Customer Reviews

Count of Monte Cristo

5 star:		(80)
4 star:		(36)
3 star:		(18)
2 star:		(13)
1 star:		(23)

 

 

Wonderful Period piece, Jim is over the top gorgeous in this one. Also does a great job of going from the life loving young man, to the vengeful older count, beautiful locations.

Well crafted story telling and fine performances make this an enjoyable film adaptation of a classic work.

An outstanding production and well worth a viewing.

I read Dumas' book, though an abridged version, and really enjoyed the pace of his story. So when I had to stay over at my uncle's house for the weekend, I got a chance to view this movie adaption from his movie library. After first choosing a Guy Pearce movie called "Memento", which had something to do with memory loss, I turned that movie off after 20 minutes, when I got too confused with it. To my surprise, Pearce is also in the The Count of Monte Cristo. I first saw Pearce in the superb L.A Confidential. Pearce is an impressive actor, even after the "what's the plot" story of Memento. Pearce plays the chief villain in the movie, Fernand, jealous of Edmond Dantes played by Jim Caviezel.

Dumas' classic story of wealth and revenge is unforgettable. Caviezel is very good as Edmond Dantes, the wrongly accused scapegoat of the Assistant Prosecutor, Villefort. The scene in which he is imprisoned and whipped with full beard, long hair made me wonder if Mel Gibson chose Caviezel to play Christ after viewing this scene. It reminded me of the crucifix scene of Gibson's "Passion" film. Dantes (Caviezel) is aided by an imprisoned priest played by an unrecognizable Richard Harris. The priest helps Dantes by helping him learn to read and improve his dexterity in dueling. The priest's death however helps Dantes the most, for Dantes uses the body bag meant for the priest to make his escape and find the treasure that will make him the Count of Monte Cristo. Once he becomes the Count, he exacts revenge (the fun part of the movie) on those who wronged him.

I suggest reading the book first, because you'll be imagining the actions taking place as you read Dumas' words. For the most part the movie stays the course of Dumas' plot, with some additional scenes and dialogue for drama's sake. This costume piece is also helped by nice scenery and good acting all around. Don't know how well it did at the box office, because most moviegoers stay away form literary adaptations, but it's well worth the rental, or buy it on VHS/DV like my uncle did.

If you are into revenge the old fashion way, this is for you. A great movie you will want to watch three times just to get it all!

I love this Movie! Totally Addicted to it! It actually has a plot that keeps you glued to the screen without machine guns or 5800 unnecessary boob shots! LOL
I watch it at least twice a month.
This is the way movies should be instead of that junk in the theaters.
Jayce

I love the book, which supposedly means I'm in no condition to enjoy a good movie, much less know a bad one when I see it. Anyway, I put off watching this thing because I figured they would screw it up. But actually, the first third of the movie was pretty good. My hopes rose, foolishly, and then the harsh glare of bad scripting sent them crashing into the sea. The 1975 version is vastly superior, being much more believable and stylish. This 2002 effort isn't exactly awful, mainly it's just boring.

The Caviezel fellow did a nice job in the first part of the film, playing the naive sailor/prisoner. The conversion to the Count was never believable, however, always coming off as a bit of a putz. He simply didn't fill the role. The scenes with the Abbé Farria were the most successful. And although the Chateau d'If whipping scenes were gratuitous, and the book never actually portrayed the landing on Elba, I think they enhanced the story. So there!

So the betrayal, false imprisonment, suffering, and relationship with the Abbé weren't badly done. Caviezel played the prisoner bit very well, and it seemed a real evolution was going on as the years went by. Thus, the set-up of the main plot was accomplished, but the execution was definitely botched.

It all went downhill with the hot air balloon bit. It was stupid. I like Luiz Guzman, but what was he doing in this movie? His absurd portrayal, I guess some see it as "comic relief" was just campy, just plain bad, and the rest of the movie sank like a stone. Caviezel's "Count" was merely foppish and ridiculous. With Caviezel as Count Clown dandy, instead of the dangerous and inscrutable figure of the novel, it all just fell apart. That's not being a stickler to the book, that's just translating the basic character to film.

Basically, the writer and director were never able to set up the vengeance(s) very well. The Count's execution of his plots were never really that clear or interesting. The dialogue between him and his prey were badly written, with a few double entendres and little else. The fairy-tale ending they went for was also VERY lame, you don't have to be a fan of the book to roll your eyes at all of the loose ends being methodically tied. And since at least twenty years went by and all the actors were still obviously in their late-twenties, it was a relief when the tedium finally ended.

I CANNOT REVIEW SOMETHING I DIDN'T PURCHASE. I HOPE YOU SENT ME THE RIGHT PRODUCT ESPECIALLY AS IT IS A CHRISTMAS GIFT

My whole family LOVES this movie....never get tired of it. We watch it every couple of months and always put in on for friends. Everyone walks away satisfied by this well told story. Action, adventure, comic at times, the whole package.

This movie surprised me, I thought it was going to be boring. I was pleasantly surprised. I didn't really know the details of the story when I bought it, and now having seen it I would like to read the book. They should make a remake with more famous actors and more attention to detail. I'm sure it would be a big hit. Nothing satisfies like revenge....

My objection to this movie was not that it had utterly nothing in common with Dumas' novel but for its name and that of its main character. As I'm sure anyone who's ever heard of this movie knows...Hollywood has once agian taken liberties and distorted a classic story into something else. I've gotten used to that by now. In any case, I still did not like the movie.

After careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that James Caviezal is really not a particularly good actor. He plays every role the same...with a sort of bewildered determination that gets very old...after about thirty seconds. There are some difficult lines in that movie, and James Caviezal makes them sound forced. Not good for a movie that has already been forced enough. Caviezal is certainly something to look at, so for a while his bad acting slips past one's guard, but in the end, nothing can hide badly delivered lines. It's a pity really, because had that role been better casted it would have greatly improved the movie. The secondary characters were wonderful. Guy Peirce, as always, did a spectacularly oily job as Ferdenand, the chief villain and Mercedes' son looked so much like James Caviezal that it made her revelation to her husband at the end of the movie a touch redundant. Richard Harris was wonderful as the priest and Michal Wincott had a humoursly sadistic little part as the prison warden. Too bad Caviezal couldn't hold up to the rest of the cast.

Oh yes, and one other thing...if you're going to chande every thing but the names of the characters...the least you could to is pronounce the names right. It's FRENCH people!! The name Dantes is pronounced Dante!! Please...I was wincing every time they said his name. If they insist on butchering the book...can they not at least get the names rightf?

On the upside, it was beautifully filmed and the costumes were lovelly. As I have said, the supporting cast was excellant (although Mercedes looked a bit to much like Dantes for my taste)and it was because of them that I enjoyed the movie. It is traditional cookie-cutter Hollywood with very bad bad-guys and very good good-guys, revenge, love...oh yeah and they had to toss in a bit of religion, annoying, but not overbearing...if you want to be entertained, the movie will do so...if you want a good movie...look elsewhere.