So, I decided to put my faith in Alexandre Dumas Père's The Three Musketeers for some historical insight into one of the lesser-famed eras of the Bourbon Dynasty. As you may be aware of, the reign of the petulant Louis XIII was rendered significant by the ever-present Cardinal Richelieu. In fact, the latter was one of the main reasons why I went for the movie. As an International Studies and Diplomacy Student, I have "grown tired" of the burdening literature, as well as the praise attached to this powerful statesman of the clergy. In short, the Cardinal benefited from the young age of Henry IV's issue, who inherited a powerful state at the tender age of 8. Richelieu was appointed his Chief Minister to help him pave his way into king-hood - a position he kept until his death. Pulling the strings at all times, he is accredited with blueprinting the current diplomatic system of nation-states that succeeded in creating a balance on the continent. Years before the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, he based the system on négociation continuelle by establishing the first foreign ministry, and dispatching emissaries or ambassadors throughout Europe.
With more than a dozen film adaptations and a number of animated ones about the Three Musketeers, I found myself in a bit of a pickle. Right when I was scrolling down the long list, my eyes came across one starring Charlton Heston. I'd only watched the guy before by accident , but my father never stopped saying how he considered him one of the greatest actors of all time. I put my father's taste to the test and opted for Richard Lester's 1973 version.
The movie did not disappoint with it's formal language and comical take of Dumas' masterpiece. It also shed light on the bravado of the age with D'Artagnan being urged by his father to make it into the King's Guard, and to literally "fight, fight, fight" to get there. The fiery D'Artagnan makes his father proud by scheduling three duels, which end up being with none other than Athos, Portos and Aramis. The fights never take place, of course, as the group focuses its efforts on combating the Cardinal's Guards, prompting the much-awaited cry of: "one for all, and all for one". As I am not interested much in the plot, I'll keep it there and move on to some of the things that caught my eye.
First of all, to both my "liking" and surprise, Cardinal Richelieu was depicted as a cruel, a plotting and an abusive man. It was striking to see even King Louis XIII revere him and fear the arousal of his ire. The fact that my motivation to watch the movie stemmed from my interest in Cardinal Richelieu and Charlton Heston was made even better when it turned out that the actor played that very character. Unfortunately though, Heston did not get as much screen time as I would have liked!
The second thing I was intrigued by is how Louis XIII, historically dubbed the Just King, is depicted as a fun-loving and idiotic monarch. Caught up in his various amusements, he also shows signs of petulance, not putting too much thought in his decisions, and not hesitating to arrest at will. In the comforts of a barren Court where his amusement is paramount, he enjoys playing chess with sign-bearing-dogs as chess pieces. His rumoured homosexuality was never touched upon; however, jealousy of his own wife, Queen Anne of Austria, was alluded to. Queen Anne further brings disgrace to Louis XIII's reign through her open relationship with the Duke of Buckingham, which only the king is unaware of.
A die-hard tennis aficionado, I was delighted to see the game played in the movie. I was never aware that the sport existed back then. In all fairness to Nadal and company, the game was played in the most unorthodox of ways. That is, I am not sure they would have made a name for themselves playing the sport in those days. So, prompted to research the history of the sport, I interestingly found out that the game was named after the word "tenez" - French for receive - in the 16th century. Glimpses of the British aristocracy in the movie also revealed that billiards was quite common back in the day, although the table seemed to have no holes, and the balls were proportionately huge.
Like contemporary times, back in the day, you couldn't spell sports without gambling. During various instances in the movie, peasants and laymen go gambling-galore, spilling out the beans. Sometimes, the games people were gambling on made those of the Roman Empire quite classy and noble. Add excessive drinking to the equilibrium and you are sure that Bet365.com would have made a fortune back then.
The last thing I would like to talk about is historical accuracy in this movie. Château Versailles is shown at the very end, specifically during the ceremony where D'Artagnan becomes a Musketeer, earning that ever-so-precious personal musket. To the furthest of my knowledge, Château Versailles was not the principal residence of Louis XIII. Although the latter purchased it, it was his son, The Great Louis XIV, who made Versailles the well-known edifice of today and the main residence of the French monarchs that followed. For such a formal appointment, I would have assumed that the King would have carried it out at Fontainebleau.
If you watch this movie, remember that it was made 39 years ago. If you're accustomed to IMAX filming quality, this adaptation will surely come across as blurry. There's a 2011 version that might be more appealing. I, myself, am a fan of more recent movies, but I personally found this one captivating. Through it's historical context, it was also thought-provoking, reminding me of the various be-headings of French Monarchs. It was also a reminder of King Juan Carlos I's ancestry. For after Louis XVI lost his head, the Bourbons dispersed with some landing in Spain, reigning until as recently as 1931 through Alfonso XIII. Franco made sure to remedy that when upon his death, he appointed Juan Carlos as a royal successor, once again associating the Bourbons with monarchy.
Well, I'll keep it at that and I hope you enjoy the movie if you decide to go for it!
No comments:
Post a Comment