Avis des utilisateurs

Well, this a great piece of cinema, the actors play well, the scenes are well designed and the music is top notch. Yet, at someone that read the book before, a lot of the actual story, is not just missing but heavily modified. This is frustrating and they main reason it's a 8 and not 10, but I guess taking a 6 books story into a 3 hours move isn't that easy. Some of the original characters are missing and grouped into new character (Angelel). So, if you are not a Dumas fanatic, go watch it, you will have a good time ! The 3 hours feel like 20 minutes, with good romance, great costumes, great action scenes and drama.

It's hard not to notice that modern adaptations of classical works often tend to sacrifice depth and complexity for the sake of fast pace and entertainment. As a result, the special atmosphere and emotional depth inherent in the original texts are often lost. "The Count of Monte Cristo" by Alexandre Dumas is not just a twisted story of revenge with many bright twists, it is a reflection on life and how a person is transformed by circumstances and his own decisions. Alas, the new film adaptation, and this, of course, in my opinion, coped with the task of conveying this transformation - satisfactorily, but no more, leaving the characters at a simple and understandable level of archetypes.

Expectations did not come from an empty place, because many people read this fascinating tragedy of revenge and had hopes to see the development and deepening of the characters on a par with the original source. At the same time, the audience was offered a set of events that take place too quickly, as if on a high-speed cinema highway. Deep emotions, nuances of character, dramatic internal conflicts - all this was clearly not enough. But it is these details that make the work alive and truly memorable. Yes, undoubtedly, a thousand pages of a novel cannot be transferred into one film, but this is the power of creativity - the ability to revive images and give the viewer empathy. In the film, all this is there, but dosed, within the framework of the standard form of monosyllabic presentation.

The film is not bad, but spoiling Dumas means being completely incompetent, and, to my joy, I can't blame anyone for that. But I expected more and I'm a little disappointed. The whole film was shot with a 24 mm wide-angle lens, and it was unnecessary: there are clearly not enough close-ups, especially when the actors play well. Despite the decent acting, the characters seem to be unsaid and aimless, reduced to simplified and stripped-down images.

During the viewing, I hoped to see a philosophical reassessment or depth of thought in the scene with "Abbé Faria", but, unfortunately, only the Soviet painting by Georgy Jungwald-Khilkevich with Alexei Petrenko as the abbot was able to prepare the viewer, lay the foundation for the climax, making them realize the suffering of the prisoners and catch the main question: "What are you up to Will you spend your life, for revenge or for good?". After this episode, it became clear that the story would quickly sweep through the pages of the fireproof manuscript, and so it turned out.

The connection with the epoch and with the literary echoes of the past, which give the original its special flavor and indescribable integrity, has disappeared. Perhaps this is a sign of the times. Modern technology allows you to create impressive visual effects, but no technique can replace the power of a story, the ability to convey a mood and invite the viewer into a deep understanding of life. One thing is for sure: trying to adapt classics is always a challenge that requires incredible skill and understanding of the text. This is a difficult task, and, alas, not everyone can overcome this path, but the task was done well, although there was a residue of disappointment.

Not once was I bored. Not once did I find inconsistencies. Sceneries and sets were to notch. The acting never pulled me out of the story, it keeps you there from start to finish.

French cinema produces a lot of forgettable movies (in my opinion), a lot of fun ones, some greats and here and there a movie that actually makes me love cinema and the theater. Le comte de Monte-Cristo is of the latter.

Rarely do I find a movie that depicts love, friendship, treason, courage, solitude, caring, vengeance, and much more, in at least a decent manner. Nothing felt rush to me. The three hours were deserved and it felt like less than two.

I encourage you to watch this movie, it has many qualities and it won't be a waste of time.

Now if you are a Dumas enthusiast, you opinion will certainly differ.

Usually not a fan of action movies, the wonderful cast as well as the choice of a classic of French literature convinced me to go watch LE COMTE DE MONTE CRISTO. And man I wasn't disappointed !

Despite its three-hour runtime, the movie never bores. When it doesn't keep us on our toes, it shows us eye-popping scenes of 19th century France, leaving us wondering how they made that with only 40M euros ! I guess the beautiful cinematography and clever editing have a role to play in making this movie stand out from much costlier Hollywood productions.

Of course much of the credit also goes to Alexandre Dumas for coming up with such a poignant story, but adapting it for the screen sure wasn't an easy task either, and it was done marvelously here.

