THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO 2024 MOVIE REVIEW

In this post, I'll share with you a review of The Count of Monte Cristo. I don't go to theatre/movies often. In fact, years have been known to pass without me seeing a film on the big screen. However, when I saw the poster for the new 2024 The Count of Monte Cristo movie, I knew I simply had to go. I really wanted to see this film, and I didn't even read the reviews or watch the trailer for it. I wasn't even intimidated by the fact it is a three hours long. Afterall, it's based on a rather long novel, so I didn't expect it to be short. 

Now, I usually review books on my blog, not movies. However, perhaps this film review won't come as a surprise to you. I don't know if you have noticed, but I included a few Monte Cristo quotes in my last post. In the post preceding that one, I mentioned how much I like French movies and recommended one of them- The Odyssey. Moreover, I admitted I'm considering seeing the new Monte Cristo film because of Pierre Niney, the actor that portrays the famous count.  So, you could say this Monte Cristo post was sort of teased or at least expected. 

Book vs Movie! Are these two different? Yes, actually they are, and I'll tell you how I feel about it shortly. With the estimated budget of over 43 million euros, The Count of Monte-Cristo is the most expensive French film of 2024. Directed and written by Matthieu Delaporte and Alexandre de La Patellière. The novel on the other hand, is a timeless classic by Alexander Dumas, that has been adapted both for stage and the big screen. Published in 1884, this adventure novel remains a source of inspiration. 

DIRECTED BY ALEXANDRE AND MATTHIEU, THE COUNT OD MONTE-CRISTO 2024 HAS MET WITH FAVOURABLE REVIEWS SO FAR!

One thing I noticed when I finally looked up this film is that the reviews are extremely favourable so far. 

Honestly, I don't know much about the directors of this movie, but one thing I would complement them for is casting. I managed to find an interview with the two of them online, so I'll just link it up quickly because I think it reveals a lot about how they think and what they were trying to do with this newest Monte-Cristo adaptation. 

ALEXANDRE SAID THEY WERE GOING FOR A BAROQUE FEEL 

One thing you'll notice about the film is that there's a lot of switching between bright scenes and dark ones. At one moment, the character find himself in this idyllic Mediterranean sunbathed outdoors and the other in a dark alley. Both outdoors and indoors can be very illuminated but also dark. The directors played with the darkness and light masterfully. 

Alexandre: This book spans a number of literary genres. There’s tragedy, romance, a great romantic story. We realised this on set. We never did the same thing with the crew. We went from interior scenes to epic sequences, from adventure scenes to darker ones. We went for something baroque to a certain extent.

I DO AGREE WITH ALEXANDRE SAYING THAT THE THEME OF REVENGE HASN'T AGED

Alexandre: It is a very accessible story because we become one with the character and want to take revenge with him. But as time goes by, he strays off course. There is a very harsh critique of Monte Cristo’s journey by Dumas, which allows the viewer to go on this introspective journey with him. In this world, which was violent back then and is not much less so today, we found that the idea of revenge had not aged one bit.

MATTHIEU SEEMS TO SEE MONTE CRISTO AS A MAN WITH LITTLE TO NO MORALS 

Matthieu: I also consider that Dumas’ novel is set during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution, at a time and in a society that were less aristocratic, when birth would soon become less important than money. And another interesting element is that Monte Cristo is a man with no religion, no country and no morals. He is not Robin Hood. He finds treasure and, instead of sharing it, keeps it for himself to satisfy his desire for revenge.

I HAVE TO SAY THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS SURPRISED ME IN THE FILM, THE WAY IT ALMOST PORTRAYS COUNT MONTE-CASINO IN A NEGATIVE LIGHT

I will come back to this later, but I thought it's worth mentioning now. If you're expecting this movie to be about a heroic young man who was wronged but rose above it, you'll be disappointed. This movie is very much a tale of revenge. I didn't love all the choices that the directors took, but there's one thing I have to complement them for- and that's casting. 

READING THIS INTERVIEW I REALIZED THAT ALEXANDER SPECIFICALLY WROTE IT WITH PIERRE NINEY IN MIND

Alexandre: We decided that we could not write our version of Monte Cristo without an actor in mind, despite having always refused to work that way beforehand. We got in touch with Pierre Niney, had a coffee with him and he accepted the part. We began coming up with this story, with the idea of turning the character of Monte Cristo into an avatar of Dantès by radicalising him, then worked back and forth with Pierre on a regular basis. After that, we were really lucky because we had drawn up a dream list of actors and they all agreed to come on board.

