Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

TheLittleSongbird This may be a very loose adaptation in detail- though not in spirit, there is a real feel of what makes the story so good in the first place- of the classic Dumas tale, but adaptations deserve to be judged on their own terms(fidelity to the source material has never been an issue to me, there may be some poor adaptations around but if they are of such good quality elsewhere it would be very unfair to completely dismiss them) and this adaptation of Man in the Iron Mask is not an exception. And yes it is a very good example of being brilliant on its own regardless. It may start off rather slow and a little poorly staged in the first 10 minutes but it picks up very quickly and is near faultless after that. It may be a TV film but one of great quality, the locations and scenery are colourful and very authentic and the same can be said for the costumes. The photography is also fluid and skillful, not cinematic but hardly amateurish or too studio-bound. The music is rousing and enhances the action very well, while the script is witty and successful in the comic and dramatic moments, what there is of the action is very exciting and not clumsy-looking at all and the direction doesn't allow the film to rush or drag beyond the first 10 minutes. The story is still the thrilling, suspenseful, fun and ceaselessly compelling one that we know with scenes that prove to be quite memorable. Especially when the iron mask is fitted onto Phillippe, quite cruelly harrowing in a way, Phillippe and Louise dancing the minuet which was beautiful to watch and more than satisfying dramatically and the touching scene where Phillippe meets his mother for the first time. If there was an asset that fared best it was the acting. The standout is Richard Chamberlain, in one of his best films and roles he is amazing as both Phillippe and Louis, completely believable in roles that couldn't be more different. You'd be hard pressed to find a crueller and more egotistical Louis than Chamberlain and his Phillippe is subtle and sympathetic. Patrick McGoohan is also wonderful, literally seething with villainy while having a touch of charm, and his intense scheming chemistry with Chamberlain's Louis is equally good. Ian Holm is wonderfully shrewd and intelligent and Louis Jourdan is a sly and dignified D'Artagnan. Ralph Richardson doesn't disappoint either and Jenny Agutter visually has never been more lovely and still brings believability and enchantment to a somewhat one-note character. All in all, a brilliant version, adaptation-wise the 1939 may be a little better but this is my personal favourite, both trump the Leonardo DiCaprio version though that has its merits too. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Paul Andrews The Man in the Iron Mask is set in 17th Century France & starts in Burgundy where musketeer D'Artagnan (Louis Jourdan) captures a man named Philipe (Richard Chamberlain) & sends him to be imprisoned in the Bastille prison in Paris with orders no-one else sees or speaks with him. While at the prison visiting her father a young woman named Louise (Jenny Agutter) is accompanied by a high ranking minister named Fouquet (Patrick McGoohan) who recognises the man Philipe as an exact double for King Louis XIV (Richard Chamberlain), visiting Philipe later Fouquet sees a birth mark exactly the same as one on King Louis & is convinced that Philipe is in fact the identical twin brother of King Louis who was meant to have died at birth but somehow lives unaware of who he is, reporting back to King Louis a plan is hatched to send Philipe to an island fortress prison Pignerol & encase him in an iron mask so no-one ever sees his face but D'Artagnan & minister Duval (Ian Holm) plan to rescue Philipe & use him to overthrow King Louis & save France...This British & American co-production was directed by the prolific Mike Newell who has gone to direct recent Hollywood fare such as Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) & Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010) & is a fairly lavishly produced & colourful adaptation of Alexandre Dumas père novel The Man in the Iron Mask which was his final book to feature the Three Muskateers. I must admit right now that I have never read the book so cannot compare the two although I am sure they are fairly similar & share the same basic plot, The man in the Iron mask isn't usually the type of film that I watch but it was shown on afternoon telly over here so I decided to give it a go. I must admit that I was expecting a bit more action here, a few more sword fights & chases & was a bit surprised at how talky this is. That's not to say it's a bad film by any means, it held my interest & I liked the story which is told efficiently & effectively enough but I was sat there waiting for The Man in the Iron Mask to spring into life & it never did. The switch at the end as Philipe takes the place of his brother is nothing more than a con trick while Philipe being released from his iron masked imprisonment is also very straight forward apart from a brief horse chase & sword fight. The plot is solid enough, there's the expected treason, lies, political skulduggery, mistrust, the odd plot twist, love triangles & romance as the future of France is on the line & I enjoyed the story but there have been various adaptations of the novel & it's a well known story so maybe there won't be many surprises here. I did like the rather ironic & downbeat ending as King Louis gets his comeuppance in a rather unpleasant way, the only problem is I wasn't totally convinced by the reasons given by King Louis in the first place as to not just kill Philipe outright but if he had there wouldn't have been a story, would there? Also, if Philipe was living in France in Burgundy why had no-one ever recognised him before as looking exactly like King Louis? Not my type of film really but I still enjoyed it for what it was although it probably helps that I have never seen any other adaptation of the novel before, not even the Leonardo DiCaprio one from 1998.Although apparently made for telly by the British production company ITC this actually looks very nice & I am surprised it never got a theatrical release in either the UK or US. The sets, locations & costumes are all very impressive & colourful & give a real air of authenticity to the film, the iron mask itself is a fearsome looking prop with it being soldered onto Philipe's head a particularly good moment. Like I said earlier there's really not that much action in this which is surprising, I would have though there would have been more sword fights & shoot-outs & stunt work but I was obviously wrong. Just don't expect much action that's all I am saying, this is more of a plot driven adaptation than elaborate stunt work.I would have thought The Man in the Iron Mask had a reasonable budget as it's actually filmed in France including Fouquet's actual Cháteau Vaux-le-Vicomte, the Palace of Fontainebleau and the Cháteau de La Houssaye & it show's with some great location work. There's a top cast here including Richard Chamberlain in dual roles, Jenny Agutter, Ian Holm, Patrick McGoohan, Ralph Richardson & Louis Jourdan who is the only French actor here despite the entire film taking place in France with French character's.The Man in the Iron Mask has been adapted to the silver screen no less than a dozen times & this is the only one I have seen thus far so cannot really compare it to any other version but I liked it for what it was, a solid historic political thriller with a hint of adventure. Perfect to waste a couple of hours one lazy afternoon but not really any sort of classic in my eyes.

MartinHafer 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.

trpdean 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.