I sincerely hope this movie will have a career outside of France, as more people deserve to see this.

Merci Alexandre, merci Matthieu :)

Have you ever had something really unfair happen to you?

Have you ever been betrayed by people you trusted?

Have you ever had the feeling of wanting to show them all and teach them a lesson?

Have you ever been mad with rage?

Have you ever thought that if you had the chance you would do so much good in the world?

Have you ever wondered about what cost your actions and words have on other people far out in the future?

Have you ever been consumed with an idea you wouldn't separate from?

Have you ever held onto someone even though they moved on?

Have you ever had your life fall apart?

Have you ever convinced yourself that you were right, only to learn that you were wrong?

If you can say yes to just one of these things. This movie is for you. A masterpiece. I sat with profound feelings of mercy and grace towards myself and others after watching this movie.

It is always tricky to approach something as complex as this novel and try to get a coherent movie that features all the plots, and sub-plots, and sub-sub-plots, let alone book accurate characters.

I enjoyed the Richard Chamberlain TV movie, and the 2002 film despite some wholesale plot chopping in both. Even the 1998 6 hour 23 minute miniseries couldn't do the complete story and that's been my definite adaptation for the last 25 years.

The point being that to fit into 3 hours it was clear that some plot-lines were going to axed, characters changed and a streamlining of the narrative.

It then becomes a case of whether it was done in a way that allows those who don't already know the story, those who may have read the book three or four times, and all those in between to enjoy it.

Clearly the producers understood the underlying themes and (apart from one quibble I had which I'm not going to post as a spoiler) did great service to the original and still managed to include some sub-plots I thought they were going to cut out.

Of course, if you're a purist who hated Lord of the Rings because Peter Jackson changed characters and aspects from a 100% faithful adaptation of the book then you aren't going to like this either.

Totally entertained and it never once felt like a 3 hour film.

It also has a great soundtrack, the reprise of which had me stay for the whole credits.

The first question I'd love to ask directors adapting novels to movies is: if that book inspired you so much that you wanted to make a movie out of it, why then alter its story?

The Count of Montecristo is another of those cases: those who read the book will be astounded by how the ending was completely distorted; and for no evident reason I'd submit, as the book's ending was dramatic enough.

So, again, if you didn't like it, why make a movie about it? If you want to ride your own ideas by all means do that, use your fantasy and in that case the sky will be the limit.

OK, end of runt...If I had to disconnect my literary memory and judge the movie for its sheer cinematographic merits, The Count of Montecristo is a honest cloak and dagger movie, with good performances by all the key actors, good photography and decent pace.

But then again, my literary memory kicks in again and a bittersweet aftertaste lingers in my mouth...

I'm French and I'm the first to say that " All movie from France are so bad, they can't and absolutely not able at all to making a great movie...It's only every 10 years that we can watching a good movie from France"

...Well this French movie it's perfect !!! All things to making a great movie from cinema was there and I'm so proud as French man to say that to finally a French movie it's a masterpiece !!!!

First to all the main story it's great, every one can watching watch this movie, it's for all audience kids, teenagers, adults, old people ... the adaptation of the novel is really well done and it's not easy to that especially when such big fan from the books expect a lot about the film !!!

But the script it's so nice, 3 hours of movie was not long at all, I didn't want that movie finish I got really into so much in the journey of the main character, you want to know the following after each moments you don't leave your eyes from the screen it's crazy ! The story of the Monte Cristo character it's so nice and touching and you attend throughout the movie to his story and it is so passionate and 3 hours it's perfect to discover the hole story (Beginning of life, betrayal, revenge...) the story it's emotional and so fascinating !!!

I hope so that not only France can watching this movie and show to others country that france can making movie like this !!

The acting skills from Pierre Niney it's great as each movie he played and the others actors and actress same thing even for Laurent Lafitte I'm not such fan about him but He did a such good performance in his bad character I hope so these both actors will win a Cesar each one at the end of year !!!

The directing and shoots from director was so nice we don't used to got a directing like this in France and the two directors showed to us that we could do that even if we have not the same budget of Hollywood, the shoots was very beautiful !!! Thanks to them !

Finally the soundtrack, make up and the different suits worn by actors was great, these all points was perfect thanks to people who worked on it, there are so many things to say again about each thing but all are good and tomorrow I will still here to say great thing about each features !!!

