Rating: 
Summary: Fantastic!
Review: This movie is way underrated! It's suspenseful, action packed, charming, interesting, historic, etc. The star studded cats brings action and emotion to the set! The sets and costumes are perfect and the story is compelling! I love the whole betrayal and treachery thing going on, it makes for a very exciting film! Leonardo DiCaprio had a lot to live up to after his breathtaking performance in the epic 'Titanic'. Well, he did live up to it! The movie is nowhere near as good (nothing is anywhere near the greatness of Titanic). DiCaprio did an excellent job portraying TWO people of totally different personalities. Being able to do something like this (what Leo did) is the sign of a gifted actor. Gabriel Byrne, Gérard Depardieu, John Malkovich, and Jeremy Irons did a fantastic job! It's great to see so many stars in the same film! Randall Wallace did an excllent job directing AND writing 'The Man In The Iron Mask'. I'm impressed that he wrote it, he did a very good job!
Rating: 
Summary: Well, 2nd Best Isn't Bad
Review: I was hesitant to watch this movie because of bad things I heard about it. I certainly prefer the Chamberlain version. But this 2nd best version isn't so bad. In my opinion, Chamberlain had the 2 extremes (tyrant-suffering innocent) down better. Though Dicaprio does a fairly good job. The scenery and outfits are nice. The script is fairly well written. D' Artagna is an interesting complex character. He acknowledges the king's reprehensible actions, but feels moral obligations to serve his king. Jeremy Irons is an interesting character who is pious and wants the best for France. But at the same time, he acknowledges his share of the blame in the situation at hand. Malkovitch is interesting as the aged father with an axe to grind; but he also shows a tender loving side to the masked prisoner. Depardieu is an interesting pleasure lover. (Though his efforts are much better represented in "Cyrano De Bergerac.") The reason I can't put this in the same cateogory as the 77 Chamberlain version is that, (1) The subtle and dignified humor of the 77 version gives way to lower slapstick humor. (2) As good as Dicaprio does, Chamberlain did better. (3) There is kind of a surprise concerning D 'Artagnan that really doesn't in my opinion belong. Don't get me wrong. 3 stars does not = a bad movie. And it is certainly worth giving 2 hours to. But unlike the 77 Chambelain version, I can't say it's a 'must have.'
Rating:
Summary: Starry show for "Man in the Iron Mask"
Review: "THe man in the iron mask" is probably best known for being DiCaprios first film after Titanic, and probably all that itll be remembered, or thanked for. The plot is twisted like much of Dumas' novels in recent film adaptions (such as "The Count of MOnte Cristo")but is still a good film to watch, once you can look over some imperfections in the various actors accents and very television-like twist at the end, that does pose as a suprise to a viewer, whether s/he has read the Musketeer novels or not.
The costumes and scenery are georgous. The huge budget shows not only in the starry cast on show, but in the quality of the interiors of Marseilles and the country side exteriors for Philippes transformation and training. The acting is spontaneous although it plays like a pantomine at times (such as Depardieu's consistent farting and incompetence with three women at one time. Malcovich mid-west accent and Iron's noble countenance somehow match (similar to "Dangerous Liasons" with Close and Malkovich)and Byrnes tragic/romantic/hero passes not exactly for the D'Artanian of the popular screen, his Irish accent also is another mix in the bake.
The directing makes the most of all that is on offer (such as the musketeers charging into musket fire, elaborate chase scenes on the kidnapping of the king and the squalor of the Bastille) and the music complements each scene beautifully that it stands out.
"Man in the Iron Mask" is overall a good film, not a landmark adaptation, but good entertainment of a better quality.
Rating:
Summary: This film offers much to the "deeper heart"
Review: This movie was very, very enjoyable. The previous reviewer is obviously upset that this film doesn't follow his expectations and thus he feels everything about it is worthy of his scathing criticism. The heartfelt emotions I experienced in this film are that of nobility, heroism, respect, chivalry, loyalty and valour. I found myself getting choked up more than a few times. There was even some well placed comic relief that I found quite enjoyable. I'm not a big Leo fan but I felt he played his dual role very well and perhaps his best acting to date. You despise the evil King and feel completely empathetic for the betrayed brother who still manages to be noble, gallant and true-to-the-end despite his brother's malicious subterfuge against him and other victims. The musketeers, played by a star-studded cast, do as well and more and I loved feeling all that I felt during this film. Space here does not permit me to detail everything. Bottom line; chivalry, loyalty and nobility reign supreme within these characters and in other veritable heros within the cast. This is a romantic, heartfelt film and is worthy of those who appreciate the same.
Rating:
Summary: A bit disappointing for DiCaprio and Malkovich fans alike
Review: Since this movie was made in 1998, Leonardo DiCaprio has shed his boyishness, but in this movie he just does not have the gravitas to pull off the role of the sadistic and selfish Louis XIV, or his identical twin, Philippe. I think he could pull off this part now, after "Gangs of New York," but 5+ years ago he wasn't ready. It is especially bothersome to see him play such a part opposite such known heavyweight actors as John Malkovich, Jeremy Irons, and Gerard Depardieu, each of whom plays one of the famed (but retired) Musketeers once bound to serve the king, but now determined to rescue his twin Phillippe and place him on the throne of France in Louis' stead. Even when the script means for them to be light-hearted, these fellows are sullen and malevolent, making poor Leonardo look like a pouting teenager. The production values and direction are good, actually, so if all you are hankering for is a decent swashbuckler, you will be reasonably satisfied. But the plot is Swiss Cheese (miraculous escape from torrents of bullets, secret identities revealed and then never mentioned again) that just doesn't hold together the way you might hope.