I DON'T SPEAK FRENCH, BUT I DID NOTICE THAT THE ACTORS SPOKE WITH PERFECT RHYTHM AND ON OVERALL SOUNDED VERY NATURAL

Matthieu: We needed the very best actors to make sure that the text, while faithful to the language of the 19th century, had a modern, fluid edge to it in this fantasised era. We never said to one another that we were making a period film, but we did not want to over-modernise the dialogue. For example, we asked the actors not to shorten words or omit syllables and we worked on the fluidity of this. The rhythm was so nice with them that it sounded very modern.

THE CASTING OF PIERRE NINEY AS COUNT MONTE CRISTO AKA EDMUND DANTES

Some wondered at the casting of Pierre Niney as count Monte Cristo, but I think he's been born to play it. Moreover, if you look at the novel description of young protagonist Dantès in the first chapter, you'd see that Pierre fits perfectly:  

"He was a fine, tall, slim young fellow of eighteen or twenty, with black eyes, and hair as dark as a raven’s wing; and his whole appearance bespoke that calmness and resolution peculiar to men accustomed from their cradle to contend with danger."

I really cannot imagine any other French actor of his generation in this role.  Even the illustrations in the original novel look like him. 

THE CASTING (from IMBD)

Cast (in credits order)  

	Pierre Niney	...	Edmond Dantès
	Bastien Bouillon	...	Fernand de Morcef
	Anaïs Demoustier	...	Mercédès Herrera
	Anamaria Vartolomei	...	Haydée
	Laurent Lafitte	...	Gérard de Villefort
	Pierfrancesco Favino	...	Abbé Faria
	Patrick Mille	...	Danglars
	Vassili Schneider	...	Albert
	Julien De Saint Jean	...	Andréa
	Julie De Bona	...	Victoria
	Adèle Simphal	...	Angèle
	Stéphane Varupenne	...	Caderousse (as Stéphane Varupenne de la Comédie Française)
	Marie Narbonne	...	Eugénie Danglars
	Bruno Raffaelli	...	Morrel
	Abde Maziane	...	Jacopo (as Abdé Maziane)
	Bernard Blancan	...	Le père Dantès
	Oscar Lesage	...	Le témoin du duel

ALL THE ACTORS WERE SO WELL CASTED!

Bastien is wonderful as Fernard. He looks nothing like the novel's version and I definitely imagined him differently, but he played the role perfectly. Anais makes for wonderful Mercedes, playing her as the young and the mature women with equal precision. Anamaria does the best with the time she was given as Haydee. She transmits an exotic radiance and defiance, especially when she speaks in a foreign language. Laurent embodies Gerald perfectly. Pierefrancesco seemed a bit young for the role, but he has done an amazing job with it.

THE ACTING 

For me, the acting was the highlight of this film. I feel like the actors really did the maximum with the materials they were given. As I said, I don't speak French, but I could feel the way they spoke sounded very natural. I'm in favour of subtle acting, especially when it comes to dialogues. As a language teacher, you could say that I'm very focused on the rhetoric aspect of acting (the sentence stress, the pauses between words, the word emphasis and things like that). There was that historical feel to this film, yet without the language sounding dated. 

Pierre Niney simply shines as a young Edmond Dantes aka count Monte-Cristo. This was especially important as it gives an additional dimension to the character.  The fact that young Edmund is an angel of sorts is very important, because it makes the injustice he suffered all the greater. Not a lot of time is devoted to young Edmund, so it's good that at least the writing emphasized that. 

Once he turns into count Monte-Cristo, Niney suddenly undergoes transformation. It's not only that he ages, and becomes more mature, his personality is changed. Niney played the transformation wonderfully, keeping an aura of mystery around Monte-Cristo. Moreover, as the count Monte-Cristo Niney play different characters, and wears masks, in order to full his enemies. This is also an important part of the book, the way Monte-Cristo manages to full his enemies by playing different people. As an actor, Pierre Niney played that part exceptionally well, really transforming the characters he played. The make up department with the prosthetics and masks did a fantastic job as well. I wished he was given more time to play characters under masks. 

 I think Pierre did the best with the time he was given. I'd have liked to see more of his personal suffering showcased through his interactions with others, but the writers decided to let him sulk in silence. While Pierre plays those moments of self-doubt with passion, the stubborn isolation of Monte-Cristo makes him a less sympathetic character. In the book, he is a lone wolf, as well, but he has got some friends and you can his inner turmoil better. The final scenes of the battle were played a little bit flat for me, or rather they were just a tiny bit too long, but on overall the acting was potent. 

