BEFORE: Almost half a month into the new year, and the watchlist still stands at 205. How does this happen? Well, I blame Turner Classic Movies, which has been crushing it lately with their scheduling. They ran some classic romantic comedies like "It Happened One Night" that simply must be included in my February chain, and then a couple of Rita Hayworth films - if I'm going to cover screen sirens like Marilyn Monroe later this year, I might as well toss Rita into that mix - and they also ran "Howards End" and "The Remains of the Day", which are going to round out an Anthony Hopkins 5-play. From other channels I also picked up the two "Conan" movies from the 80's, follow-ups "No Strings Attached" and "The Legend of Zorro" and since Jan. 1 the premium channels got re-stocked too, with last year's hits like "Admission", "Oblivion" and "A Good Day to Die Hard". Those films have to be added to the far end of the list, because I've settled on a chain that's locked until mid-June at least. Last year my watchlist was stuck at 230 for three or four months, so that's just what happens when the year kicks off. There's a list of films I want to add to the watchlist, and I enjoy crossing a film off from THAT secondary list almost as much as from the main list.
Linking from "The Prince and the Pauper", Aidan Quinn was also in "The Mission" with Jeremy Irons (last seen in "Reversal of Fortune").
THE PLOT: The cruel King Louis XIV of France has a secret twin brother who he keeps imprisoned. Can the twin be substituted for the real king?
FOLLOW-UP TO: "The Three Musketeers" (Movies #1, 277 + 1,303 + 1,304)
AFTER: I wish I'd realized that this story was a sequel of sorts, Alexandre Dumas' third book in his Musketeers series - but since I didn't have a copy of this film last January, I suppose it's a moot point. Yes, Dumas was working from the same playbook as Mark Twain and Charles Dickens - he wrote this in 1847, so this predated "A Tale of Two Cities" and "The Prince and the Pauper", but this story relies on the plot point of secret twins, not accidental look-alikes.
ASIDE: I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that this "switcheroo" formula has been repeated many times over the years, not only in the infamous "body-switching" films, but also in "Trading Places". The caper that the Musketeers attempt here assumes that you can replace a king with a properly trained commoner, and even though Dan Aykroyd and Eddie Murphy didn't resemble each other, the question is the same - what will happen when these two are swapped? That essentially makes the Duke brothers the modern-day Musketeers - but only one of the two stories has a man being raped by a gorilla in the denouement (and I think we all know how painful that can be). End of ASIDE.
There actually was a masked prisoner in the Bastille in the 1600s, but no firm records of his identity, except for the probably-phony name Eustache Dauger. As to whether he was the king's brother, or someone's son, or minister or valet, history is very unclear. Dumas' story plays off of Louis XIII's 20-year estrangement from his queen, so it incorporates speculation on how the birth of Louis XIV during that time was possible. What the heck, let's subvert the whole process of monarchy succession, what's the harm? I suppose there were only a couple more Louises to go before they tore the whole system apart anyway.
According to this story, the queen had twins, and the king saw fit to remove one son from the equation, so there would be no struggle for the throne. If you believe that a father would cast out his own infant son, you may also consider this an elegant solution that couldn't possibly have any implications 15 or 20 years down the line. One son raised as king, given ultimate power and everything he desires, and the other raised in obscurity, then imprisoned - which one's more likely to be the a-hole?
The tricky part here is that in order to not tip their hand about the switch, the Musketeers need to train the nice brother how to act like the evil one - so what will happen when he's sitting on the throne? Once again, it's all about identity - do the clothes make the man? If we change what this man does, will we change who he is - will he rule benevolently, or does power corrupt? Assuming the Musketeers succeed, I'm not sure what this says about identity - Louis XIV might have been a great king, so things work out well for France, but the overarching question about nature vs. nurture is more of a mystery.
It's interesting that at the start of the story, the four Musketeers are fractured - D'Artagnan is now head of the organization and works for the king, Aramis is a priest working against the king, Athos is retired and sullen, and Porthos is actively pursuing wine and women. But some purpose is clearly missing, and bringing about lasting change in France means getting the news team, sorry, the band back together. Or at least three out of four working toward the same goal.
Surprisingly, no one in this film asked the most obvious question - "Which twin was born first?" Because that answer, to me, would make the Musketeers' actions either very right or very wrong. You can't subvert the right of succession just because one guy acts like a dick and the other doesn't. I'm not sure that Dumas' novel covered this point either, but the plot points in the novel were quite different, including the ending. Hollywood plots need to have more twists, and end in a better place.
Also starring Leonardo DiCaprio (last seen in "J. Edgar"), John Malkovich (last seen in "Mulholland Falls"), Gerard Depardieu (last seen in "Life of Pi"), Gabriel Byrne (last seen in "Little Women"), Anne Parillaud, Peter Sarsgaard (last seen in "Flightplan"), Judith Godreche, Hugh Laurie (last heard in "Arthur Christmas").
RATING: 6 out of 10 secret passages
No comments:
Post a Comment