Movie Review: THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK

THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK

1998
PG-13

The Man in the Iron Mask is a 1998 action film directed by Randall Wallace. It has been called a very loose adaptation of Alexandre Dumas' The Vicomte de Bragelonne, the second sequel to the famed The Three Musketeers. This film follows a plot by everyone's favorite musketeers: Aramis (Jeremy Irons), Athos (John Malkovich) and Porthos (Gérard Depardieu). These aging soldiers have major issues with how the current king, King Louis XIV (Leonardo DiCaprio), is treating the people of France. The three men decide to take action by finding a prisoner encased in an iron mask to replace the king on his throne. This prisoner (also played by DiCaprio) serves well because he is the unknowing twin brother of the current king. However, one man truly stands in their way: D'Artagnan (Gabriel Byrne), who was once the fourth musketeer in their small group. So the story essentially becomes a battle between the two sides, each of which is either trying to start or prevent a chance in the country's kingship.

If the previous synopsis seemed a little bit convoluted, then you'd be hitting the nail on the head. It's not that the storyline is hard to follow - in fact, it's a little too simplistic. Rather, it's just not very good. I felt like it was entirely predictable. You'd be hard pressed to think that the film would end in a way other than it does, and that doesn't necessarily bode well for this particular film. However, the biggest problem with the film (and I blame the screenplay) is that it never truly pulls you into the story. The Man in the Iron Mask is a film you can watch while working on other things. It's the perfect multi-task flick because you can be working on something else and still know exactly what's going on in the film. For some, this is a good thing because they won't miss any major plot details. In terms of a film's effectiveness, however, there's no hook. That's not a good thing.

I also had some issue with the level of acting in the movie. While no one is downright awful - save Judith Godrèche, who plays King Louis' love interest throughout the film - there's really nobody that's terribly good, either. If anyone is standing above the rest, it's Irons, who I found to be the most believable. Byrne is also very good, but his blank stares kinda killed it a little bit. My biggest issues, however, were with the actors who couldn't even manage to deliver even a hint of an accent. Whereas most of the cast, as well as all supporting and nameless characters, had some sort of accent (it was supposed to be something like French, but anything that didn't sound "American" was a plus for me in this movie), a few of our big names couldn't bring anything like that to the table. For starters, DiCaprio was totally out of his element. I feel like it was too early in his career to delve into a film where he would play dual roles, especially if he couldn't give either character an accent. Shouldn't the King of France sound French? Malkovich also does nothing different with his voice, and that probably annoyed me the most, considering he's a phenomenal actor who's usually so dedicated to his craft. And even though he only plays a minor role early in the film, Peter Sarsgaard doesn't give us an accent. I know I'm nit-picking, but you've gotta be better than that, guys. Seriously.

Oh, and I'd also like to mention that we get a Hugh Laurie sighting in the film. He's not an important role, by any means, but I suppose it's worth mention that "House" did do films before becoming a full-time, certified doctor.

Overall, The Man in the Iron Mask is a tad bit on the boring side, and although you can watch it while working on other things, it still may not be worth your time. Nothing's really adding up to anything of quality, which really is sad considering the caliber of actor we're presented. It's all just too bad.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: D
1.5 Thumbs Down

Movie Review: DIE HARD: WITH A VENGEANCE

DIE HARD: WITH A VENGEANCE

1995
R


You can watch the trailer here

Any time you get a chance to watch Bruce Willis as his alter-ego John McClane, you're definitely in for a treat. Although the latest installment in the Die Hard franchise (2007's Live Free or Die Hard) was a bit of a step down, it can't take away from the series as a whole. Die Hard: With a Vengeance was the only film I had yet to see, but now I can say that I have seen, and am a fan, of the entire Die Hard saga. John McTiernan took this film and ran with it.

The story this time around doesn't take place at Christmastime like the other three films. Instead, we see a suspended McClane brought back into active service when a madman with an explosive edge demands that he lead the investigation. Speaking merely in rhymes and riddles, our villain sends McClane and a "good Samaritan" named Zeus (Samuel L. Jackson) around New York City looking for bombs placed at various locations. However, through all of the turmoil, a deeper plot is uncovered, and the identity of the villain becomes a piece of the puzzle. I won't give away that little twist, but it happens early enough in the film that it's hardly a spoiler. Anyways, gratuitous and sometimes ridiculous action ensues, and the rest can be left to the imagination.

The screenplay this time around is decent, but it's nothing truly spectacular. Granted, it would be tough to oust the original Die Hard film (which I believe is one of the greatest action films of all time), but this film definitely carries its own weight. The story starts off incredibly well, with a clever foe leading our heroes on a wild goose chase throughout the big city streets. The clues are thought-provoking and fascinating, and the villain is painted as a worthy adversary for our mostly-brute-but-sometimes-brains McClane. However, as soon as we finally see the bad guy, things start to spiral into your standard action flick, and it loses a little bit of its cleverness along the way. Still, it is just an action movie, so you can't knock it too much.

I don't have any complaints about the acting. Bruce Willis is Bruce Willis; I mean, he's taking a stab at a character he's already played twice, so I don't think there was really much contemplation about changing the psyche of John McClane. However, there are a couple interesting additions to the cast list that prove very effective. Jeremy Irons is great as our villain (a familiar role for him, if you take a glance at his filmography). He doesn't have a terribly large amount of screen-time, but he makes the most of the time he's given. If the Die Hard franchise does anything extremely well, it's that they present villains who aren't psychologically disturbed or absolute nutcases; rather, they give us brilliant individuals capable of developing mastermind schemes while keeping a sense of calm about them. Irons does well to continue this tradition. The second standout addition this time around is that of Samuel L. Jackson as our "good Samaritan." He saves McClane early in the film then becomes caught up in the action, much to his chagrine. Jackson plays a good character opposite Willis, and their banter throughout the film gives a rise in the tension as well as provide the occasional comic relief.

If I had any real beef with the film, it was just the overuse of the march, "When Johnny Comes Marching Home." It seemed a little out of place in the movie, and it was used over and over again. I constantly found myself taken out of the film just to think about why they put that instrumental bit into the movie. Then again, that's just personal preference; maybe you won't even notice it.

Personally, I think Die Hard: With a Vengeance stands as the second-best film from the franchise, barely squeaking ahead of its immediate predecessor. Obviously nothing will beat the original, but this is still a fun little movie if you're itching for some action.

Grade: B
Thumb... Up