The Count of Monte Cristo

Rating:
Summary: Well done drama, creative re-interpretation of the book
Review: This movie is excellent as a movie. As far as following the book not so. However let's be honest: If this movie were to be faithful to the book, it would be 100 hours long! There are over 200 characters in the book, and several sub-plots that are unable to be adapted to cinema accurately. If one is a purist, don't watch movies based on books! You will always be disapointed. The job of someone adapting a book for Cinema, is not necessarily to reproduce the book in exact detail (which in most cases is impossible unless its a tv miniseries that can run all week). It is to reproduce the essence of the story, and find those things which will make for the best film. That's tough when you are constrained to 2-3 hours of film.

The Count of Monte Christo presents the essence of Dumas' story, a man betrayed by his best friend, learning the skills to survive in prison from a priest, also unjustly imprisoned, and returns to exact his revenge, and in the process, he learns that revenge is not worth it. The acting, costume, music, cinematagraphy and sword play is second to none, and the movie is quite entertaining.

The only problem I had was that they spend a lot of time building up God, and religion and morals, then present fornication and adultery in a positive light because Dantes and Mercedes "Loved each other", which as a Christian I had a problem with. Maybe that doesn't bother the non-religious viewer, but it presents a contradiction to me that is at best difficult to reconcile and at worst ruins the moral impact of the movie.

Rating:
Summary: The count of monte cristo meets the TWILIGHT ZONE!!!
Review: The movie by itself is really good:photography, actors, acting, drama...blah blah blah.
If you bothered to read the book, then you'll see why I put the above title. It's like taking the characters and putting them into an alternate reality. I laughed all throughout the movie. And honestly, doesn't anyone ever age!?!? It's like nothing happend. It's such a cliche revenge flick, it's absolutely hilarious.
If you want to see the closest version to the book, then buy the French Mini-series (of 1999) that's available. It has some tiny differences from the book (like the ending) but at least it's WAY more accurate to the book than this piece of ...well, you get what I mean.

If you just want to see a bunch of sword-fighting, some underdeveloped characters, and a bunch of family drama...then this is the movie for your...but then I advise you not to read the book.

Rating:
Summary: Its not like the book
Review: I found the movie to be compelling interesting and totally unlike any other movie ive seen, that is the reason I read the book, I didnt like the book I found it to be very very dry, its stupid to say that you dont like the movie, what did you expect. If your a fan of a book its your job not to like the movie, Thats why I anticipate that both Ender's Game and the Hitchhikers Guide to the galaxy are both going to be terrible. Moral to the story Anticipate the worse that way you wont be disapointed.

Rating:
Summary: Just like the book, except for the whole concept thing
Review: Whether you like this film or not will depend heavily on whether you have read the book and whether you believe that films based on books should follow the original text as closely as possible (for example, Lord of the Rings).

In this particular case, the film varies greatly from the book in both detail and tone. The overriding theme in the Dumas book is one of redemption and forgiveness; the theme of the film is primarily one of revenge. As a result, major details in the book (who is Albert's father? Who is Mercedes' husband at the end of the story?) are changed to keep the narrative more focused on the theme of the film.

However, if you are willing to look at the film as a work independent of the original text, you will find an excellent piece of cinema. Although changed from the dense Dumas novel, the story is compelling and well-written. The overall tone of the film is dark, though enough bits of comic relief are woven in to keep the story from being overly depressing, especially early on. Even in places where the film is basically consistent with the novel, the writers have made smart choices, for example by showing the action on Elba instead of having it all be retold in conversations (as in the book).

The cast is uniformly superb, including on of Richard Harris' last films as the Priest and Jim Caviezal playing yet another Christ-character in Edmond. Guy Pearce, who was evidently offered Edmond but decided he would rather play the villian, plays Count Mondego with an ever-so-slight bit of guilt, though this does not affect the crowd-pleasing ending of the film. My favorate performance, however, is J.B. Blanc as smuggler Luigi Vampa. Blanc shows the kind of raw charisma that you would expect if Will Smith had played the role instead.

The DVD has several special features, not of which are spectacular. The director commentary is above average and will provide you with some interesting additional tidbits about why the film was shot as it was. Or where it was, for that matter, such as the pieces shot at the Presidential Palace in Malta. That said, I am still trying to find the airplane that the commentary says is visible during the climactic fight scene.