Rating: 
Summary: MITIM: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly
Review: Okay, I am not going to claim that this was the best movie of all time - but I think some are not willing to give it a chance because it stars "flavor of the month" Leo Decaprio. Indeed, I too was reluctant to watch it for that very reason. Fie on me! I missed a great film on the big screen due to my own prejudices. THE GOOD: Excellent cast. This is definitely a movie about "characters." What fascinates us here are the people involved, the players upon the stage. The Musketeers in particular are able to convey a depth of emotion and character that is refreshing. The chemistry between them is "magnifique," and I found their motivations both believable and compelling. Some of the scenes between Irons, Malkovich, Byrne and Depardieu are a study in the nuances of human interaction. Leo does a wondeful job of protraying the vulnerability of young Phillipe, though his Louis is not quite as convincing, in my opinion. Plot. I know some have complained about the lack of historical accuracy in this film, but one must remember, Dumas himself was playing around with history in his novel. Accept it as a work of fiction and enjoy it as such. The plot was filled with political intrigue, most of the major characters burdened with personal secrets that slowly get revealed during the course of the film. This movie does deviate from Dumas' book quite a bit, so if you expect the film to follow his vision you will be disappointed. However, Dumas' rendition has been filmed before - this new adaptation allows for a provocative plot twist which I felt added tension and interest. Accept this version on its own terms and I hope you will find it as engaging as I. The scenery. Beautiful location shoots and lovely costumes, plus a certain realism of having some of the clothing, sweat stained, mussed and torn when appropriate. THE BAD: Accents! There is no consensus here! We have English, Irish, French and American accents all thrown together in an uneasy mix. It is distracting... and though I love Depardieu's portrayal of Porthos - it took me five viewings of this movie to finally be able to understand his every line! Another pet peeve - mispronunciation of names. No one can seem to decide how to pronounce "D'Artagnan," "Athos" or "Porthos." There should have been agreement on something this basic. Even worse, sometimes the same character pronounces the names a multitude of ways! Various of the main players use little intonation, resulting in a wooden delivery of some lines - However, since they were still able to convery a great deal of emotion through gestures and expression, I didn't find this overly bothersome. THE UGLY: A bull's eye view of Depardieu's naked rear end. :) Still, overall, an entertaining film, and certainly worth viewing. It's on my "favorites" list. All for one and one for all!
Rating:
Summary: Starry show for "Man in the Iron Mask"
Review: "THe man in the iron mask" is probably best known for being DiCaprios first film after Titanic, and probably all that itll be remembered, or thanked for. The plot is twisted like much of Dumas' novels in recent film adaptions (such as "The Count of MOnte Cristo")but is still a good film to watch, once you can look over some imperfections in the various actors accents and very television-like twist at the end, that does pose as a suprise to a viewer, whether s/he has read the Musketeer novels or not.
The costumes and scenery are georgous. The huge budget shows not only in the starry cast on show, but in the quality of the interiors of Marseilles and the country side exteriors for Philippes transformation and training. The acting is spontaneous although it plays like a pantomine at times (such as Depardieu's consistent farting and incompetence with three women at one time. Malcovich mid-west accent and Iron's noble countenance somehow match (similar to "Dangerous Liasons" with Close and Malkovich)and Byrnes tragic/romantic/hero passes not exactly for the D'Artanian of the popular screen, his Irish accent also is another mix in the bake.
The directing makes the most of all that is on offer (such as the musketeers charging into musket fire, elaborate chase scenes on the kidnapping of the king and the squalor of the Bastille) and the music complements each scene beautifully that it stands out.
"Man in the Iron Mask" is overall a good film, not a landmark adaptation, but good entertainment of a better quality.
Rating:
Summary: Really fine movie
Review: I bought this movie only recently and really liked it.
I thought EVERYONE was utterly convincing and excellent especially Leo who plays both evil and innocent equally well.
However does anybody note here that something is brought in that was in no other version and not the book : Dartagnan is the father of the king and his brother?
Hmmmm.
But EXCELLENT FILM and I recomment it.
Rating:
Summary: The iron and the golden review
Review: I think the movie The Man In The Iron Mask is the best movie ever produced by Hollywood.
The story about two brothers who grow up in different parts of society,one on a poor farmer land and the other joining his fathers position as the king, is played very realistically.
The two develop during the years very differnet characters and when some people staying together with the king get to know that he makes others suffer from his apsolutism, they create a plan to change the bad charcter into the good one.
The actors inhabite their roles very well so that the whole story seems to be very realistical.Leo who on the one hand has to play the role of the bad king and and on the other hand his polite brother, is able to avoke the spectators interest when those two meet each other for the first time, after being divided for several years.
All in all the fims is the most ineresting and moving story I`ve ever seen.
Rating: 
Summary: The Crap in the iron mask
Review: This movie is unfortunately not worth the price. There are two fatal flaws that any well-educated member of the human race ought to realize straightaway: 1. The star is Leonardo DiCaprio. 2. The star is not Patrick McGoohan. In short, WIMPY!!! The better version is the '70s edition starring Richard Chamberlin, and possibly the best actor ever, Mr. Patrick McGoohan, recently appearing in such films as Braveheart. My Advice: Toss this out with your copy of Tomorrow Never Dies and get some real pictures. But I will say that the new Count of Monte Cristo is awesome, as compared to the older one. So as they say, "1 out of 2 brings in just as much cash as 2 out of 2." Way to go, Hollywood!
|
