MovieChat Forums > The Count of Monte Cristo (2002) Discussion > Which is the most faithful adaptation?

Which is the most faithful adaptation?

posted 9 months ago by MovieChatUser497 (18943)
4 replies | jump to latest

I mean I was skimming over the wikipedia summaries for the various versions of this novel and yeah all of them seem to be very different from the novel.

[–] Darren (1135) 9 months ago

Probably the 1998 TV miniseries adaptation with Gérard Depardieu. The Count of Monte Cristo is a very long novel, originally published in serial format over the course of more than a year. It has intricate subplots, and an enormous array of characters. You can't expect any feature length film version to adapt all that very faithfully. There's just too much that has to be cut out to fit a roughly two-hour time constraint.

That said, I think the 2002 film version is my favorite of the movie versions I've ever seen.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 9 months ago

Yeah I know, in order to make a truly faithful adaptation it would have to be 3x 3 hour movies and I doubt any studio is going to take that kind of a risk. I mean the first half of the 2002 version was relatively faithful but it all falls apart after he discovers the treasure. I've read the entire 1300+ page novel and yeah it is very lengthy and detailed.

[–] Darren (1135) 9 months ago

I wouldn't say "falls apart." It simply has to tell an enormously simplified version of the revenge plot in order to exist under the time constraints this medium imposes on it. Given that reality, I think they did a pretty solid job. You have to accept this for what it is, and what it isn't. Had this been a TV miniseries -- or if an outfit like Netflix or Amazon Prime were ever to make a series version, possibly stretched over two or three 10-12 episode seasons -- then they could do something much closer to the book.

[–] Rascar-Capac (45) 9 months ago

Most faithful adaption:
Le Comte de Monte-Cristo (1979), french TV mini-series, starring Jaques Weber as Edmond Dantes.
This is as close to the novel as you could imagine. That said, I wouldn‘t rank it as the best adaption. Weber is a good choice for the lead role, but of the other parts, some are not performed good. The direction is quite stiff, production values reflect the medium budget the series was given. No real highlights here. Besides, the DVD Set I own displays a poor picture quality.

As for the more commonly known 1998 series with Gerard Depardieu: Although it is even longer than the 1979 version, it stays close only to parts of the novel. It‘s story telling is nothing but absurd, as the first half of the book nearly has been skipped. The conspiracy and betrayal and twenty years of suffering in Chateau d‘If are condensed to aproximately five minutes of short flashbacks! To the contrary Dumas‘ (over)complicated revenge scheme is faithfully shown here with minor parts omitted. But even here the producers fail with a script that invented another female character (Camille), completely untrue to Dumas and the film ends with a very, very different twist.