Home > Adventure >

The Count of Monte Cristo

The Count of Monte Cristo (2002)

January. 23,2002
|
7.7
|
PG-13
| Adventure Drama History

Edmond Dantés's life and plans to marry the beautiful Mercedes are shattered when his best friend, Fernand, deceives him. After spending 13 miserable years in prison, Dantés escapes with the help of a fellow inmate and plots his revenge, cleverly insinuating himself into the French nobility.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Hellen
2002/01/23

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

More
Micransix
2002/01/24

Crappy film

More
Infamousta
2002/01/25

brilliant actors, brilliant editing

More
Cooktopi
2002/01/26

The acting in this movie is really good.

More
abbwend
2002/01/27

Okay so this book is supposed to be based on the book The Count of Monte Cristo and it's NOTHING LIKE THE BOOK. Yes, it's half of the same characters who are kind of like the way they are in the book but the story line is NOTHING LIKE THE BOOK. It's is so annoying watching this movie. If a person who wants to make a movie about a book it should be a rule that if you can't make the movie like the book maybe you shouldn't be making the movie. I'd rather the movie be 5 hours long and like the book than whatever I just watched. Hollywood, maybe try having an original idea...

More
zohawamiq
2002/01/28

The Count of Monte Cristo is a tale of deception and revenge which is carried out on the big screen and it was first released in 1934. After 68 years a director named Kevin Reynolds decided to do a remake which he released in 2002. It's a piece of old fashioned ambiguous entertainment. It is rated PG-13 because it has several violent scenes and a moment of implicit sexuality. This movie has its melodramatic aspect and sufficient humor that makes it hard to resist. A lot of universal and fundamental ideas of life such as personal growth, relationships, happiness, success, wealth, perspective, mysteries and finally freedom and liberty are also demonstrated in this gold-aged, adventurous movie. The movie stars Jim Caviezel as Edmond Dantes who is an honest man, very humble and blessed with good looks, good fortune and the love of the beautiful fiancé Mercedes played by Dagmara Dominczyk. Edmond's happiness and satisfaction infuriates his evil, well-bred friend Fernand DE Mondego (Guy Pearce), who is the main antagonist of the film. The conflict between these two characters leads Edmond in trouble, but later he gets himself out of it. The Count of Monte Cristo definitely has its pros and cons. Now starting off with the cons, it's one of those movies where it's going right at first but everything turns around in an instant to the point where one is not even expecting that to happen. Even though most movies have that instant turning around feature, to me it's a clique. Probably the biggest con would be how the time line of this movie is very unclear at times. For a number of scenes, it is hard to tell whether it has been days, months or years that had passed since the last time a given character had been on screen. The movie feels a bit drawn out at times but the graceful action scenes and the music in the background somewhat holds the audience's attention and keeps them on the edge of their seats which saves this movie from being too unfavorable. As for the pros, this movie is filled with amazing actors/actresses and serves as a great entertainment with its colorful cast, numerous plots, beautiful costumes, accessories and the music that truly makes up the movie. First, Richard Harris gives a legendary performance and is absolutely hilarious at times even though there is no spot for comedy here. Still, he manages to entertain us at these moments. Jim Caviezel who plays the male lead, gives off his usual and charming performance to make a stunning display in the movie. Finally, Guy Pearce who is probably the best-acting actor in the movie in terms really sinks into his role and character. His delivery of his duologue's and emotions throughout the film captures the audience's attention, even though he is playing a supporting role. The casting for this movie is truly perfect, and the actors do not disappoint whatsoever. The fast-paced nature of the film and the added romantic aspects truly makes this movie one of the great ones. Another thing it may do on a personal note for some of the audiences members, are bring back some old memories. Some joyful and nostalgic moments appear when you get to see those vintage telephones in the movie with the very exciting rotary dial feature. Since these no longer exist, it may bring back memories for the older viewers of the movie. All movies have their pros and cons and so does this one. I would say however, the pros outweigh the cons. As for watching the movie, this movie cannot be watched for a pick me up or in order to laugh hysterically but it's definitely a movie one should watch. Despite its minor shortcomings and fogginess, the count of Monte Cristo is still a great movie with excitement, creativity and is fun to watch.

More
arthursranch
2002/01/29

I liked this movie a lot except ....Happy ending, adventure, beautiful people, beautiful exteriors, beautiful landscapes, fun, some light-hearted banter, good story. Did I say fun? Fun.The best character for me was Luis Guzman. The sidekick was better than the star, who was OK, plenty handsome as required, perhaps a little wooden. I just found out that Henry Cavill was in the cast at 17.I rated a 7. Why not a 10, or an 8.5? The opening and the imprisonment needs to get over with faster. Richard Harris's part drags and drags, and forces the revenge part to be cut short. What a waste! That's why I call it "unbalanced." The ratings of 6 to 8 seem about right to me. I'd rate the post-Harris part as a 9. I skip all the way past the Harris part to start the movie at the point of escape.I'd like a new cut that lengthens the revenge and shortens the openings. As for the bad ratings on IMDb, this is a movie and movie business, not a book. Few movies should ever be compared with the book. The bad ratings seem all from disappointment book vs. movie. Kyle MacLachlan's Dune shows what happens when movie tries to follow book.

More
jc-osms
2002/01/30

I consider Alexandre Dumas' original novel to be probably the best adventure story I've ever read and would recommend everyone to immerse themselves in it as I did. However it was some years ago that I did so and as it recedes from my memory, I can't recall in detail the incidents from the book as they correlate to this film dramatisation by Kevin Reynolds, late of Kevin Costner's career-torpedoing "Waterworld", so that I can't take the point of view of some of the reviewers here about disparities with the source.For me then it was just a case of just sitting back, identifying enough with the main characters and following again the twists and turns of the story but not slavishly carping with any major deviations from Dumas' written word. It would be impossible anyway to condense such a massive tome into a two hour movie (watch the worthy French language six-part version starring Gerard Depardieu for that), so I just let myself be royally entertained with this sumptuously filmed, sharply written and well acted tale of jealousy, comradeship, enduring love but most of all, of course, revenge.The costumes and sets are a sight for sore eyes as are the well-chosen actual locations, particularly for the climactic scene at the ruined cloisters plus I liked the way film flagged its plotting intentions in planting in advance the little motifs by which Dantes will ensnare all his future prey, carefully dotting the i's and crossing the t's as he lures them to their deserved fates. All the leads perform well, Jim Caviezel mysterious but twisted as the too-trusting innocent taken in by best-friend Colin Farrell's covetous, asinine Mendango, Dagmara Dominczyk exotic but vulnerable as the woman they both love but who ultimately never wavers in her true devotion and Richard Harris in an effective cameo as the old priest who initially supplies the means by which Dantes can embark on his grand plan of payback but who also plants the seed for his moral redemption by the film's close.I almost couldn't believe that this was the same director who helmed Costner's expensive folly. Here Reynolds' direction flows excellently, always at the service of the story, nicely mixing up the action and suspense and while detractors might demur at the liberties taken with the text, I think the film still managed to purvey the underlying themes of the book and most importantly, entertained and thrilled this viewer at the same time.

More