Il conte di Montecristo

I went to see the new production of The Count of Monte Cristo this past weekend and then rewatched the one with Richard Chamberlain. This one captured the book far better than the new one did. It follows Dumas' original more closely and the character of the Count is calculating and single-minded just as in the book. The supporting actors weren't bad but Richard Chamberlain is who makes this movie as enjoyable as it was.

In this "classic tale of injustice, revenge and ultimate retribution," according to the DVD description, "Edmond Dantes is about to marry the love of his life and become a Captain in the Navy until he is falsely accused of conspiracy and is sent to the hellish island fortress of Monte Cristo. Locked away from his perfect life, he feels only hatred and revenge towards the perpetrators of this horrible injustice, but can see no way of exacting his revenge...

"Told of a secret treasure by a dying prisoner, Dantes finds a new hope and escapes to find the treasure. Now with a fortune, he assumes the identity of the wealthy and influential Count of Monte Cristo. Here, he seeks his revenge using his enemies' greed and corruption to bring about their ultimate downfall."

This is a handsomely mounted ITC-TV production of the frequently adapted Alexandre Dumas classic. There are some hair and make-up distractions, but most of it looks nice, at least.

Richard Chamberlain performs the leading role with focus and style. Of his quartet of veteran co-stars, Trevor Howard (the Abbe Faria) is most impressive. The younger cast includes an early Kate Nelligan (as Mercedes) and the grown-up Dominic Guard (as Albert) kid from "The Go-Between" (1970). But, with piercing sword and courtroom play, the lesser known Carlo Puri (as Benedetto) makes the most memorable impression.

****** The Count of Monte-Cristo (1/10/75) David Greene ~ Richard Chamberlain, Carlo Puri, Kate Nelligan, Trevor Howard

The Count of Monte Cristo as well as The Man in the Iron Mask were both made for television in the mid to late 1970s and starred the talented Richard Chamberlain. Yet, because they were originally made for TV, they seem to have vanished and I haven't seen either on TV since the early 1980s (though I did copy them to now worn out videotapes). It's a real shame, as they were first-rate and every bit as good as any Hollywood production--maybe better.

The Man in the Iron Mask was the better of the two stories, but both are about as good Alexander Dumas stories as you can find. This is due to the overall package--exceptional music, acting, writing and pacing. I simply don't know how you could have made them much better.

When you convert a novel of 1100 pages to a film of about 100min, you're inevitably going to lose a lot of details - probably a few important ones. But under the circumstances, this film was about as good as it could get. I love the original novel, and was a fan of the 1973-74 films of "The Three Musketeers" (in which Richard Chamberlain played Aramis, incidentally), and so was interested to see this.

The most obvious change is that the first half of the film deals with about the first quarter of the book - making it a little unbalanced. But then, the book has so many subplots, it was probably necessary to let go of a lot of them.

The other obvious change is that in the novel, Danglars is the main villain, whom Dantes pardons at the end. In the film it is Mondego - which makes more sense from a film point of view, as Mondego took Dantes' bride. But apart from that, here, Dantes does not show any mercy - whereas in the book Danglars was pardoned, in the film he does not show any remorse until all four villains are either dead or locked up - and only then because Mercedes does not love this new version of himself. So that's a pity.

Still, changes aside, this film is about as good as it could be. Someone else said probably best for those who've not read the book. They're probably right. But that doesn't mean you can't enjoy it if you have read it. I'd give this 7/10.

This movie is excellent, especially compared to the new version with James cavaziel, which is much longer, and still does not touch on the depth and characters, this 75' version was somehow able to do. As well Chamberlain, was able to show through voice and appearance, changes of appearance from the young man of 19 to the man in he would be in his late 30's. If they didnt capture every subplot, they covered most of them, in more pared down fashion. Its a shame this was not made into a miniseries at the time on tv. It would likely have been excellent. You can tell from the cuts in the movie, that there was a longer one there, that couldnt be aired due to time constraints. Nevertheless, excellent, american production of the film, though not as good as the version with Gerard Depardieu, Chamberlain, himself, cuts a finer figure as the count, at least in is look. Chamberlain had assurance, picked a voice to use in the film, which I point out, because in the 2002 version, Cavaziel, had this very problem and never was able to be comfortable in how he delivered his lines or his appearance. Great Film catch it while you can.