Bastien Bouillon seems to plays Fernard with much confidence. He does particularly well at showing Fernard's two-faced nature and his family's aristocratic pride that fuels his hart red towards Edmund. However, as the film progressed, his portrayal lost something of its power. Maybe it is the writing, but he becomes less and less noticeable just when he's supposed to take central part. Moreover, one doesn't really gets a chance to observe his obsession with Mercedes. While it's played subtle in the beginning, it still feels convincing. What happens later? We didn't really get a change to see their marriage. Does he still adores Mercedes? I wish we were given something as viewers, some insight into their relationship or some closure. It could have been as simple as a long longing gaze toward his estranged wife or something of the sort.

Anais D. makes for a wonderfully layered Mercedes. The plays the young Mercedes so naturally and effortlessly. Her first encounter with Monte-Cristo, in particular, was so well acted. The way her voice trembles when she speaks to him makes the dialogues so powerful. Anais captured all the complex sadness and tragedy of this character. 

Anamaria V. as Haydee was quite powerful in some scenes, especially towards the end. Of course, she's very different from the book version, but that is how this character was adapted for this 2024 film. She's given a more adventurous role, you could say, or rather one with more scheming. The  tragic story that fuels her vengeance exists in the book, but the plot plays out differently. In book, Haydee was saved from slavery by the count, but didn't really have an actual part in her vendetta towards Monte-Cristo's enemies, here she is an active participant in the revenge. Anamaria that is Haydee and count Monte- Cristo are bound by revenge, and sometimes she seems like his pawn and sometimes like a protege. Their relationship is much different from that from the book, and I wish it was given more space. At some scenes, it's really hard to make up what Anamaria was feeling, but perhaps that was intentional and she was written like that. 

Laurent was incredibly convincing as the villain Gerard. I watched him in other movies, but never in something so ambitious. I never saw him act better! This was an extremely hard to play, with the way it was written and everything. You could say he is the chief villain of the film, and he played his role to perfection. It isn't easy to portray a man who wears so many masks. His rage upon being discovered was absolutely credible. You can see all the emotions on his face even when he doesn't utters a single word. His eyes spoke volumes in every scene. Besides PiereFrancesco nobody has done more with the time given on screen!

Pierefrancesco played the role of his life time as Abbe Faria. I was familiar with his work, yet I was still impressed. He and Niney shared a wonderful connection on the screen. They both played prisoners convincingly, but Pierefrancesco took it to another level. How he managed to show us the depths of the pain of his character and the wisdom that the suffering brought to him in the little time he appeared on the screen is beyond me. In the book, the imprisonment is written as rather important experience for Dantes, and the conversations between Abbe Faria and young Dantes are deeply psychological and philosophical. Faria serves as both a spiritual and intellectual father to young Dantes. 

The film hints at that, as Faria offers to teach Edmond Dantes foreign languages- and everything he knows. Pierefrancesco's character Abbe Faria speaks to young young Dantes in Italian as he is dying, and it was one of the most touching scenes I've watched. His words were so filled with emotion and meaning. Now, it's possible that I was so touched because I have also read the book, so it is possible I remember their connection, but I still think Pierefrancesco acted his part flawlessly. 

Who else left a mark on me? I think  Patrick Mille did a good job as Danglars. He portrays him as a appearing rather carefree once he became rich, but once he loses his riches or his position becomes endangered, it's clear it's just a pose. He's materialistic to a core, and completely lacks any empathy.  Vassili Schenider is all tears and emotion as a young love-possessed Albert. He plays the innocence of Albert perfectly. At times, I felt like he was overacting a little, but considering the youth of his character and the fact he portrays his first love, it does makes sense he acted with so much emotion. 

Julien De Saint Jean is a fantastic Andrea. I almost wished he was given more space, even if he was really taking away from the count Monte-Cristo by becoming such an active participant in the vendetta. I also wished he didn't disappear from the stage the way he did, or that he was given some kind of closure, maybe a meeting with his mother or something like that. 

Adele Simphal is amazing as the brave Angele. She plays her character with much strength and courage. She also had a great chemistry with Monte-Cristo, I wish they were given more time together. Not necessarily as love interest, but it would have been great if he recollected her and her kindness in some way or spoke of her to her nephew.

Marie Narbonne is wonderful as Eugenie Danglars. Her eyes speak volumes, even if she's not given much room to speak. It's amazing how much paint, fear and anguish, she manages to convey with her face expressions. Eugenie Danglars is a living breathing woman in this film, and it's all her credit. Now, I don't know what to say about Abde Maziane as Jacopo, he hardly appears on the screen, and isn't given any lines. That was really a shame, as he is an important character in the novel and by all logic should be in the film as well. Yet, Monte-Cristo never shares a word with him. If you haven't read the book, you'd be justified in thinking he's just hired help. Finally, Bernard Blancan does a good job of portraying senior Blancan, Edmond's father. He's given little screen time, but somehow with his eyes and movements, he manages to portray the love and the pride he feels for his only son.

