The Count of Monte Cristo book Vs. film

[Jeffbert]

I read this, I guess, at least 10 years ago, so the details are a bit vague, but just now, am in the midst of viewing a film version starring Robert Donat. Unlike the topic I created about actors mismatched to roles, Donat seems to fit the character of Edmond Dantes as well as I can n recall. Moreover, he was described as being very pale skinned when the Smugglers fished him out of the sea, which is correct for a man who spent well over a decade in near total darkness.

I was really surprised when the film accurately depicted his escape from the Château d'If,

Spoiler

which involved taking the place of his benefactor who had died, in the sack that was to be carried out a flung in the sea, while the guards were out of the cell gathering weights to sink it

as I thought that was a very intense scene & the Hayes Code would surely not allow such a thing! After checking the wiki, I was indeed surprised to see that this film was made in the USA: http://www.ask.com/wiki/The_Count_of_Monte_Cristo_(1934_film)?qsrc=3044! I still have about 25 minutes to go, but so far, it seems as close to accurate as it could be for a 2 hour film.

 

[soulsinging]

Can't say I've seen that version, but I found the recent one with Jim Cav and Guy Pearce to be pretty entertaining. I can't say how it stacks up to the book, since I've never read the book. I'm thinking of picking it up, but am a bit intimidated by the unabridged version!

 

[The Judge]

I've read the book but not seen any of the films, so can't help either, I'm afraid.

As far as the book is concerned, there's a very gripping start which is certainly worth reading despite the pompous and long-winded writing, but thereafter it gets bogged down in somewhat tedious chapters devoted to the only marginally interesting antics of two men-about-town in Rome, the dumped-on-the-page backstories of peripheral characters, and, worst of all, the billing and cooing from the drippiest pair of lovers I've ever had the misfortune to read (the version I had contained an Introduction with a judgement on the couple as "vapid and verbose"), and the submissive, brainless, ever-tearful Victorian ideal of perfect womanhood made me gag. Despite all that, it is actually compelling, thanks to the revenge-driven scheming of the Count himself. So, worth reading, but don't be surprised to find yourself skimming in places.

 

[BAYLOR]

I saw the 1975 film version with Richard Chamberlain years ago and remember liking it.

There is a even a version of the story with Mr Magoo in the lead role , It's entertaining.

 

[Jeffbert]

Magoo, as the lead?

As I recall, when I read the novel, there was a very long space between the mention of the names of the guys who framed him, and the next time. I had to do a text search to refresh on who they were. I do not recall thinking it was bogged down at any time, but that was over 10 years ago.

As far as recent film versions go, I recall one in which the guy emerged for years in near total darkness with a healthy tan!

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

I've only seen the Richard Chamberlain version too. Must look out for the one with Robert Donat. Loved the book. Either my edition didn't have an introduction, or maybe I just skipped that bit in my eagerness to get on with the story. I enjoy most Dumas (pere) books for the swashing and buckling.

 

[tinkerdan]

I found the version with Gerard Depardieu quite compelling
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000BFJM26/?tag=brite-21
though I'm sure I missed a lot since it had subtitles I had to read for the french.

It seemed reasonably faithful until the end. Typical of stage and film productions that someone wants to bring something new to the table.
It was long and tedious in some way; but that might have come of reading subtitles.

The book I've already enjoyed reading three times; but Dumas is like a scotch whisky: you have to acquire a taste for his convoluted intrigues.

I've not watched the Donat version though He has always been a favorite and if I hunt I might find a VHS version of it hidden away around the house.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

scotch whisky: you have to acquire a taste

Wat!
ye need to acquire a taste fer it?

Donat is usually good.

Gerard Depardieu, sometimes.

 

[Anne Spackman]

I tried reading the book years ago but couldn't get into it at the time. However, I did see two films based on the novel, with Richard Chamberlain and also Jim Caviezel more recently. Haven't seen the Donat one yet, though I just looked it up. I like cinema classics, and the film starring Donat dates to 1934, so it should be interesting.

 

[Connavar]

I found the version with Gerard Depardieu quite compelling
http://www.amazon.com/Count-Monte-Cristo-Gérard-Depardieu/dp/B000BFJM26/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1426862464&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=counte+of+monte+christo+gerard
though I'm sure I missed a lot since it had subtitles I had to read for the french.

It seemed reasonably faithful until the end. Typical of stage and film productions that someone wants to bring something new to the table.
It was long and tedious in some way; but that might have come of reading subtitles.

The book I've already enjoyed reading three times; but Dumas is like a scotch whisky: you have to acquire a taste for his convoluted intrigues.

I've not watched the Donat version though He has always been a favorite and if I hunt I might find a VHS version of it hidden away around the house.

Im also fan of Depardieu version and really when i saw it i didnt remember much of the book so i dont know if its a good version or not. I just felt for the character because of the actor, i thought it was a good story as a film.

Dumas/Count of Monte Cristo is live changing writer,character for me. I didnt like to read books until my teacher in my early teens recommended/sold the book to me knowing the adventure writer it was. It was my first ever book i read and of course it was the children version in swedish translation and not the complete 1000 pages version. Edmond Dantes was my first literary hero.