Overall the film is visually interesting and should be seen on as big a screen as you can get; the camera's scope in capturing the harbor at Marsailles or Edmond's voyage to the Island of Monte Cristo is fantastic and will make this worthty of a big screen. At the same time, the scenes inside the prison are shot in almost all grays and gives a cramped and depressing feel to the life Edmond lives there. By the time he escapes you may not realize that you essentially have not seen color in 30 minutes.

Overall this is an excellent film despite the departures from the book. if you come into the film with an open mind you will enjoy one of the more under-rated films to come out in the last 10 years.

Rating:
Summary: A benign feel-gooder for American audiences
Review: In spite of the flogging scenes, the movie is benign enough for young children to watch. It's passable entertainment for those who do not demand plot accuracy. The movie is indended for Americans who have not read the book. Snobbish French people would wince at the sound of the names butchered. Even I couldn't help chuckling at the fact that all signs in Paris were written in English.

Rating:
Summary: Um .. ok but?? READ THE BOOK FIRST.
Review: I would say that the movie was good, but after reading the book does no justice to the Real Character of Edmond Dantes.

By all means watch the movie!The acting for one is BRILLIANT. IT is Good as I said .. but I could not help noticing that it missed the point of the many important Characters and historical points that Alexander Dumas in the book covered.

I only comment as I felt the book better and the movie seemed to bend and cut and paste people and events described in the book to make almost a mokery of the clear moral ground Dumas stood on in the area of Revenge and Providence.

Makes interesting food for thought. READ the Book first. Do the story Justice Hollywood and tell it how it is. :-)

GS.

Rating:
Summary: This is what happens when you cram a classic into a matinee
Review: After finishing Dumas' classic novel, I immediatly watched this movie. About an hour later, and a hillarious balloon scene, I sadly ejected the DVD, which I now use for a coaster. If you've never read the book, you've got nothing to lose. But if you've ever read the book, you get that sense of annoyance very quickly, and outrage towards the end. Do yourself a favor and read the book first! It is excellent!

Rating:
Summary: Amazing film - but with a couple of minor glitches
Review: I'll admit, I've not read the original source novel on which this is based (the only thing by Dumas I have read, is the classic 'Musketeers'); life is too short to read every great novel, try as one might - but having seen this film, I am determined to seek out the text.

Judging the film on its own terms, I found this immensely satisfying, and though quite long (131 min), it does not drag for a second. The story itself is really quite something, and no matter how many films you have seen, or books you have read, you will be absolutely bowled over (as George Bernard Shaw was) by the breadth, depth, simplicity and universality of it.

There are some minor faults with the film; sometimes the dialogue seems a little stilted (eg. Guy Pearce, an Australian who has mastered a range of accents, seems a little too much of a cookie-cutter villain: Daniel Day-Lewis did a much better job in 'Gangs of New York'). There is something faintly unsatisying about the conclusion, no matter how memorable it may be - but even compared with 'Barry Lyndon' (Kubrick), this is still a riveting, assured adaptation.

These are very minor quibbles, and I would put this in with some of my favourite films, along with 'Captain Blood' (Errol Flynn), 'Koyanisquaatsi', 'New Cinema Paradiso' and 'Celebration' (aka Festen). Generally, the script is absolutely top notch, full of little throw-away quips and putdowns. The cast is absolutely stunning, especially James Calaziel, absolutely convincing in his metamorphosis from naive youth to cold-blooded avenger. Watch out for Luis Guizman as a scheming pirate.

Very highly recommended, for those who seek something a little more high-brow than the standard multiplex schlock.


Rating:
Summary: Visually a treat
Review: Dumas' stories have been filmed so often, yet it still is a joy to see them. This new version of the Count of Monte Christo is no exception. It has serious flaws and errors, too numerous to list. For example: modern language lines, totally unbelievable interpretations (as other reviewers mentioned), very amateurish characterizations (the Count twirls his locks and his old love recognizes him by the gesture rather than by his nearly unchanged looks). None of these things really disgusted me. I just sat back and enjoyed. The opening scene set a mood and the photography generally showed fine settings. The very end was incredibly sappy, but since I had just watched a wonderful fighting/fencing scene with a lush green setting, I didn't care too much.

A strong complaint I have about most new movies: the voices are almost inaudible compared to the background music and noises.

I hope you will read the book, if you haven't already. No film ever has done Dumas' story telling power justice. The Three Musketeers film version with Michael York as d'Artagnan came close.

If you're willing just to be entertained, this movie may fit your mood. I saw it three times by now.