h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

actually, the movie the man in the iron mask was quite good. of course, leonardo dicaprio greatly tarnished the movie ( sorry, Titanic fallout)but the storyline was quite interesting. what about what everyone else thinks?

Well, I hate to tell you this, but I really didn't like the movie at all. In my opinion it was just to boost Leonardo di Caprio's career. I made out all through it, and I dont usually do that. but you're entitled to your own opinion...

I much prefered the 1976 TV version with Richard Chamberlain, yet the 1998 movie was saved from being a complet Leo disaster on the Titanic scale by having an Oscar-winning Isle of Wight actor starring along side.
I mean, of course, Jeremy Irons.

I didn't really notice that part as I was not paying that much attention after I decided it wasn't good...

IMHO, there has never been a really good adaptation of the book, because there can't be. I've read the book and it just wouldn't work on screen the way it was written. Most adaptations pick up on some bits and leave out others, notably the fact that the prisoner in the iron mask did NOT successfully replace his brother on the throne.

Where the 1998 film was better than some others was:

1. The age of the king was right.
2. The relationships between the original musketeers were right.
3. Aramis as the secret leader of the Jesuits.
4. The relationship between Raoul (Athos's son) and the girl the King fell in love with, although the film changed her name and made her a reluctant, rather than willing, lover.
5. The timescale of the swap - days to prepare, rather than weeks or months.

Having said that, D'Artagnan looked far too old (he should have been at least a few years younger than the other musketeers), and far
too close to the Queen in age.

I thought it was a decent movie. i waited to see it until Titanic had sunk from the public view. I don't think that Leonardo DiCaprio can act very well, but at least he wasn't in every scene. IMHO, he wasn't really the star of the film. It was a fun story, reguardless of truth to the original...but how true can you be to a story that no one's sure of?

Very true. The actual story as presented in the article was much more interesting to me.

I always hoped there'd be a version starring Oliver Reed, Richard Chamberlain etc, as a continuation from the "Three Musketeers", "Four Musketeers", "Return of the Musketeers" series - it would have helped with the continuation of the plot tremendously.

Unfortunately, with the demise of Oliver Reed last year (or the year before), this idea is a non-starter. Who could possibly replace him?

In general, though, I agree with you. The film would be more light-hearted than most versions. Who would you have playing King Louis / Philippe, though? He'd have to be in his mid-twenties at the most.

As for it being hard to get a decent film when nobody's sure of the facts, the film is based on the book which owes little to the facts. The prisoner didn't even wear an iron mask. The frame may have been of iron, or something similarly sturdy, but the mask itself had to be light enough for daily wear over a long period. Iron most certainly isn't. And there's no evidence that the mask was locked on to the prisoner's head.

I saw a programme some years back that worked out who the prisoner was likely to have been. A member of royalty was considered unlikely as the records show that the prisoner acted as valet to a member of the nobility whose own valet had died - not something a nobleman would do. Unfortunately I can't remember who they reckoned the prisoner was, but they based their reasoning on the fact that the prisoner moved from prison to prison with one particular governor, to minimise the number of people who knew of the prisoner's existence. And the prisoner was not, according to the programme, listed as 'Prisoner number 6xyxabcd' or whatever, but listed by name, which may have been fake.

It'd be interesting to find out the facts of the story - but that's impossible. Everything has plot holes. Iron would be heavy for everyday wear though.

We could use my time machine and go see! Anyone up for a trip?

*grabs backpack and gummybears*
I'm ready!

Well let's go then!
--Puts on medevial dress and lets down her hair--

Don't go yet - wait for me!

Oh, all right, but hurry up... I have a final in 30 minutes...

Rightio.
Shall we go in a different thread, though?

Wait! You'll have to change. Medieval dress won't do. You need late 17th century clothes. Fortunately I have some here, reasonably priced, not worn since the Great Plague of 1665, but who's worried?

Oh good. I wasn't sure if what I had was any good. Thanks for straightening me out, Dragon. Sure, let's start a new thread. You decide, Bluebottle...

Could I get some of those clothes dragon? and please tell me about the new thread. *eats a gummy bear*

I'll start it. I'll call it "Who was the man in the iron mask? A trip to find out."