If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

I have never seen nor read any other version of The Count Of Monte Cristo. But I do know that it is probably the most popular revenge story of all time. I decided to sit down and watch this movie because I kind of liked the director's movie Small Sacrifices, even though it's depressing. So I found this and watched it tonight. It actually is pretty good.The plot for those who don't know is that in 1815 Edmund Dantes is on top of the world. He's getting married to a woman who loves him, he's about to be promoted to a captain of a ship and will use the money he earns to help buy his father a proper house. When he sees the person under him in ship ranking, a man in love with his fiancée and a thief that he took prisoner talking, he thinks nothing of it. On the day before his wedding he is charged for conspiring with Napoleon Bodepart. When he is taken to the prosecutor Demund reveals that the old captain was dying and demanded Edmund deliver a note.It turns out the old captain is working with Bodepart, and the person he will deliver the message to is actually the prosecutor's father. Under the impression that Edmund was to be taken to the church where he was to be married, he instead is taken to a living hell of a prison. 10 years later he meets an old man who is digging his way out to the sea wall but instead finds Edmund. So they decided to dig together out of the prison.It turns out with both of them digging would take another 4 years and the old man teaches Edmund everything he knows and also helps him piece together who actually conspired against him and why. Driven by revenge he continues digging and the old man then dies but not before giving him a treasure map over 3 centuries old. Edmund takes the old man's place in the body bag and gets thrown off the island. He then gets picked up by Italian smugglers.He finds the treasure and uses it to assume the identity of The Count Of Monte Cristo, where he uses diabolical schemes to destroy the social status of the people who framed him and helped his father starve to death. However, after nearly 2 decades of him being imprisoned and hatching the scheme there are people who will be caught in the crossfire. Such as his former fiancée and her son.The acting is great, Richard Chamberlain makes way for a great Edmund Dantes and is very believable. Everyone else is also good but Chamberlain is the stand out. The writing is also good and makes way for a sad movie. David Greene's direction is also pretty top notch for a movie of this kind. The more I see some of the movies this guy has done the more I want to see the rest in my opinion.Just as a compliment... a minor compliment I find the scenery in this movie to be very good. I was actually surprised at the scenery and how convincing it was as 1800's France. I might be giving TV Movies like this a lack of credit (I wouldn't know I barely watch TV Movies, period) but I was surprised.If there is a complaint with this it would definitely be the pacing of the first few scenes. We barely have comprehension why these people are conspiring to put Dantes behind bars in the first place and it's only made clear by the old man. It might be a nitpick because it is actually explained later but I really was confused as to why that was going on.So if you can find it my advice would be to watch it now. It really captures the pain Dantes is going through as well as how to an extent what he is doing is hurting people he barely knows. It is worth a look and for a TV movie it is one of the best.

There is obviously a 119 minutes (TV-) version of this movie, but I only know the shorter (theatrical) version. The longer version is probably better than the short one. It really suffers from being so short. The novel is very long, especially the part that deals with Edmond's revenge. Here, there are about 50 minutes for the first part (up till Edmond finds the treasure) and another 50 minutes for the second part (Edmond's revenge). This is much too short because too much of Edmond's revenge is left out.However, I liked this adaptation. I liked the acting, especially Chamberlain is very good. Trevor Howard (Abbé Faria) is also good. I especially liked the scene where he shows Edmond - by means of logical deduction - who betrayed him. Carlo Puri is very good as Benedetto (a.k.a. Faustino). My favourite scene is the end of the court scene when de Villefort moves over to him (Benedetto) and they look into each other's eyes, shattered.Although it's too short the script writers managed to keep the core of the story, and the story stays coherent. As to the plot changes: Caderousse has only a small part, the story of Caderousse and the diamond is left out. The sequence in which Edmond deals with his enemies has been changed. Even the way in which he deals with some of them is different - for example, there is a long sabre duel between Edmond and Mondego. Edmond doesn't show any real mercy to his enemies, whereas in the novel he shows some mercy to Danglars. Even the ending is a bit more drastic, Haydee is nowhere to be seen. At least they did not change it completely (as was done with some other adaptations, where the ending is changed to a happy ending). Some of the lengthy (sometimes too lengthy) subplots of the novel have been left out completely, e.g. the episode in Rome (with Edmond, Albert and Frantz d'Epinay), Maximilien Morrel's love story, how Edmond rewards Maximilien's father for the help he has given Edmond's father, and Madame de Villefort's poisonings.In my opinion, this movie really deserves 8 out of 10 points. Perhaps the longer version even deserves one point more. If you're interested in a long movie version of the story, try the version with Depardieu in the title role (it's actually a mini-series). It isn't perfect - for example, they changed the ending too much - but all in all, it is closer to the novel than this version.

My mom learned about Alexandre Dumas's "The Count of Monte-Cristo" in the movie "Sleepers" and recommended it to me. I read the novel and was quite impressed by this version. Portraying sailor Edmond Dantes (Richard Chamberlain) getting falsely accused of being a "Bonapartist" in early 19th century France, and then escaping from jail and taking revenge, they really got the movie right. Two really dramatic scenes are the trial scene (because of how they film it) and the sword fight. One can certainly see how the novel influenced the boys in "Sleepers". The 2002 version with Jim Caviezel wasn't half bad either. Also starring Kate Nelligan, Tony Curtis and Donald Pleasance.Oh, and that school project? I made a video done like "Masterpiece Theater" and used scenes out of this movie.

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.