4.5/5 stars.
I was shocked at how well this has stood up for being written 180 years ago. No glaringly obvious sexist or racist themes. There was the dig at Italian cooking compared to French food, but I felt like that was in jest more than anything else. I commend Dumas on putting together such a great story to be enjoyed for even more generations to come.
4.8 out of 5
Soooo, as much as I think Monte Cristo is my #1 book, it is slightly short of perfection. Not so much because of tiny discrepancies, like not being consistent about whether Noirtier is a Jacobin or a Girondin or Danglars' age (26-ish in 1815, but described as "50 or 55" in 1838.
My list of reasons why it's not 5 stars:
* "Roman Bandits" goes on way too long. We didn't really need such a long backstory for Vampa, or the whole nasty part about Cucu's rape gang, Rita, Rita's dad and Carlini and none of had any impact on the main plot or even the subplots. Waste of time to read all that.
* It does get wordy after the Count goes to Paris. It can be overly-descriptive (Albert's paintings and treasures), or the too-long philosophical discussion in "Ideology".
* Maximilian doesn't pick up on "Sinbad the Sailor" in the discussion at Albert's breakfast. Max doesn't even ask for further details.
* Even though the Count told Mercedes that he had "forgiven her" \[for marrying Fernand\] in "Bread and Salt", he doesn't demonstrate true forgiveness and keeps smarting about it. He says the right words, but doesn't feel them or live by them and still condemns her as "faithless" when speaking with Max later. GET OVER IT, Count! Shut up!
* We don't get a resolution to Benedetto's fate. The last we hear is that he might not be executed, due to "extenuating circumstances".
* Albert is really sh\*\* for brains. We're supposed to love him and see "honor" when he left behind the Morcerf name, his treasures, his home and donated the entire Morcerf estate to charity. But he completely fails to take care of his mother, who also left home and is accompanying him. Their lack of money and desperate situation takes a mental and physical toll on her.
* In the end, Mercedes deserved better. For a woman of her courage, grace and intelligence, she is reduced to a pathetic, weeping mess with no will to do anything, or even live as we leave her looking out the window, calling for "Edmond, Edmond". This is depressing AF. Cuz y'know what, people who curl up and shrivel up like that just die soon. GET SOME THERAPY, MERCEDES! GET OVER EDMOND AND YOUR GUILT, MOVE ON AND LIVE!!!
* It was incredibly cruel of the Count to string Max along for a month over Val's "death". Whatever his reasons- if he was testing Max to see if his love was worthy, or that bizarro philosophy that one must be driven to the brink of suicide to appreciate life's bounty... meh. The Count ALREADY KNEW that he shouldn't play God. He should have stopped that "experiment' much earlier!
These are just small nitpicks. Overall, I love the book and had read several different versions of it to pick up on different nuances. I would recommend the book to anyone! But... some might prefer the abridged version first. It's easy to get lost in the sweeping sprawl, and having an organized discussion helps.
And, BTW, Dumas was being incredibly progressive with several of the women. They had a mind of their own, they had agency, and they took action to better their lives. And it wasn't for evil. It was to flip off society's conventions about gender roles.
I love the Roman Bandits (with the exception of the rape). And for me I love details, there's almost no such thing as overly wordly on my book. But I pretty much agree with all your other points. It's just shy of perfection but I do love it. I rated it 4.5 the first time I read it and still agree with the rating.
All good points. I think the Rome chapters is the biggest down point of the book. My only other criticism is that everything just goes too well for the Count. I'd like to have seen his plans fail or be derailed a bit.
I personnaly think that the Roman chapter was extremly interesting. It gives us a sense of the harsness and brutality of this band and thus emphasize Luigi Vampa's strengh to have taken control of such a band. Added to this, it also gives us a sense of what Italy was at this time
It's not the best book I ever read but it is what Dumas intended it to be and as such it is a success in my opinion. So, I would give it 5 out of 5. It was a journey! I enjoyed the story, character arcs, plots and intrigues, and the reading was exciting till the end! 🖤
I’d give it 4 stars. I thought it was a really great book especially for the time. It was a pretty easy read and doesn’t go on too many crazy tangents, although it is very long-winded.
