The Count of Monte Cristo

Gérard Depardieu has lavished much care and attention to detail on this production of the famous Dumas story. He is most impressive as Edmund Dantes who is falsely imprisoned by his "friends" in the awful Château d'If for some 18 years, then escapes, finds a vast fortune, and as the mysterious Count takes revenge upon those who betrayed him in a very complex series of intrigues. Bearing in mind the great length of the original novel, simplification of the sub plots are inevitable in any screen version, although the extended running time of this TV series allows much of the text to be brought to the screen faithfully. Using some quite stunning set pieces and beautiful scenes to background the action, the cast perform exceedingly well, dominated by Depardieu's portrayal of Monti Cristo. Although a rather overweight Count, his strength as an actor overcomes this minor flaw, and certainly its unlikely we'll see a better performance of the role for years to come. If you have the patience to view the extended version here, it is a rewarding and finally well crafted adaption of a most difficult subject.

I like Gerard Depardieu, and I liked much of this movie. I am huge of the book, which provides amazing insight in human suffering, redemption, and revenge. The butchery of the script was benign relative to the recent Hollywood remake (a complete disaster - "It was a nice film about something, but it was not the Count of Monte Cristo."), but apparently the writer(s) could not resist temptation to alter the ending - which was particularly galling given the mostly faithful recreation of the book up to the point of the conclusion. I personally was bitter - you can't take a story of revenge and remake it into Harlequin romance novel. If you know the story, you know what they should have done, and you know what they probably did. Given the time investment in this movie to watch the whole thing, I literally could not believe it as it became apparent that the sell-out was going to happen. They were so close, and that just made the experience that much more sour.

Eight hours allows for a greater presentation of the many subplots and complexities of the storyline. Depardieu (once you get past his size) is excellent as the Count, a man who, as the reviewer from Amazon says, exchanges one prison for another, a prison of his own hatred. The cast is general is very good and convincing, with Ornella Muti certainly the definitive Mercedes. Set design and production values are excellent.

I have only two criticisms. The first and more minor one is that even this long adaptation doesn't have everything. They couldn't, of course, portray everything -- the book itself is well over 1,000 pages and in truth has padded sections -- but some worthwhile aspects of the story were cut, most notably early sequences with the Abbe Faria (who teaches Dante how to read and write) a very famous part that's usually included in dramatizations of the story. The ending, too, is happier than Dumas's. (I should add that some sequences were very sensibly cut).

A more serious criticism is that Dantes's character is too soft. Depardieu is a fine actor but his portrayal allows Dantes to come off far more sympathetic than I think Dumas intended. The coldness and bloodthirstiness of the Count is not emphasized as much as it might (one sequence at an execution has a very different spin from the way it's presented in the book, for example), nor is the extent of his hatred. This is a real flaw, partly because it makes light of the theme of the story, the effect of revenge on the revenger, and partly because the climax is not as effective if we're already on Dantes side. The flaw here is not with Depardieu, who does his job admirably, but rather with the screenwriter and director.

As such, I can't call this the definitive version -- a little more courage on the screenwriter and director's part would've done wonders. Still, it's probably the best we're going to get. It's hard to imagine anybody else lavishing this kind of care and attention on the story.

One could say I am an old coot, geezer, at the age of 71. This wonderful series, starring the great Gerard Depardieu, pulled me back to my childhood at about eight years old. The two librarians in my little home town in Louisiana always pushed me to read books that were at least two grades ahead. At the end of the school year we were given the usual Summer Reading List. Presenting mine to the local librarians, they suggested a novel by Alexander Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo. I had never actually read a "novel" of that size. I was a bit over- come, but began to read this book right then and there, sitting in a bay window overlooking the little river that flowed past the library's huge windows. That experience changed my life from a casual reader to a dedicated and life-long lover of books. I learned that Dumas was French and had written many other books. I read them all that summer. Then on to Victor Hugo, Balzac, George Sand, and others, all recommended by those lovely ladies in the local library. I have seen almost every film adaptation of The Count, going back to the 1934 version with Robert Donat to the last one with Guy Pierce. THIS one, with Depardieu,is my favorite. Although many liberties are taken, as usual with movie producers and directors, it still is an exciting and involving tale. Dumas' story is so sturdy that any injury visited upon it would be only superficial. I found myself an eight year old all over again. Unlike some adaptations of Dumas' novels, this one had very little swash and even less buckle, being more character driven and fueled by last minute escapes and near fatal outcomes. The ending, as several other comments express, is a bit too up-beat, but so what? Life is full of wonderful and unexpected joys. Watching this made-for-television series was one of them. AND I found it on DVD so I can watch it over and over.

Alexander Dumas's immortal novel has been treated to many film and television adaptations, but until you watch the 1998 miniseries, you've never really seen it. If you've read the novel-I have an English-translated copy on my shelf-you know that it's impossible to condense every plot point into a two-hour movie, which is why the other adaptations have stuck to the main storyline and cut out the intricate plans of the title character. In this six-hour miniseries, it's almost like reading the book! And, since this is a French version, who else but the incomparable Gérard Depardieu could tackle the leading role?

From the opening scene, with Gérard's son Guillaume portraying him as a young man, you'll be purely captivated. To be brief, Guillaume is innocently involved in a treasonous plot, and before he can marry his sweetheart, Naike Rivelli, he's arrested, tried, and locked away in an Alcatraz-type prison on an island. Imprisoned for eighteen years, Guillaume becomes Gérard, and Gérard vows to escape and exact his revenge on those who did him wrong. Many people have cited the escape scene as their favorite, and it is incredibly exciting in this version. And, since this is a six-hour miniseries, Gérard's friendship with his fellow inmate, Georges Moustaki, isn't rushed like it sometimes is in other movies. Nothing is rushed in this adaptation, allowing the audience to understand every detail and complex plot point, and enjoy the execution of each scene.

How is it possible for Gérard Depardieu to be so wonderful? This role calls for so much, and some who've taken it on have been more successful than others. There's physical acting in addition to the highly dramatic scenes, a need to fit in to the time period, and the ability to take on many different disguises without being comical. Revenge, remorse, sympathy, determination, relief, and intelligence are just a few of the qualities the actor needs to embody. If he doesn't, he'll never convince the audience to root for him as he systematically ruins the lives of others. Gérard puts more of himself into this role than in any of the other thirty films I've seen. It's truly an experience to watch him in this miniseries. It feels that he, and not Alexandre Dumas, wrote the story, and that he, and not Josée Dayan, who directed the camera and his fellow actors to completely revolve around him. He is Edmond Dantès. His expressions are mesmerizing, and at times heartbreaking. He delivers his lines with such passion, understanding, and sensitivity, it's as if he's signed "Finis" in ink so that no other actor will bother to take on another remake.

Jean Rochefort and Pierre Arditi make the most of their deliciously villainous roles, and Ornella Muti plays the older version of Naike's role, Edmond Dantès's sweetheart. In a truly family affair, Gérard's daughter, Julie plays Ornella's daughter, and it's very cute to see their scenes together. You can practically feel his pride that both his children are acting alongside him in this masterpiece. Even if you're partial to the 1975 version, I recommend you watch this one. It's so much more thorough, it'll feel like a different story, so you won't be betraying Richard Chamberlain by liking both versions.