O Conde de Monte Cristo

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 Yet, because they were originally made for TV, they seem to have vanished and I haven't seen either on TV since the early 1980s (though I did copy them to now worn out videotapes).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.

As all movies made from books do, it simplifies the plot to a miniscule point and takes as much drama from it as it can. As a movie, this works surprisingly well. Chamberlain is excellent as the conflicted changeling, but others don't do so well. Tony Curtis has never been my favorite actor and Kate Nelligan doesn't have much screen presence. Watching Louis Jourdan try very hard to play to the camera is kind of sad, but Donald Pleasance is very good and almost steals scenes away from Chamberlain.

Unfortunately, this is a TV movie (1970s), so the direction is awkward and stage-y. But a pretty good script and Chamberlain's performance make this a strangely compelling experience.

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.

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.

A good TV effort for this timeless tale. Chamberlain's performance carries the story along. I recently picked up the video at a yard sale and was disappointed to find the "tableaux" scenes missing. Too bad, as the sequence of Dantes' confrontation with Mondego makes a lot more sense after the deleted scenes.