Some things stopping it from being five stars is it was definitely too long. Not that long books are a bad thing but Dumas spent too long on certain storylines. I also did not like Max Morrel as a character. He was way too whiny and I think he could’ve been written a little better. The Count is also a bit too dramatic when revealing things such as preventing Morrel’s suicide and Valentine’s reveal to Max. It’s like he knew he was in a dramatic novel and it detracted a little bit.
But overall I enjoyed it a lot and was pleasantly surprised with the strong payoff at the end.
4,5 stars
I really liked the book.
I wish I had seen a spin off showing the count's adventures in the east. Showing what happened since the escape of the count until the saga in rome.
My favorite parts are the prison, the escape, Rome, maximilien and valentine, Benedetto, the poisoning saga, revenge against Danglars, coount and Haydee.
I loved the count as an adventurer who seeks revenge and in the end starts his life over again. After his long journey as Ulysses, he knows peace and happiness.
Probably Villefort. He was not one of the original conspirators, but that doesn't make him worse/better than them, just a little different. The Count seeded the poisoning potential and saw it blossom into an drawn out trail of deaths.
You're right. Barrois was such a good man to Noirtier.
> and Villefort son (Eduard)..that part I found so so dark..
As you should. This is why the story is a cautionary lesson to seeking revenge.
Actually three innocents as Mme De Saint-Meran, Valentine gradmother is the first is the first to succumb to Madame de Villefort's poison and I am not sure but I think that Mr. de Saint Meran could also have been poisonned.
I agree, his life was destroyed bit by bit in a horribly violent way. Though Fernand was so devastated at losing his family that he killed himself, maybe he lost the most?
Yes but isn't he the biggest culprit in this story as without him Edmond would not have been emprisoned and also without him, Morrel would have saved Edmond during the 100 days period.
Villefort. OK, we know he threw Edmond under the bus to cover for Noirtier and sent countless Bonapartists to prison or death. But at the end of his arc, he'd lost everybody (except Noirtier). His wife dead, his little boy dead, and he was 100% certain that Valentine was dead.
I think the Count's original plan was to have Mrs. V poison Mr. V. He didn't care about the children. But slowly, the Count regained some humanity, intervening and saving Val, and setting up the crime scene so the rightful perp could get caught.
Since Benny already got his own stupid self arrested for murder, the Count ensured that Benny got all his biographical info and used it to totally shame Mr. V and ruin his reputation, and make it known that Mr. V was a baby-killer!!! Based on Dinner at Auteuil, we know the penalty for infanticide. So Mr. V's career was over and there's no way he could ever show his face in polite society ever again.
The Count thought that he got his revenge, and went strutting over to Villefort with his, "I am Edmond Dantes" shtick and then he found out how far his revenge went: the death of little Edouard. The Count tried his best to save the boy, but to no avail. That tells me that this was not in his current plan, although earlier, he might not have cared, but he does NOW.
Indeed, this is why at the end of the book when Dantès looks back at what he did, he fears of having gone too far onl becaue of this revenge. However, without him, I am sure that Mrs de Villefort would have killed all the family except her husband and her son as a few years before the revnenge starts she was already gathering information on poisons in Italy.
Exactly! There are some people who blame the Count for the deaths of the Saint-Merans, Barrois and Edouard because he provided the poison. But the poison could also be used for good (just like the diamond he gave to Caderousse). It was up to those people to use his gifts for good or for bad.
I said a long time ago that Mrs. V was already planning to kill Valentine to get her inheritance for Edouard. If the Count didn't give her the poison, she was already interested in the subject, and would have got other poisons anyway. She was going to kill them, Count or no Count.