The environments of movie was great too and finally 43 millions budgets ?!??!!?? Sorry ? But the movie look like 100 millions budget at least it's crazy it show again that why this movie it's a masterpiece cause making a great shoots with great scenery's with a movie during 3 hours for only 43 budget it's unbelievable and I don't think so people are aware of that it's crazy !!!

This Movie from France it's masterpiece that's all, if you don't like it you don't like cinema sorry !

So I have actually read the book, the real book(s), and not the watered down version you find in the book store. That story is compelling, charcter driven, intricate and the details tell how it all comes together. This while a totally ok movie has nothing of that besides the outlines of the main plotlines. There isnt the good besides the bad, there isnt the ambivalent ending and there isnt the base of it all, the relationship between the Abbé and Edmond who basically becomes a son. Also missing is the back story from the escape to Edmonds arrival in Paris that makes the whole revenge plot believable in the first place. I also cant help but miss the old Mr Villefort whose story while peripher is so central to who Edmond really is as a person. So want to see a french drama during the 19th century that is pretty ok with some good actors, go ahead. Want to immerse yourself in the real story of the Count of Monte Christo? Find and Antiquarian because that is the only place you find this masterpiece.

I read a lot of French lit in high school, but I really regret this was not on the required reading list. What a film! Revenge is such a central theme of so many films, from Michael Winner's DEATH WISH to Coralie Fargeat's REVENGE, but this story, with its nonstop potboiler twists and turns, is a fantastic new spin--using a very old classic literary masterpiece. You will also learn a lot about French history after the Revolution. I only had vague ideas about Napoleon's exile and the restored monarchy; now I know it was decades of backstabbing skullduggery! Don't miss it. It's a three-hour page-turner!

I read the books and saw two other versions of it as a film.

I asked myself what was the idea to make another version even though 18 exist already.

I watched it in French and realized that it is pretty far off the original storyline. Some characters are missing and others adapted. Apart from the great costumes and the brilliant locations, it seemed to me that only the beautiful, 'rich' sides were shown. The prison seemed too romanticised to me, as did the society. The Count could hardly stand out from the others due to his wealth and mystique, because this didn't always come to the surface.

Nevertheless, the film is entertaining and I was never bored. It managed to tell the whole story, although in a different way. Unfortunately, I couldn't answer the question of why this film was made, because it's just another version.

Watch the film if you don't know the story yet and like a romanticised story. Otherwise, I recommend the book by Alexandre Dumas and the film 'The Count of Monte Cristo 2002'.

Once upon a time in France a film was not a film if Alain Delon was not present in it, then for far too long it was Depardieu late 70s to 10 years ago far too long now we have Pierre Niney he is only 35 so we could fear Gerard-itis could strike here too

Last year every other French film/series seems to have him in it usually as the main draw

I see no reason for this. The first two at least had a presence of sorts. Unpleasant maybe but a presence. Him not so much. Bit of a girly boy and yet they cast him in very masculine roles

Anyway this viewer here is already Nineyed out in 24

To the film: not bad will give it a six

But the reviews here. Practically the second cinematic coming

Cmon. It is OK no more than that

Apart from the drone shots could have been made in the 50s. VERY "traditionnel"

What is good here?

The storyline but that is Dumas; some say it has been tweaked. Do not remember the book so will take their word for it. The studios Woke police managed to shoehorn a lesbian tryst in it; why deprive ourselves? Indeed but I will say I can safely bet 3 trillion bitcoins Dumas was lesbian-tryst free in the book .... or i shall eat my hat and pay up

The costumes. The locations, The chateaux. Oh Yes spot on

Spiffingly beautiful actresses especially the young French-Rumanian actress Anamaria Vartolomei did she really sing those songs? Excellent

But really all in all pedestrian it is and all the way through

I do not understand those rave reviews unless you have never been to the cinema before

It is an OK movie which will NOT bore you. Best I can offer here. High Street main stream viewing ...

I will not deny it, I think the film is really beautiful : production design, costumes, props... and of course lighting (congrats M. Bolduc) and many other details helped make it a wonderful experience for the eyes, in my opinion.

Now with a plot so huge as with Dumas', so many characters, theads, sub-stories and such, the authors had to cut things, adapt, re-write... betray, as is often necessary or critical with any adaptation!

That's a given.

But why dishonor the original author's choices (Dumas')?

Why betray the lessons he wanted to impart : Monte Cristo's moral dilemma, his good nature overall, his help to so many, and unrivaled loyalty to anyone who had been good to him or deserved it in any way ?