ARE THE MOVIE AND THE NOVEL SIMILAR OR DIFFERENT? 

Yes, they are quite different in some ways, but in many ways they're similar. The film isn't a completely different story. Many of the characters are very true to themselves. The setting is the same. Plotwise, yes the ending takes a different turn, but the interpretation isn't widely different. 

I didn't mind the plot differences, at least not terribly. There are many adaptations that are quite close to book, so why not do something creative? 

However, some changes that happened toward the end felt like a little bit too much. Still, I appreciated the introduction of some new characters. 

THE PLOT IS WHERE THE DIFFERENCES ARE QUITE OBVIOUS 

THERE'S NO ANGELE  IN THE BOOK

The film opens with Edmond jumping overboard into stormy sea and bravely saving Angele from certain drowning. We witness him being scolded by the ship's captain Danglars, and orders imprisonment on board for Edmond. Captain Dangles, while she's unconscious,  manages to find Angele's letter signed by Napoleon and then threatens her with it. Nevertheless, Angele threatens back, saying she has powerful friends. Captain Danglars is instantly portrayed as a villain, he even states that he is proud to be a cruel man. When they return ashore, Captain Dangles retells the incident, praising himself for caring only about the cargo and scolding Edmond for his act of bravery. The ship's owner, however, takes Edmond's side, and degrades Captain Danglers, saying that a man cannot allow a woman to perish if he can stop it. The ship owner then promises to make young Edmond captain. The importance of this is stressed both in the book and in the movies, because as a captain Edmond actually has a fighting change of marrying his beloved Mercedes.

The book  tells a slight different tale. It opens with Edmond Dantès sailing the Pharaon  ship after the death of the captain, Leclère. Like in the book, the ship's owner, Morrel plans to make Dantès the next captain but under different circumstances. The Napoleon conspiracy is also told differently, with the captain Leclère (on his deathbed) charging Dantès to give a package to General Bertrand (a man exiled with Napoleon), and a letter to a Bonapartist.

In the book, Danglars isn't a captain, but a crewman. However, like in the book he is jealous of Dantès becoming a captain (even if it is not at his expense). In the book, the plot against Edmond is plotted on the eve of his wedding to Mercédès.

THE BOOK PORTRAYS DE VILLEFORT DIFFERENTLY 

The the movie, the plot is actually initiated by Angele's brother de Villefort, who initially feigns friendship to Edmond, who is brought to him from his wedding.  It is clear to de Villefort that Edmond is innocent, and he assures him that everything is fine. However, when Danglars gives the letter to de Villefort, that he realizes that Angele might be blamed, and quickly think of involving Edmond as a way of saving his sister- and his own reputation. 

The book version of de Villefort also sentences Edmond without a trial, but it's because he doesn't want people to know that his father is a Bonapartist. Do you remember the letter and the package that Edmond was given in the book? That's the connection. In the movie, it's Angele's letter that has been taken by captain Danglers and put in Edmond's book. In the movie, de Villefort. 

In the book, it is when Danglers meets Fernand Mondego,  Mercedes' a cousin in love with her,  that they hatch a plot to accuse him of being loyal to Napoleon. In the movie, things take a different turn. Fernand doesn't confess love openly to Mercedes, like he did in the book, rather he hides it. When the movie's Mercedes and Edmond tell Fernand of their engagement, he's shocked but tries to hide his feelings and congratulate the young couple.

EDMOND AND FERNARD ARE IMPLIED TO BE FRIENDS IN THE MOVIE

In the church at the day of the wedding, Fernand stands besides them, and when Edmond is arrested at his wedding, he acts like he's truly appealed by it, demanding from guards to let him go. However, in the movie, he isn't exactly involved - yet! One of the differences between the movie and the book is that in the movie, Edmond and Fernand start as friends. As the two of them sail the boat with Mercedes, it's almost like they're all close childhood friends. Even if Fernand seems prideful, and it is unthinkable to him that Mercedes is even thinking of marriage beneath her position (Edmond is a son of a servant), he still seems to hold friendly feelings towards Edmond- at least until Mercedes and Edmond tell him of the engagement. 