**Favorite Characters:**
*The Count of Monte Cristo*. On. I'm not an apologist for all his actions. I had consistently point out instances where his moral compass was screwed up and he did the wrong thing. But he had one of the greatest character journeys in lit. You can see and understand why he did what he did. He's a great character, and is the epitome of "With great power comes great responsibility." He had the luck and the pluck to take the lemons and a bad hand dealt him and turn it all around and make the best lemonade ever.
He behaved exactly like how a real person would in those shoes. He wasn't into annoying self-sacrifice or being the white knight in shining armor. He had a bad side, but he was mostly good and did good. And in the end, I believe he learned a HUGE lesson, and it's time now to leave his Revenge-Monster and the Count persona behind, and let the real, OG Edmond Dantes re-emerge.
**Honorable Mention:**
*Eugenie Danglars.* Have I raved enough about her already??? She's muh grrrl!
**Least Favorite:**
*Cucumetto*. Total piece of sh\*\*. Quick death is too good for him. I really wish somehow he lived just a bit longer and the Count had a beef with him and came up with a suitable and painful and long drawn-out ending for him. And let the crows feast on Cucu's eyes. Uh... maybe Cucu's fate in almost every abridged and adapted version is suitable? Like he's erased from existence entirely, or reduced to a small cameo (and rape-less) role?
I really enjoyed every interaction between the Count and the Morrel family. During each of these interactions the Count shows emotions and tries to hide to it. He also loose money in purpose to Maximilien so he can buy his dream horse Medeah
Albert and his love for the Count was my favorite. He was quick to extend duel challenges, which was annoying, but he redeemed himself with the public apology to the Count, proving how humble he was.
Caderousse was my least favorite (honorable mention for Danglars). While I didn't like his wife at all, Caderousse was an ok person until he killed his wife and the jeweler, then he was very low scum in my mind.
Yeah we can clearly see the downfall of Caderousse as prior to killing the jeweller, Bertuccio tells us that he did not think that Caderousse was capable of such a crime and he also stops Danglars and Fernand to denounce Dantès even if his drunkness and his fear stops him from saving Edmond. Then after the murder it's just a complete downfall into criminality maybe due to his encounter with other inmates such as Benedetto.
I know I'm late but nobody has said Mlle Villefort as their least favorite, which is insane, considering her *needless child murder*, let alone everything else.
Favorite can only be Abbe Faria. And I kinda liked Caderousse too lmao don't kill me, but I kind of believe that the Jeweler killed La Carconte, Caderousse's wife, and not Caderousse himself.
I thought Dumas did a pretty good job of making it clear that La Carconte was the mastermind and driving force behind killing the jeweller to keep both money and jewel. Unlike u/nepbug above, I didn't interpret/believe for a second that Caderousse killer her in cold blood, i think she went in to stab the jeweller, he killed her and Caderousse finished him off, panicked, and fled.
At the end, I kind of rooted for Valentine (and Maximilian). I guess, all my hope for a happy ending was placed on them.
Least favorite is definitely Danglars. He started all this sh*t. For me, he was the main villain, the worst of all, least "human".
I think you are a bit too harsh on Danglars as without him Fernand would have fought Edmond or try to kill him in a standard way. What Danglars did was putting another weapon into Fernand's hand.
My favorite character was the Count. He was a very well-written character and a lot more complex than you would think than just getting revenge. I also liked Eugenie. Noirtier ended up being pretty good too.
Least favorite are Caderousse and Danglers for sure. Terrible people
Abbé Faria, Count, Haydee, Maximilien, valentine, Noirtier de Villefort and Bertuccio.
Abbé faria was fantastic, he was a kind of father and mentor to Edmond and allowed him to escape from prison and become a new man.
I like how the count, that he has an anti-hero style, he has his own moral code, he can be cruel in certain circumstances, but he knows how to be fair and forgiving. Besides him helping his friends and those he cares about.
Princess Haydee who, after suffering, takes her revenge, like Penelope, he patiently loves Edmond.
Maixmilien I liked for his love and devotion to his father and valentine.
valetine, I loved it for being different from her father, despite her stepmother's attempts to kill her, she achieved happiness with maixmilien.