Why change Haydée's love for him for a silly romance?

Even Mercedes' understanding of Monte Cristo's actions and why she can't be saved, and why Albert has to follow her are admirable, in the book...

And what are we left with, here?

Pure show?

I can assure you it's not what remains, when you read it.

Unfortunately, good films that truly deserve to be listed among the best are not released very often. So, I wasn't expecting that the next film adaptation of "The Count of Monte Cristo," a classic novel by Alexandre Dumas, would surprise me.

The film was directed by Alexandre de La Patellière and Mathieu Delaporte, whose work has a high rating on IMDb, averaging above 7 out of 10 for all their previous films. This is a very reliable source of information, and they really lived up to their high expectations.

The film runs for quite a long time - three hours, which may seem like a long time. However, this is not the case. The pace, regularity, aesthetics, and beauty of the narrative make us want to return to this film again and again. While watching, I didn't find a single place where the plot would lag, where it would need to speed up or slow down. The very structure of the film is aesthetically pleasing.

From the very first scenes, the film impresses with its scale and quality of production. You can see how beautifully the scenery is made, how the scenes are filled, and feel how the spirit of adventure fills the soul of the audience. Most of all, these feelings are conveyed by "Pirates of the Caribbean," and in some scenes you immediately remember the Assassin's Creed series of games. After the plot starts, you literally jump with joy that this is only half an hour of the film, and then there will only be more - not every film causes such admiration at the beginning.

The plot follows the classic path of the hero: first, everything is fine, then an accident happens (by evil), and the hero falls into the abyss. He meets the teacher and, having gained strength, rises back to the light. He becomes better and stronger than his original self. With renewed strength, he defeats evil and returns home a hero.

The atmosphere is complemented by the soundtrack, which should be taken out separately as a work of art. It's not just music in the background that keeps the audience awake, like in many movies. Here, the soundtrack creates a third of the atmosphere and appeal, it is memorable, and you immediately want to add it to the playlist.

The entire cast is completely new faces for me, but they played to the maximum of their abilities. All the actors have conveyed the spirit of the characters and evoked exactly the emotions that the characters should evoke.

Since the film is based on a great book adventure novel, the plot can not be directly attributed to the directors. Alexandre Dumas wrote a great story about love and revenge. In this case, it is necessary to evaluate not what was shown but how it was shown. Did you convey the spirit of the original source? Did those who have never read the book get interested in reading it? At 100%. I was so interested that I immediately started rereading the history of the Templars, looking at Gothic architecture, and buying a book.

This film made a great impression not only on me but also on my girlfriend. This is the case when you do not notice any flaws and shortcomings. This is love at first sight, and the desire to review again and again. Everything is so great that for me personally, this film is an unexpected discovery and will take 1st place among all the films of 2024.

I was absolutely captivated by the film from start to finish. Every moment kept me on the edge of my seat, and I wasn't bored for a single second. The sets are simply stunning, with each scene being a true masterpiece, especially Monte Cristo's castle. The soundtrack is equally majestic and heightening the emotion of every key moment.

As for Pierre Niney, he is simply outstanding in the lead role. He portrays Edmond Dantès with such an intensity and depth. His performance clearly reflects the evolution of the caracter from the innocent sailor to the revengeful vigilanty at the verge of losing himself.

Special mention also goes to the actress who plays Haydée: she absolutely steals the show. Her presence is magnetic.

In short, this movie is a masterpiece that never lets up and is definitely worth watching.

It's very good, and maintained the pace for a long film very well. The actors did their job properly with the right amount of emotion. I wanted to give it 8*, but couldn't. It's very good but not quite outstanding. The camerawork is very good, sometimes splendid and added to the emotion of the story. I don't agree with reviewers who compare films with the original classic novels. They're two different media and both have shortcomings and advantages. It's worth seeing and on a big screen. I didn't notice anyone becoming bored during the film despite its length - such as looking at their phones or shifting a lot.

It's been a long time since a movie captivated me the way The Count of Monte Cristo did. From the moment it began, I was completely hooked, not wanting to miss a single second. Maybe it's the French influence that made it feel even more immersive, but there was something about this film that kept me engaged in a way few movies do.

The acting was simply amazing. Every performance felt authentic and deeply emotional, especially the lead, who brought Edmond Dantès to life with such intensity that I could feel every ounce of his pain, betrayal, and eventual triumph. The supporting cast was just as strong, adding layers of depth to the film's themes of revenge, justice, and redemption.