The plotting happens differently in the book, but the conspirators are the same. The difference is that Gerard de Villefort takes a more active role in the conspiracy. He tells Fernand that all he needs is a word, and he will let Edmond go free. Fernand in that moment realizes his chance, and decides to write a letter as a testimony against Edmond. He doesn't actually come up with the plan to ruin our protagonist in the movie. So, the film Fernand only acts when the opportunity presents itself, while the book one hates Edmond with passion and thinks of the whole thing. There's also a witness. 

THE CONSPIRATORS ARE THE SAME BUT THEY PLAY THEIR PARTS DIFFERENTLY

In the movie, this witness has a sneak peak through the door and sees Fernand signing the accusatory letter with the encouragement from Gerard de Villefort. This witness is shown with Dantes, so he cannot do anything at that moment. It's implied that he's also a crewmate who works with Dantes. However, he doesn't do anything later either and he doesn't make any effort to save Edmond. In the book, this witness to the plot is Dantès's neighbor, Caderousse, who is present when the conspiracy is made at the dinner. In the book, he objects to the plot, but is too drunk to prevent it. In the movie, there isn't much he can really do, as things are already in motion, but he doesn't make any effort anyways.

So, from now, you can see there are quite a lot of changes to the beginning of the novel. New characters are introduced such as Angele, and important characters such as shipowner are given little to no mention. The imprisonment period is also told differently. As I already said, the book takes its time with building the friendship between the Italian priest and young Edmond, but the movie sort of flies over it.

The books speaks more of Mercedes' suffering as well as the suffering of his father. Dantes' own suffering is also elaborated on.  More time is given to all of them to express what they are feeling.

“Only seventeen months,” replied Dantès. “Oh, you do not know what is seventeen months in prison!—seventeen ages rather, especially to a man who, like me, had arrived at the summit of his ambition—to a man, who, like me, was on the point of marrying a woman he adored, who saw an honorable career opened before him, and who loses all in an instant—who sees his prospects destroyed, and is ignorant of the fate of his affianced wife, and whether his aged father be still living! Seventeen months’ captivity to a sailor accustomed to the boundless ocean, is a worse punishment than human crime ever merited. Have pity on me, then, and ask for me, not intelligence, but a trial; not pardon, but a verdict—a trial, sir, I ask only for a trial; that, surely, cannot be denied to one who is accused!”

I WORE A SIMILAR STYLING IN 2016

In the book, the protagonist is actually on the verge of suicide when he meets Italian priest Faria. They meet in the same way as they did in the movie, when  Abbé Faria, digs an escape tunnel mistakenly leads to Dantès's cell. Their friendship is tangible in the movie as well, but it's more due to the acting, than to the writing. Still, it's to the directors' credit that they trusted their actors to do much with little time. These two certainly repaid their trust, so I didn't really mind the time cuts and the reduction of time these two spend together. 

In the book, Abbé Faria plays a much more important role. He helps Dantès deduce everything that happens, and set him on his way, sort of speak. It is through questions about his life that Faria finds the culprits of the plot against Dantès that led to his imprisonment. As I already said, the main culprit of the book is Fernand, but in the movie, it's actually Gerard de Villefort.

One thing that the book and the movie have in common is that they give credit to Faria for educating our protagonist. The book really shows how Faria educates Dantès in languages, history, culture, mathematics, chemistry, medicine, and science during their eight years spent together. The movie just flies over that by mentioning that Faria wanted to teach him. Moreover, in the book it's often emphasized and really shown how Faria is an extremely learned man, a scholar who has a lot to teach- and he does. You might miss Faria's significance if you don't pay attention. Both in the book and in the movie, Faria tells Dantès the location of a vast treasure hidden on the island of Monte Cristo.

Now, the death of Faria plays out similarily in the book and the movie. The film really did a great job with that, making the scene very dramatic. Like in the book, the movie Dantès hides Faria's corpse in his bed and takes its place in the burial sack. When he is thrown into the sea in the book, Dantès cuts through the sack and swims to a nearby island, while in the novel he unties the sack rather than cuts it and we don't really see where he escapes. In the book, he pretends to be  a shipwrecked sailor  and is rescued by Genoese smuggled. Italy plays a more important part in the book, than in the movie, where it's only hinted and implied that the count must have had spent time there. In the book, it is show how he locates and retrieves the treasure after a few months. In the movie, he does it all by himself, finding a treasure and an island as Faria's words echo in his ears. In the book,  Dantès purchases the island of Monte Cristo and the title of the count of Monte Cristo. In the movie, it is not mentioned and it's not clear whether he only poses as a count or does he really have the title. 