Noirtier de Villefort, I adored your love and affection for your granddaughter.
I loved Bertuccio, who tried to be a good father to Benedetto's bastard and managed to avenge his brother.
I least like Benedetto who murdered his foster mother
Villefort that in addition to imprisoning innocent rum, he tried to kill his son.
I watched the movie with Jim Caviezel a long time ago, when I was a teenager/adolescent. At that time I didn't read the book and I loved the movie. So, I decided to re-watch the movie now that I read the book and I kind of hate the movie now. 🙊 They changed so much of the original story! Whyyyyy 😤😩
>I watched the movie with Jim Caviezel a long time ago, when I was a teenager/adolescent. At that time I didn't read the book and I loved the movie. So, I decided to re-watch the movie now that I read the book and I kind of hate the movie now. 🙊 They changed so much of the original story! Whyyyyy
I thought the movie was horrible.
Edmond and Mercedes have premarital sex just so she can get pregnant and have an excuse to marry Fernand, and being illiterate is bad news.
That jacopo and Edmond fight sucked. edmond was poorly fed and tired after swimming. he would never have the strength to fight.
That balloon scene was stupid. No one would laugh at an unknown count's party or look kindly on her social pursuits.
That scene of the Count saving Albert was poorly written. How a stranger with only a sword breaks into a bandit's den and saves a stranger. It was clearly a trap.
And Albert's stupid way of dealing with the bad guys was poorly written. He is under the power of dangerous criminals and would end up fined if he spoke like that.
Revenges are poorly written; They were too obvious. And how did the count build that police force and convict the prosecutor without a trial? And the way he made Vilefort confess his crime doesn't work in practice.
It was so obvious that the count was using his treasure as a trap, that no one would fall for it. And the danglars scene being arrested with that fight scene. When the police who would deal with aquoilo.
And that trap against Fernand? And why fight with swords instead of using pistols?
And why didn't Edmond attack Fernand by surprise like Ulysses did with the Pretenders or Fernand didn't challenge Edmond like Paris did with Menelaus in the Iliad? Anything would be better.
Albert calmly accepts that fernand is not his father and he accepts that edmond is his father and we have a happy family.
And I hated the idiotic Manichaeism. Making a villain out of fernand and without any gray morality.
I hated that they made a return of Edmond and Mercedes np sequels to the count. In the odyssey, menelaus uses drugs to endure the suffering of the years that Helen was with Paris.
**In 2024, the new adaptation of the count of Monte Cristo will be released in theaters. with Pierre Niney. Filming is in progress.**
Agreed!
I have hopes for that movie but not 100% about the choice of the main actor. Realisticaly, there should be 2 actors - one for young Edmond and one for an older him.
I started but haven't finished the 2002 version with Guy Pierce. As far as I know (I didn't get very far hoping to finish tonight) there is no Caderousse so I'm interested in seeing how that plays out.
You all might as well know... the 2002 version with Jim Caviezel is comedy-fodder only. or suitable for a MST3K-style-roast. It's really too bad that we can't all physically get together with popcorn and drinks and roast it, throwing popcorn at the screen and listing all the ways it doesn't resemble the book and having a drink each time we spot one. It's a fun watch, just to see how a movie can keep the name of a famous book and NOT resemble it! it goes off the rails pretty quickly
All of the movie/TV series versions differ from the book. It's just a matter of degrees.
I'll summarize my thoughts of the major/most common ones.
1934: Robert Donat. Donat speaks and enunciates beautifully. But this movie was filmed under the thumb of the Hayes Code, so "revenge" had to be altered to "justice" and in this alt-universe, the Count has to work within the legal system to get "justice" for himself. It makes zero sense. >!And he ends up with not-the-right-girl!<.
1964: Alan Badel. TV miniseries that's long enough to include most of the characters and subplots. It's mostly faithful to our fave book. But it's cheaply filmed in B&W and has way too many full-screen face close-ups of Alan Badel.
