavor and spirit of the novel (except, as one reviewer notes, for the character of Philippe, made far more sympathetic here - but then most viewers (myself included) want a sympathetic central character).

I also find the reviewer who says this was poor except for the wonderful acting of all the actors - to be a bit strange. They ARE the movie.

This was very well done, so engrossing and so much fun. Patrick McGoohan is particularly wonderful, as is Chamberlin. Well worth your time - it's efficient, clear, amusing, horrifying, romantic, and gives plenty for those interested in history.

It's also the perfect exciting family movie (well, except having to explain mistresses serving at the royal pleasure - that could be tricky) with something for everyone.