Both the book and the movie Dantès are set on vengeance. Danglars, Fernand, and Villefort are to pay for what they did.  Both the book and the movie Dantès find the witness that was mentioned and that is named Caderousse.   Both in the book and in the movie, our protagonist masks as the Abbé Busoni, and under this disguise, Dantès finds and confesses Caderousse, who now regrets not intervening in Dantès's arrest. In the movie, our protagonist masked as a priest, says that he will ask a favour of him in order to repay what he has done. In the movie, this witness helps the count Monte-Cristo get his revenge and is no longer mentioned.

In the book,  Caderousse is the principal source of information, whereas in the movie, it's an old lady servant that informs Edmond that Mercédès married Fernand, and that Dantès's father died of starvation. The death of the father is elaborated a lot more in the book and it really shakes Dantes to the core. In the book, it is the witness that tells it all to our protagonist. In the book, Dantès rewards Caderousse with a diamond but the diamond brings bad luck because later when he kills the jeweler to keep both the diamond and the money, he is arrested and sent to the galleries. In the movie, it's implied that the witness to the conspiracy actually got the opportunity to undo the wrong, and isn't mentioned anymore.

THE WRITING STILL FOLLOWS THE BOOK IN MANY WAYS

I wrote down the many ways in which the book differs from the movie. Those differences only increase as the movie progresses. Some characters are merged together into one, some changed and some are omitted. There're quite a lot of differences in terms of the plot. However, the spirit of the work is there. The writing follows the book in many ways, especially when it comes to dialogues. Even if the setting and the location are somewhat changed and the Italian episodes omitted, similar incidents are described and you can still recognize the source story effortlessly.

THE MINI BLACK DRESS WITH RUFFLES. How I styled it before? In this post, I accessorized this ruffled mini dress with a scarf in different ways. In 2013 (eleven years ago!), I colour coordinated this dress with my German Sheppard dog. You can see how I styled it earlier this month STYLING A LBD WITH BEIGE ACCESSORIES

 . 

THE PHOTOGRAPHY IS REALLY STUNNING AND ONE FEELS TRANSPORTED INTO PAST

How this movie uses light! It's like a baroque painting at times. Both indoors and outdoors, the camera captures the light and places it just perfectly. The locations are really gorgeous. The light and darkness is often contrasted for dramatic effect.

The captures describing Edmond's idyllic youth are like glimpses into paradise filled with light and sunshine. Similarly, the island of Monte-Cristo is shown as a kid of paradise island. Paris on the other hand, shows both its light and dark side.

The scenes shut at night show the Parisian alleys as a places where death can loom, even for the wealthy. The night scenes show some of the most dramatic moments, implying how much darkness is hidden behind the lights of Paris. Outdoor Parisian scenes are gorgeously rich, as for example, one outing to a botanical garden. While such scenes shows the joyfulness of Paris, darkness is always felt to around the corner. 

While the movie doesn't show any lavish galas, it shows some lavish locations and manages to create a sense of richness and luxury that way. The atmosphere is there, you feel as you can breathe in the history. All the little details are there, and they're simply perfect.

The country villa of the count Monte-Cristo certainly plays its part right. It's a place where characters return and where all the major confrontations take place- and it's certainly stunning. With the clever use of light, the photography in this film truly stands apart. The villa itself looked more gloomy and inviting, depending on the usage of light. 

THE HIGH PARISIAN SOCIETY IS A MISSING CHARACTER

One thing is missing- and that is the portrayal of high Parisian society and the fuss that the count's arrival caused. This movie focuses only on the families of the villains. We're not introduces to anyone else, while it is certain that bourgeoise Paris lives and breathes around them. It is implied that people are curious about the count Monte-Cristo but those curious people are not exactly shown. The high Parisian society is absent from the picture.

 This movie didn't really attempt to portray the high Parisian society the way other films did. If you're expecting extravagant galas, you'd be disappointed. You'll get glimpses into presumably glam parties, conversations in corners and intimate dinners. Nothing outlandish and larger than life. It's just glimpses into not, nothing on a large scale. However, those glimpses are convincing and that's what matters. 

However, what is shown seems to be really there. The locations look authentic. Perhaps the limiting of locations and people helps to keep the viewer more focused. This movie doesn't rely on CGI and special effects. 

THE PACING IS A BIT SLOW TOWARDS THE END

As we're getting to the end of my review, I'll just say that the pacing felt a bit odd. While I didn't mind that the movie flies over much of the book quickly, I did feel like the very ending was a bit slow. Taken that so much happens in the first hours or so of the movie, I felt like a good half an hour could have been easily cut out out of this film and nothing would have been lost. That being said, I didn't find the film slow on overall. Those three hours just flew by! I was surprised by how quickly the film seemed to end. 