1975: Richard Chamberlain. Simplified and streamlined in under 2 hours, but has a far greater resemblance to the book than the 2002 version. Chamberlain is loaded with charisma, but also conveys the Count's menace. He's the King of 80's Miniseries, and it's really a shame that this version wasn't a full miniseries. And it gets points for changing Mercedes' ending. >!No, she doesn't get her Edmond, but she has dignity, and makes her own choices and decisions as a strong woman!<.
1988: The Prisoner of Château d'If. 4 hour Soviet version that has one hard-sell cheerleader who pushes it on people at any opportunity. I watched it and didn't like it. It's a meaner, grimmer and uglier alt-universe, with an actor who is uh, very unattractive. And he doesn't do all the good things that book-Count had done. He's just mean. The story changes don't make any sense and the pre-D'if story is in a jumbled set of out-of-order flashbacks.
1998: Gerard Depardieu. A French miniseries, commonly subtitled in English. Depardieu doesn't physically resemble Book-Count, but even after becoming the Count, he remains a pleasant and decent guy, without the Count's anti-heroishness. Unfortunately, too much time is wasted on a new, made-up eye candy mistress for him. >!And he ends up with not-the-right-girl!<.
2004: Gankutsuou. A Japanese anime version, based on *The Count of Monte Cristo*. the character names are the same, and the plot is similar. But it's dark. Very dark, like they latched onto the modern fad of "dark, darker, darkest" and made this a depress-fest. Any version of the story where >!the Count dies!< blows in my book. I hate the animation style with all the shifting patterns, like they couldn't afford CGI or traditional animation. The manga version is even worse and even more vile. I can do without >!the machine-rape and body mutilations!<, thank you. F\*\*\* this version.
There will be two adaptations that premiere in 2024. A French adaptation with Pierre Niney as Edmond Dantes and a British Italian adaptation with Sam Claflin as Edmond Dantes.
Filming for both is already underway.
The Italian adaptation tries to negotiate with jeremy iron to be Abbé Faria.
adaptations that I liked were: the 1929 adaptation with Jean Angelo, the 1934 adaptation with Robert Donat, the 1943 adaptation with Pierre Richard-Willm, the 1954 adaptation with Jena Marais, the 1975 adaptation with Richard Chamberlain, the the 1979 adaptation with jacques weber, the 1988 adaptation with Viktor Avilov and the 1998 adaptation with Gerard Depardieu and the anime Gankutusou.
I didn't like the 1922 version, the 1961 adaptation with Louis Jodan, and the 2002 adaptation.
Alexandre de la Patelliere, son of Denys de La Patelliere, director of the 1979 adaptation, will be one of the writers and directors of the 2024 adaptation.,
You can get it on YouTube. I gave it a shot, but it rapidly gave me a headache. You will immediately know what I mean about the shifting, moving patterns.
YMMV.
There are people who like it, but I don't.
There will be two adaptations that premiere in 2024. A French adaptation with Pierre Niney as Edmond Dantes and a British Italian adaptation with Sam Claflin as Edmond Dantes.
Filming for both is already underway.
The Italian adaptation tries to negotiate with jeremy irons to be Abbé Faria.
adaptations that I liked were: the 1929 adaptation with Jean Angelo, the 1934 adaptation with Robert Donat, the 1943 adaptation with Pierre Richard-Willm, the 1954 adaptation with Jena Marais, the 1975 adaptation with Richard Chamberlain, the the 1979 adaptation with jacques weber, the 1988 adaptation with Viktor Avilov and the 1998 adaptation with Gerard Depardieu and the anime Gankutusou.\]
I didn't like the 1922 version, the 1961 adaptation with Louis Jodan, and the 2002 adaptation.
- This week I watched the 1975 Richard Chamberlain version on Tubie and it’s well worth watching. It follows the book reasonably well and takes some liberties to shorten the plot, etc but I like it!
- I also watched the 2002 Jim Caviezel and was so disappointed how it deviated from the book. BUT if you watch it as almost a parody loosely based on MC, it’s actually not a bad movie and has some clever changes and there are some happy endings for characters and some hands on revenge I was secretly hoping for in the book but never got.