The music was spot on. Every scene was elevated by the score, enhancing the emotions without ever feeling overpowering. Whether it was a moment of quiet reflection or the height of Dantès' vengeance, the soundtrack perfectly complemented the atmosphere.

As for the storyline, it was incredibly well executed. The adaptation stayed true to the essence of Alexandre Dumas' novel while maintaining a gripping pace that never felt slow or rushed. The transformation of Edmond from an innocent young sailor to the cunning and powerful Count of Monte Cristo was mesmerizing to watch, with every plot twist landing exactly as it should.

It's rare for a movie to leave such a lasting impression, but this one did. The combination of stellar performances, masterful storytelling, and an immersive score made it an unforgettable experience. If you haven't seen it yet, you're missing out on one of the best cinematic adaptations of a classic novel.

It is impossible to reduce one of the greatest (in quality and scope) novels ever to a 3 hour movie. It can't be. Every attempt so far has fallen short. Only the Chateau d'If sub plot would fill a 2 hour script. So, for me, if the movie was based on an original screenplay it would deserve a 7. It is very difficult these days to make a bad movie when you emply good professionals in every aspect of filmmaking, but I find it lacking in true emotion. I would say it is a pretty entertaining movie for those who haven't read the book. Unless it is turned into an 8 hour series, the screen will never do justice to Alexandre Dumas.

I have not read the novel but I had the sense that the film made multiple changes to the story to abbreviate it. And I cannot imagine that anyone thinks a film can entirely capture or reproduce a timeless masterpiece.

That said, this was a gorgeous, beautifully filmed and acted movie. The cinematography was never less than artful and there was never a weak link in the acting or script. With the Three Musketeers movies and this, I have the sense that the French are applying modern film making (and financing) to their great patrimony just as they have in other ways, for centuries. We are the beneficaries.

It enchanted both my 11 year old daughter and me, this is a can't-miss experience, both as a representation of a great novel, but also as movie equal to the best theater experiences we can enjoy today.

Receiving sentence, there's no trial to make your case, the jealous have you interred at great haste, you've lost your love, forfeit your life, solitary conflict wrapped in strife, withered in a cell, with years laid out to waste. But there's hope, as you find out, you're not alone, as a pair you set to work chiselling stone, scraping, digging day and night, in the search for a new sight, rocks fall - and then your future is resewn. You acquire your ex partners wealth and riches, it allows you to acquire the finest britches, plus a title and some land, revenge can now be mapped and planned, all because of nimble hands, and threaded stitches.

A perpetually enduring tale, well performed and presented, albeit with poetic license, but there are better versions available.

This is my first review, only made on the basis of gratitude and appreciation for this great work of art.

Never read the book, didn't know what to expect, but I was awed from start to finish. The visuals, the screenplay, the story, the music, everything just adds up. If you have a stick up your bum one could point out some «room for improvements», but in the end all that really matters is what emotions the movie brings out in you. I was hooked from the very beginning, and I can't even remember the last time 3 hours went by so fast.

I've always been very cheap with my 10s because I was all high and mighty about it, but with time I've reached the conclusion that every single piece of artwork which makes you reflect, appreciate and grow a bit at the same time, deserves ones utmost devotion of gratitude, and with that being said; hands down a 10.

I don't understand the hype and the high rating, maybe because it's the first major French version in a long time. At three hours, it's too long, Pierre Niney is dreadfully miscast as he's way too soft, and the supporting cast acts in extremely stereotypical ways. We all know this story. There is way too little action in this one, it's Alexande Dumas, not Sartre.

One has to find a new angle to make this very cold coffee taste interesting, like the Japanese animated series of 2009 called "Gankutsuô" AKA The Cave King. There, the story is transplanted into a futuristic setting with traditional nobility thriving on intrigue. As for film versions, I find the 2002 American version most compelling - although Jim Caviezel is not very good as the lead, Guy Pearce as the villain is excellent, and there is far more swordplay. As for the most memorable Edmond Dantès, I'd go with Richard Chamberlain in the 1975 version, he gave a masculine performance which is integral to the part, as the novel's main theme is honor vs. Vengeance.

This version is filmed with a lot of panache and the editing is very smooth, so perhaps that is the reason why many people like it. But if you have seen this all before many times, you will feel rather let down by the highly predictable script.