MovieChat Forums > The Return of the Musketeers (1989) Discussion > Vingt Ans Apres (Twenty Years After)

Vingt Ans Apres (Twenty Years After)


First of all, I haven't seen this movie. But I enjoyed The Three Musketeers (especially because it seems to be the closest to the book of any movie). When I read the plot summary, it looked like this was based on Vingt Ans Apres ("Twenty Years After" in English - the first sequel in the series), but Milady's son turned into her daughter.

Aside from that, how close does it stay to the book?

reply

[deleted]

While the first two movies (or three if you count the Man in the Iron Mask with Richard Chamberlain) remained relatively close to the original, this one goes FAR astray. Twenty Years After is such a poignant tale... this film adaptaion falls flat as a modern tale set to ride the coat tails of the previous Lester films. Although I hate Leonardo and most Disney films, I would actually recomend that your time would be better spent watching that version of the Man in the Iron Mask, which is at least somewhat closer to the original... or you could just watch the other two Lester made Musketeer films again... they are quite re-watchable.

reply

The film follows portions of the book, and the basic plot of the Frondist movement, the beheading of Chales I, and bits and pieces elsewhere, but takes a lot of liberties with the scenes and adds other material for comedy. KIm Cattrell and C Thomas Howell are by far the weakest elements and Roy Kinnear's death probably affected the script, to cover the loss. It also cast a shadow over the production and must have affected performances.

I disagree on the Randall Wallace Iron Mask. The Richard Chamberlin ITC version (mid-70's) and the 5th Musketeer are both far more entertaining. D'Artagnan being the secret father of Louis and Phillipe kills the film for me. Sloppy script writing.

reply