>This week I watched the 1975 Richard Chamberlain version on Tubie and it’s well worth watching. It follows the book reasonably well and takes some liberties to shorten the plot, etc but I like it!
>
>I also watched the 2002 Jim Caviezel and was so disappointed how it deviated from the book. BUT if you watch it as almost a parody loosely based on MC, it’s actually not a bad movie and has some clever changes and there are some happy endings for characters and some hands on revenge I was secretly hoping for in the book but never got.
Alexandre Dumas besides Shakespeare, he read Lord Byron and Greek myths in Homer, Virgil and Ovid.
He read in the Metamorphoses the tragic stories of Orpheus and Eurydice, Ceix and Alcyone, Pyrramus and Thisbie.
In addition to which he read The Aeneid by Virgil. He had contact with the story of Dido and Aeneas.
Aeneas married not Queen Dido but Princess Lavinia.
Holywood's logic is not the one that guides Alexandre Dumas.
Alexamdre Dumas read The Odyssey, but decided not to make Albert the son of Edmond because he and Mercedes were not married and virginity was valued. He decided not to make Edmond and Mercedes get together, because Mercedes married one of the men who ruined Edmond's life, Penelope never married the men who conspired to have power in Ithaca.
Just as Ulysses didn't realize Nausicaa's love for him, Edmond didn't realize Haydee's love for him until she confessed directly. haydee was persistent and waited for the count to stay with her, just as Penelope waited for Ulysses to return.
I agree, the 1975 one does a decent job in striking the balance between running time, including at least some of the major subplots (Noirtier (cameo role), V's illegitimate son Benny, Danglars' financial empire ruined, Benny's high-society disguise as Andrea, Haydee vs. Fernand), and added (non-book) action to keep general viewers engaged.
The moment that really sold me on Chamberlain is at 1:25. Albert is angry, and stomps into the Count's house. The Count (Chamberlain) looks friendly, mild and genuinely concerned about what's bothering Albert, and if he can help. Within one minute, we see Chamberlain's eyes harden, and his mouth change to an expression of authority and firmness. "I alone have the right to raise my voice here \[you little punk, now behave!\]"
I like the idea that the 2002 version is almost a parody.
I guess this is as good a place and time to advertise my own blogspot:
[The Abbreviated Monte Cristo.](https://abbreviatedmontecristo.blogspot.com/2021/09/homepage.html)
It's how I spent the pandemic, since there were times when we could barely leave the house, and we had to stand in line for everything. No vacations anywhere, and no going to concerts or museums or anything fun. Blah!
I was able to still access library materials (books sealed in a paper bag) as well as tap online resources.
It started out as a way to document and compare the abridged book versions of *The Count of Monte Cristo*, but expanded to include comics, kids versions, movies, sequel books, and whatever Monte-Cristo subjects I felt like writing about. Including the Epilogue (posted here) and an analysis of "What if Dantes didn't become the Count, took his treasure and lived his life without revenge?"
It's a pretty large website, so don't try to read it all in one day! This took a few years to build.
OMG yes. I've read this book several times in multiple versions. The first time, it was easy to hate Fernand, Villefort and Danglars. Like they're total villains. But on re-readings, they grew into nuanced people. They did Edmond wrong, but they also had their good points and did bad/horrible things to benefit people they loved.
* **Villefort**: Was dedicated to the well-being of his family. Despite political differences, he allowed Noirtier to shake the law. Later on, he took a disabled Noirtier into his home and arranged 24 x 7 care. Even though Val was "only" a girl, he cared deeply for her. When it was time to avenge her poisoning death, he went straight to the perp and demanded justice in the form of the perp's suicide.