THE COSTUME AND THE MAKE UP DEPARTMENT DESERVE AN OSCAR

The costume and the make up department did wonders in this movie. The costumes are not only historically credible and beautiful, they're also made to fit the plot and character development. How do costumes fit the character development? 

First of all, let's take Mercedes and our protagonist Edmond. Initially, they are shown wearing only light colours. Mercedes wear white dresses even before her wedding day, both foreshadowing her wedding and her innocence. Similarly, Edmond is shown wearing white shirts. On their wedding day, they both wear light clothes. Now, back in history white wasn't exactly a mandatory choice for the wedding, however light colours were not uncommon. Both the wedding dress she's wearing and the wedding suit he's wearing are light, symbolizing their innocence and love. However, their wedding gets interrupted. 

Once he emerges as count of Monte-Cristo, Edmond wears exclusively black and/or dark colours. Mercedes too, dresses in darker shades. Interestingly, even the young Haydee starts dressing in dark colours soon after their arrival to Paris. Initially, Haydee is dressed in light colours, but as the vendetta plans start to enfold, she dresses her up in black dresses and continues donning increasingly more gloomy outfits. Thus the character development and inner states are mirrored in the choices of clothing items. It's all worth noting that through all these changes, the costumes remain historically accurate. It's details like this that really make a difference. I'll bet that many of the costumes used are real historical pieces. The materials look very natural, I wouldn't be surprised if they borrowed something from a museum. Either that, or the costume department really did everything by hand and used authentic materials. The fashion in this movie is exceptionally well done! If you're a fashionista, you'll enjoy the costumes for sure. They might even inspire you to wear some cute summer outfits. I know they inspired me!

Speaking of the costumes, the make up department in the new Monte-Cristo did a great job as well. For most of the film, the actors look like they're not wearing any make up- and that really adds to the authentic. However, when our protagonists uses masks and prosthetics- they are amazingly well done. The make up really stands out in this one. 

THE COUNT OF MONTE-CRISTO 2024, MOVIE REVIEW  4/5 

THE CASTING 5/5

THE ACTING 5/5

THE PLOT 3/5

THE WRITING 4/5

THE PHOTOGRAPHY 5/5

THE PACING 3/5

THE COSTUME DESIGN 4/5

As you can see, on overall, I really loved this movie. This 2024 adaptation really stands out through its amazing acting and photography. While it differs from the book in many ways, it's still a great take on the literary classic.  Even with the changes to the plot and the characters, one can still feel the original voice of the writer. The Count of Monte- Cristo is an inspired and creative adaptation of a timeless story of revenge. I've enjoyed this movie a lot and I'm really happy I had the chance to see it on the big screen. The message that stayed with me is the message of the book: wait and hope!

Morrel opened the letter, and read:

“My Dear Maximilian,

“There is a felucca for you at anchor. Jacopo will carry you to Leghorn, where Monsieur Noirtier awaits his granddaughter, whom he wishes to bless before you lead her to the altar. All that is in this grotto, my friend, my house in the Champs-Élysées, and my château at Tréport, are the marriage gifts bestowed by Edmond Dantès upon the son of his old master, Morrel. Mademoiselle de Villefort will share them with you; for I entreat her to give to the poor the immense fortune reverting to her from her father, now a madman, and her brother who died last September with his mother. Tell the angel who will watch over your future destiny, Morrel, to pray sometimes for a man, who, like Satan, thought himself for an instant equal to God, but who now acknowledges with Christian humility that God alone possesses supreme power and infinite wisdom. Perhaps those prayers may soften the remorse he feels in his heart. As for you, Morrel, this is the secret of my conduct towards you. There is neither happiness nor misery in the world; there is only the comparison of one state with another, nothing more. He who has felt the deepest grief is best able to experience supreme happiness. We must have felt what it is to die, Morrel, that we may appreciate the enjoyments of living.

“Live, then, and be happy, beloved children of my heart, and never forget that until the day when God shall deign to reveal the future to man, all human wisdom is summed up in these two words,—‘Wait and hope.’—Your friend,

“Edmond Dantès, Count of Monte Cristo.”

I DO RECOMMEND EVERYONE TO READ THIS NOVEL! IT'S A TIMELESS CLASSIC

You can read this classical novel for free on project Gutenberg. The Count of Monte Cristo is a very long novel.  Below you can find links for every single chapter. 

