The Iron Mask (1929) Reviewed

September 8th, 2011

The Iron Mask of 1929 is a sequel to Douglas Fairbanks, Sr.’s The Three Musketeers of 1921. It is also his last silent feature, although it includes a brief introduction and intermission in sound. Like its predecessor, its production values are of the highest order with lavish sets, an enormous cast of extras, and a heartfelt dedication to verisimilitude as demonstrated by a declaration in the credits that “This entire production was under the supervision of Maurice Leloir, Member of the Society of French Artists, illustrator of ‘The Three Musketeers,’ the acknowledged authority on the period depicted.” No expense seems to have been spared to bring that period to life.

The Iron Mask covers a greater span of time as well as a greater span of joy and sorrow. Based on events in Alexandre Dumas’ novels The Three Musketeers and The Man in the Iron Mask, the film begins in 1638 with the birth of the future king of France, Louis XIV, and ends 24 years later. It begins also with D’Artagnan’s love for Constance and the loyalty of four friends that even death cannot sever. Fairbanks’ acting skills have noticeably matured just as his D’Artagnan matures, and the tragedy from which the audience was spared in 1921 is finally played out midway through the picture probably to better effect.

The sombre moments are fittingly counterbalanced with most of the best swashbuckling elements: romance, espionage, derring-do, and high-spirited (and humorous) carousing. There is, perhaps, a little less swordplay than might be expected, primarily occurring in the middle and climax of the film, but swordplay itself is less the focus of a Douglas Fairbanks, Sr. movie than the acrobatics and physical shenanigans he integrates into any action sequence.

Solid performances are given by Rolfe Sedan as Louis XIII, Belle Bennett as the Queen Mother (an improvement over Mary MacLaren’s portrayal), and Dorothy Revier as Milady de Winter. Nigel De Brulier reprises his role as Cardinal Richelieu perhaps a little more convincingly, and Marguerite De La Motte reprises her role as Constance Bonacieux quite capably. The weak link in this film is William Bakewell’s dual performance as Louis XIV and his twin brother. Although the former is rendered somewhat more sympathetically than the historical inspiration, the latter is reduced to the equivalent of a moustache-twirling villain of the type who ties damsels to railroad tracks (or would if trains had existed in 17th century France). This is disappointing, but it is not enough of a flaw to ruin the totality of the picture.

In the end, it is a lovingly crafted adieu to an era, and at the same time it is “The Beginning” of the next, which would soon see the rise of Errol Flynn.

  • Writing: Good
  • Directing: Good
  • Acting: Good
  • Cinematography: Great
  • Stunts: Good Great
  • Swordplay: Fair
  • Panache: Great

Overall Rating: Good
Swashbuckling Rank: Good

Tea Rose Composition

September 5th, 2011

A nice, natural arrangement of tea roses in various states of bloom:

Tea Rose, Fig. 1

Royal Flash (1975) Reviewed

August 31st, 2011

Royal Flash (1975) is what a good swashbuckling spoof ought to be: a ripping adventure punctuated by genuinely comedic moments that are presented in context. Director Richard Lester is a master at melding those elements without sacrificing the integrity of the setting (thus preserving the audience’s willing suspension of disbelief, which is always a virtue in the genre of swashbuckling escapism). Royal Flash also manages to be a satire on that swashbuckling classic, The Prisoner of Zenda, by reimagining it as having been inspired by events in the life of Harry Flashman (Malcolm McDowell), a questionable war hero self-described as “a scoundrel, a liar, a cheat, a thief, a coward—and, oh yes, a toady.”* Both the screenplay and the novel upon which it is based, The Flashman Papers, were written by George MacDonald Fraser.

Beautifully filmed and directed, Royal Flash is equally satisfying as a comedy and as a swashbuckling adventure (albeit with an anti-hero for a protagonist).

  • Writing: Good
  • Directing: Great
  • Acting: Good
  • Cinematography: Great
  • Humor: Great
  • Stunts: Great
  • Swordplay: Good
  • Panache: Great

Overall Rating: Great
Swashbuckling Rank: Great

* Fraser, George MacDonald. Flashman.

Daffodil a.k.a. Narcissus

July 28th, 2011

A daffodil (the national flower of Wales) at my parents’ house (photographed 23 April):

Daffodil, Fig. 1

Comments Closed Again

July 3rd, 2011

Like a tokusatsu hero exclaiming a henshin transformation slogan, I am once again declaring, “Comments off!” I had over 100 spam comments yesterday, and almost 700 over the course of two weeks before that. I am taking a break again, so for a while at least, comments will be closed for articles over ten days old. Thank you, my three or four readers, for your understanding.