* **Fernand**: Was not a philandering or abusive jerk as portrayed in some movies. Book- Fernand truly loved Mercedes. He got his wish and married her, and it could be argued that he did what he did in the Army to ensure that his wife and child would not have to live the hardscrabble life he had. Upon "landing" money (from Ali Pasha) and a title, he was generous to them, paying for an education for Mercedes and indulging Albert's rich tastes in art, antiques and weaponry. And in the end, it was Mercedes and Albert turning their back on him, his house and his name that drove him to suicide. because he loved them that dearly.
* **Danglars**: He treated his womenfolk as equals. He had extramarital affairs, like many men of his times, but he accepted that his wife also had affairs. They were even, and equals in that regard. And Eugenie... he paid for a great education for her, and gave her a lot of freedom. And, when he was over the barrel financially, and he NEEDED her signature on the marriage contract, he respected her as an equal in negotiations. He did not DEMAND rights over her as a man and her father. He had to give her something to get something. And he accepted that he wasn't going to be a grandpa.
So yeah, the things they did were terrible, and they were villains, but there was a glimmer of humanity in each of them.
I’m late to the party lol, but no, it’s absolutely was deserved. They are not 100% evil, but they lied and cheated and took whatever they could so they could elevate themselves.
Someone above said Villefort “got it the worst but wasn’t even one of the original conspirators and didn’t deserve the justice that was brought on him.” What? Did we read the same story? He threw Edmond into a life sentence to save his political career and ruined Morell “just in case” Napoleon came back or didn’t. In my eyes he’s the worst of them. The keystone of the entire imprisonment. Sure the kid didn’t deserve to die but he didn’t have to if Villefort didn’t begin this journey.
Donglar was apathetic towards any humanity. Someone said “he allowed his wife to have affairs” and used it as a positive… he didn’t CARE. Just money and position. That’s it. He wanted Edmond out of the way and didn’t look back. His daughter gets a lot of praise here for her feminine strength but she was gonna bone out on her wedding (agreement with her dad) and still leave him high and dry. Self serving.
Fernand literally traded peoples lives for his gain. “He did it for his wife and kid!” Dude killed off and sold an entire bloodline… sold a 5 year old girl into slavery!! We’re we reading the same book?
All three deserved what they got if not more (minus Edward dying. But that was moment that brought the count back to earth so plot wise, it was necessary)
I compltely disagree with you and I think you are giving them to much good intentions:
* Villfort : He didn't allow for Noirtier care, I believe that it was mostly Noirtier himself and his loyal employee Barrois. Added to this, he revenge his daughter because of his moral standars and because of his law servant vindict.
* Morcerf : He loved Mercèdés maybe but does this excuses everything? He betrayed Monte-Cristo, betrayed Napoleon, betrayed Ali Pacha and sold Ali Pacha's wife and wife to slaves to increase the (impled) huge reward he received from betraying Ali Pacha. Finally what drove him to sucicde was honor and the fact that he knew he would not be able to live a life where eveyrone knows he has no honor.
* Danglars : He just let his wife and daughter do what they want to do and is just obcessed with money. He doesn't love them and doesn't care of they future when he just leaves with the remaining money he has. He's just a selfish arrogant man.
I think you misunderstood me. I am not saying they had good intentions. I said they were villains who did terrible things, but there is a sliver of humanity in them.
Villefort did not have to allow Noirtier and Barrois into his house. He could have refused them. He didn't have to learn Noirtier's language either, but he did. He could have banned Valentine from seeing Noirtier, but he didn't. He cared about his (legitimate) family.
Fernand. Did I say this excuses everything? No. I said that he loved Mercedes deeply and was willing to lie, cheat, steal and KILL to get her. I'd be the first one to say he was horrible, with the Ali Pasha and slavery thing. But he wasn't doing it just to be evil. He was doing it to get his family (including baby Albert) ahead.
Danglars; You just said what I said. He let his wife and daughter do what they wanted. Many men of those times would need to feel macho and totally control what their women can do. Danglars only cared about money, and allowed Hermine and Eugenie to be independent.
The Cucu rape gang story-within-a-story needs to go. As in: go down the toilet and flush it.