Contents

VOLUME ONE

Chapter 1. Marseilles—The Arrival

Chapter 2. Father and Son

Chapter 3. The Catalans

Chapter 4. Conspiracy

Chapter 5. The Marriage Feast

Chapter 6. The Deputy Procureur du Roi

Chapter 7. The Examination

Chapter 8. The Château d’If

Chapter 9. The Evening of the Betrothal

Chapter 10. The King’s Closet at the Tuileries

Chapter 11. The Corsican Ogre

Chapter 12. Father and Son

Chapter 13. The Hundred Days

Chapter 14. The Two Prisoners

Chapter 15. Number 34 and Number 27

Chapter 16. A Learned Italian

Chapter 17. The Abbé’s Chamber

Chapter 18. The Treasure

Chapter 19. The Third Attack

Chapter 20. The Cemetery of the Château d’If

Chapter 21. The Island of Tiboulen

Chapter 22. The Smugglers

Chapter 23. The Island of Monte Cristo

Chapter 24. The Secret Cave

Chapter 25. The Unknown

Chapter 26. The Pont du Gard Inn

Chapter 27. The Story

VOLUME TWO

Chapter 28. The Prison Register

Chapter 29. The House of Morrel & Son

Chapter 30. The Fifth of September

Chapter 31. Italy: Sinbad the Sailor

Chapter 32. The Waking

Chapter 33. Roman Bandits

Chapter 34. The Colosseum

Chapter 35. La Mazzolata

Chapter 36. The Carnival at Rome.

Chapter 37. The Catacombs of Saint Sebastian

Chapter 38. The Rendezvous

Chapter 39. The Guests

Chapter 40. The Breakfast

Chapter 41. The Presentation

Chapter 42. Monsieur Bertuccio

Chapter 43. The House at Auteuil

Chapter 44. The Vendetta

Chapter 45. The Rain of Blood

Chapter 46. Unlimited Credit

Chapter 47. The Dappled Grays

VOLUME THREE

Chapter 48. Ideology

Chapter 49. Haydée

Chapter 50. The Morrel Family

Chapter 51. Pyramus and Thisbe

Chapter 52. Toxicology

Chapter 53. Robert le Diable

Chapter 54. A Flurry in Stocks

Chapter 55. Major Cavalcanti

Chapter 56. Andrea Cavalcanti

Chapter 57. In the Lucern Patch

Chapter 58. M. Noirtier de Villefort

Chapter 59. The Will

Chapter 60. The Telegraph

Chapter 61. How a Gardener May Get Rid of the Dormice

Chapter 62. Ghosts

Chapter 63. The Dinner

Chapter 64. The Beggar

Chapter 65. A Conjugal Scene

Chapter 66. Matrimonial Projects

Chapter 67. The Office of the King’s Attorney

Chapter 68. A Summer Ball

Chapter 69. The Inquiry

Chapter 70. The Ball

Chapter 71. Bread and Salt

Chapter 72. Madame de Saint-Méran

Chapter 73. The Promise

VOLUME FOUR

Chapter 74. The Villefort Family Vault

Chapter 75. A Signed Statement

Chapter 76. Progress of Cavalcanti the Younger

Chapter 77. Haydée

Chapter 78. We hear From Yanina

Chapter 79. The Lemonade

Chapter 80. The Accusation

Chapter 81. The Room of the Retired Baker

Chapter 82. The Burglary

Chapter 83. The Hand of God

Chapter 84. Beauchamp

Chapter 85. The Journey

Chapter 86. The Trial

Chapter 87. The Challenge

Chapter 88. The Insult

Chapter 89. The Night

Chapter 90. The Meeting

Chapter 91. Mother and Son

Chapter 92. The Suicide

Chapter 93. Valentine

Chapter 94. Maximilian’s Avowal

Chapter 95. Father and Daughter

VOLUME FIVE

Chapter 96. The Contract

Chapter 97. The Departure for Belgium

Chapter 98. The Bell and Bottle Tavern

Chapter 99. The Law

Chapter 100. The Apparition

Chapter 101. Locusta

Chapter 102. Valentine

Chapter 103. Maximilian

Chapter 104. Danglars’ Signature

Chapter 105. The Cemetery of Père-Lachaise

Chapter 106. Dividing the Proceeds

Chapter 107. The Lions’ Den

Chapter 108. The Judge

Chapter 109. The Assizes

Chapter 110. The Indictment

Chapter 111. Expiation

Chapter 112. The Departure

Chapter 113. The Past

Chapter 114. Peppino

Chapter 115. Luigi Vampa’s Bill of Fare

Chapter 116. The Pardon

Chapter 117. The Fifth of October

Thank you for reading and commenting!