The Three Musketeers (1939) Reviewed

June 7th, 2011

The Three Musketeers of 1939 is a musical comedy that is musically impaired and comedically challenged. Don Ameche imbues the role of D’Artagnan with an earnest enthusiasm that does little to counterbalance his utter mediocrity. The three musketeers of the title’s fame are stiff caricatures who appear briefly for the purpose of enabling the Ritz Brothers, who are cooks at an inn, to be mistaken for them by D’Artagnan and everyone else. It bears a closer resemblance to a stock Three Stooges short than a feature-length comedy, and could have benefited immensely from some ruthless pruning. Some of the comedy routines are humorous enough to elicit laughter, but there are too many instances where the plot of the novel weighs the movie down too heavily to allow it to fly to greater heights of absurdity and originality, which really should have been the filmmakers’ aim if they wanted to create a parody lasting more than 30 minutes. The music is something more to be endured than enjoyed, which is all the more unfortunate for the frequency with which it is inflicted on the viewer. The movie’s saving grace is Binnie Barnes, who plays Milady, and although she shines in the role in its comedic incarnation, it would have been fascinating to see her reprise it in a serious adaptation.

  • Writing: Poor
  • Directing: Fair
  • Acting: Fair
  • Cinematography: Good
  • Musical Numbers: Poor
  • Comedy Routines: Fair
  • Stunts: Fair
  • Swordplay: Poor
  • Panache: Mediocre

Overall Rating: Mediocre
Swashbuckling Rank: Mediocre

Coral Dawn

May 31st, 2011

Two views of a coral dawn rose on the east side of my house:

Coral Dawn Rose, Fig. 1

Coral Dawn Rose, Fig. 2

The Prisoner of Zenda (1937) Reviewed

May 27th, 2011

The Prisoner of Zenda (1937) is a superlative example of the cinematic swashbuckler removed from the traditional period setting, for it takes place neither in the golden age of swashbuckling (the 15th through 18th centuries) nor even in an actual place. Based on the popular 1894 novel by Anthony Hope, it is situated firmly in the mid to late 19th century in the fictional European country of Ruritania. It is a tale of royal intrigue, adventure, and love, with the central theme of a protagonist who is forced to assume the identity of another. Ronald Colman has the dual role of Rudolf Rassendyll, an Englishman, and his identical cousin, the future king of Ruritania. In both roles, Coleman shines without overpowering his scenes. Rarely, in fact, does one see so well-balanced a job of casting. C. Aubrey Smith and David Niven are exceptional as the king’s friends and advisors; Raymond Massey is excellent as Black Michael, the king’s brother and nemesis; Mary Astor is equally suitable as Antoinette de Mauban, Black Michael’s inamorata; and Madeleine Carroll gives a performance of sublime yet understated beauty as Princess Flavia, the Prisoner of Zenda’s betrothed. It is Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., however, who gives perhaps the most stunning performance as a quintessential swashbuckler who is a villain. As Rupert of Hentzau, Fairbanks crackles with energy and ensures that no encounter will be dull. In all ways, he provides a perfect clash of personality and arms with the less flamboyant — but no less decisive — English gentleman. Nominated for two Academy Awards (Best Art Direction and Best Music, Score), it honestly deserved greater recognition in other categories as well. The Prisoner of Zenda, as an adventure, as a romance, and as a drama (with a healthy amount of humor), stands as one of the greatest swashbuckling movies of its time or any other era.

  • Writing: Good
  • Directing: Great
  • Acting: Great
  • Cinematography: Good
  • Stunts: Good
  • Swordplay: Good
  • Panache: Superb

Overall Rating: Great
Swashbuckling Rank: Great

Tulips Two Days Later

May 24th, 2011

These are tulips photographed on the 8th of May:

Tulip on the 8th of May, Fig. 1

Tulip on the 8th of May, Fig. 2

The Three Musketeers (1948) Reviewed

May 20th, 2011

The Three Musketeers from 1948 is neither the best nor the worst of all the film adaptations of Alexandre Dumas’ classic swashbuckling epic. As an adaptation of the novel itself, it is colorful, lively, and ambitious, but it is also a clumsy adaptation in the standard Hollywood tradition. Moments that are meant to loom large both in plot and dramatic impact are instead rushed and reduced. The moments where it lingers longest are overwrought and paradoxically (though unintentionally) invite detachment rather than empathy. The casting choices promise more than they deliver. Vincent Price would seem to be made for the role of Cardinal Richelieu, but his portrayal seems as flat as the script. Frank Morgan as Louis XIII carries himself more like a befuddled shopkeeper than a king, Angela Lansbury as Queen Anne could be any unhappy housewife, and the titular trio could be any group of boisterous, well-intentioned fops despite the moderately tortured posturings of Van Heflin’s Athos. Lana Turner falls short of embodying the evil for which Lady de Winter is infamous, which is a serious shortcoming for so important an antagonist. The film’s greatest asset is Gene Kelly as D’Artagnan in what must have been a conscious attempt to mimic Douglas Fairbanks, Sr. in the same role in 1921. In fact, the film succeeds most where it attempts to adapt its 1921 predecessor rather than the novel. Kelly’s D’Artagnan is essentially Fairbanks’ D’Artagnan with sound and color, just as dynamic physically and comically, and just as prone to melodramatic telegraphy. With a better screenplay, this 1948 version of The Three Musketeers could have been — and ought to have been — much more than a one-man show.

  • Writing: Mediocre
  • Directing: Fair
  • Acting: Fair
  • Cinematography: Good
  • Stunts: Great
  • Swordplay: Good
  • Panache: Good

Overall Rating: Fair
Swashbuckling Rank: Good