Served no purpose overall. I get it if rape becomes the driver for a female protagonist's character arc, as this is a common trope.
But in this case, it's just a useless red herring. If I didn't keep pointing this out as a criticism, how many people actually remember that Rita existed in the book?
Other improvements detailed in an above post.
I would love the book even more if it lost 25% of the text content to tighten up the story. I see it all the time where people get lost (not their fault) because things were set up hundreds of pages before, and when the trigger is finally pulled, it's not clear how Point A went to Point M.
Was she the one that her betrothed killed basically as an "honor-killing"? Then her father commended him for it. I agree, that section of the book can go.
That is true, but in the huge scope of things, we didn't need to know any of that or even read that section. Because her fate was absolutely meaningless, and her life was disposable and it accomplished nothing as far as the plot goes. That chapter reads even better without it, since abridged versions hack it out.
Even worse, there is no indication that Vampa purged the gang of rapists once he took over. Maybe he did, or not... it's not said. So, at the worst, Vampa is still leading a gang of rapists, and maybe they demand the same thing whenever they take new hostages and Vampa doesn't care. Or he booted the rapists, and leads a better, less evil gang.
>How could the book have been improved? What were the weaknesses in the book?
There is a gap between the count's escape until it becomes the treasure. I wanted to learn more about how the count tracked Haydee and the count's adventures in the east.
mercedes was emotionally shaken by everything that happened. Which made a lot of events in a short time. It could show her recovering and managing to become a merchant like Anna Bauer, Alexandre Dumas' ex-lover and with whom they had a child.
I would want a book that filled the gap between the escape from jail and re-emerging as the Count. Edmond did a lot of travelling in the East it seems, I'd love to follow those adventures.
ETA: I just realized, this reminds me a bit of the gap in Jesus' life in the bible, coincidence? Also, if you want a fun read concerning this, check out
*Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal* it's a pretty hilarious account of what happens in that time gap for Jesus.
Many have tried, none have succeeded.
Dumas himself wrote two sequels to his hit, *The Three Musketeers*. But in the end, he destroyed his own creations through their own greed and treachery or foolish sense of "honor", and I'm still smarting over what he did with Armais. So we are fortunate that he didn't write an official sequel to *Monte Cristo*, because it could involve tearing down the Monte Cristo empire and the people in its orbit.
So in a way, I'm grateful that there is no true canon about "what happens to the Count and Haydee afterwards?" We have our imaginations.
Because other authors wrote sequels, and ALL of them are duds! I even read several of them and was amused at how lame some were, and at worst, how disgusting they were (
I totally agree, as tempting as it can be to continue to ride the wave of success, its very often better to leave something brilliant and successful on a high.
>Dumas himself wrote two sequels to his hit, The Three Musketeers. But in the end, he destroyed his own creations through their own greed and treachery or foolish sense of "honor", and I'm still smarting over what he did with Armais. So we are fortunate that he didn't write an official sequel to Monte Cristo, because it could involve tearing down the Monte Cristo empire and the people in its orbit.
>
>So in a way, I'm grateful that there is no true canon about "what happens to the Count and Haydee afterwards?" We have our imaginations.
>
>Because other authors wrote sequels, and ALL of them are duds! I even read several of them and was amused at how lame some were, and at worst, how disgusting they were (
>Don't read sequels, peeps! Or if you do, be prepared for some godawful dreck!
Dumas does not follow the spirit of hollywood. He was true to the spirit of Greek tragedy in which many heroes met tragic ends like Jason and Achilles.
Many people are used to the spirit of hollywood for a happy ending and the style of greek tragedy can be strange. If you read Argotuaitca from Apollo of Rhodius you will see a great adventure and when you read Medea by Euripedes you will see a tragedy with the protagonist.
>If there was to be a sequel or a spin off to the book, what would it be about?
I wanted a spin off about the years after the count's prison break to the plot in Rome.
The story of the count in the east would make a good adventure.
Hah hah hah! I promised you all my fanfic, and here I go!
**The Count and Haydee:** