Light at the end of the Beeb costume drama tunnel?

It is too early to cheer, but maybe, just maybe, we are nearing the end of the "new grit" trend in English costume drama. The high and mighty BBC, no less, are currently airing a new series based on The Three Musketeers, which they have cheekily scheduled to run at the same time as Mr Selfridge series 2 on ITV. I've not watched it - it's not airing in Sweden, and the DVD will be a while - but judging by the reviews, the series is nothing more nor less than a light-hearted romp.

All right, so the Beeb is clearly still eschewing "bonnet dramas". But nor is this a drama about "ordinary people". Leather-clad (yes, it's true - I've seen the pictures) posh young men swashbuckling their way through 17th Century France - is it possible to think of a concept more unlike that of The Village? It does look a lot like Auntie has finally realised that people must be amused. But who knows - this may just be this year's White Queen, a single sop to costume drama viewers who only want to have a good time before the network starts again with the earnest, muddy, social-history approach.

I may be wrong, but again judging from the reviews, the series looks likely to be something along the line of the Scarlet Pimpernel TV series starring Richard E. Grant, Elizabeth McGovern and last but not least Martin Shaw. This series not only played fast and loose with the original Scarlet Pimpernel books, but also with history. The approach of Musketeers sounds similar: the historical background becomes a sort of cloud-cuckooland where every adventure is possible. Richelieu having his unfaithful mistress shot in a wood is surely a parallel to Robespierre wearing buttons featuring the guillotine: not even the book version went that far, and as for the real historic personages, they wouldn't have dreamt of doing any such thing (it is to be doubted that Richelieu even had a mistress). I enjoyed what I saw of the Pimpernel TV series, much thanks to Martin Shaw's manly Chauvelin - much as I dote on Orczy's Chauvelin, I never imagined him looking anything like Martin Shaw, but hey, who's complaining? The actor saddled with playing the Alice-in-Wonderland version of Robespierre was also very good, in spite of his caricature of a part. I'm sure I will enjoy Musketeers in much the same way. Nevertheless, you do wonder: what is it with the Musketeer story that makes adapters take a cavalier approach both to Dumas and the history books?

A confession is in order here: I haven't read The Three Musketeers. My knowledge of what takes place in it is based on somewhat foggy memories of the Illustrated Classic and the film starring Michael York as d'Artagnan (which seems to have been faithful to the book if you go by the Illustrated Classic test). Even with this limited knowledge, though, I sensed that things were decicedly off-kilter in the 90s film version (starring Charlie Sheen as Aramis and a wolf-grinning Tim Curry as a libidinous Richelieu - I forget the rest). The trippy 2011 film (full of villain totty - I like it) was more honest in a way: it was clear by out-there set pieces such as the infamous airships that this film bore no resemblance to any known version of 17th Century France whatsoever, whether written by Dumas or otherwise. Both the new films had you scratching your head if you'd grown up with the Michael York version of events. As for history, you're more amazed when a film gets it (almost) right than otherwise. Buckingham in the 2011 film refers repeatedly to "King James", and what do you know, James I's Buckingham is the same as the skirt-chaser in Musketeers. Granted, in reality he wasn't quite stupid enough to carry on a flirt with France's queen while his patron was still alive - his "diplomatic" mission to France came later, much to the then English king Charles I's chagrin (Charles was Louis XIII's brother-in-law) - but all the same, that was darn close.

I don't think it's a coincidence that it's The Scarlet Pimpernel and The Three Musketeers which have been victims of cheerfully-off-the-rails adaptations. Simply put: if the history in a historical novel is already wonky, the temptation must be all the stronger to crack it up another notch. If the French Revolution is depicted as nothing more than a bloodthirsty rabble's revenge on mostly cuddly noblemen, why not go the whole hog and let Robespierre wear guillotine buttons? If you have to make Cardinal Richelieu, an able and loyal minister who was a blessing to his country, into the villain of the piece, then both history and the original story might need further tweaking, especially if you want viewers to sympathise with a undertaking aimed to cover up the French Queen's adultery with an English duke. Tellingly, Queen Anne in the 90s and 2011 films is innocent of any Buckingham hanky-panky, and part of the musketeers' mission is to heal the breach between her and the King so two vulnerable young hearts can beat as one (both films are set at the start of Louis XIII's reign, when Richelieu really shouldn't be around at all). There was no such sentimental nonsense in the Michael York version. The King and Queen were no longer naïve newlyweds, and obviously not the lovers of the century. The Queen did have an affair with Buckingham, but had to be shielded because... because... well, because she was against the Cardinal who did all sorts of wicked stuff. Like... banning duels.

Whether it's because of modern values or insufficient Frenchness, there are points of the original story that viewers like me have problems with when it comes to The Three Musketeers. This has been used before as an excuse for adapters to go wild, and I strongly suspect that the same is true of the BBC series. It'll be intriguing to find out whether Queen Anne is blameless in this version or not.