Whereas Alexandre Dumas’ The Three Musketeers has been turned into a plethora of movies and is read far and wide, its sequel, Twenty Years After, seems to be far less known. This really is a pity, for the novel is actually far superior to The Three Musketeers for several small reasons. In the modern day, when darker, grittier stories are preferred, Twenty Years After should really be increasing in popularity.
The first weekend of August was once again the time to visit the Hakkapeliitta Fair - an event commemorating the Finnish light cavalry that served in the Swedish army under King Gustavus Adolphus during the 30 Years War in the early 17th century. It is practically the only occasion when we can put on our cavalier costumes and not get strange looks when we walk outside our apartment.
There are great works of fantasy, mediocre works of fantasy and bad works of fantasy. The great naturally include authors like J.R.R. Tolkien, Robert Howard and Guy Gavriel Kay, while the mediocre include worthwhile authors the likes of Dave Duncan and Raymond E. Feist. The bad (but still published) authors are many and I will not name them here for fear of detracting the reader from the topic of this short article. But even worse than being bad are the authors who start well, but drop the ball somewhere along the way, just like Robert Jordan did with "The Wheel of Fire" series that came to a screeching halt after about the third novel and only recovered after the death of the author when another author finished the story for him (from about novel ten onwards).
Having read several people praising the 1948 version of The Three Musketeers as the best film adaptation of Alexandre Dumas' novel, I decided to dig it up and watch it for myself. I think I've seen it before once, but that was when I was still in my single digits and the memory was mixed with all other swashbuckling films that I saw at that age. Thus, I decided that I needed to refresh my memory to make my own judgement of the film adaptations of the Dumas' novel.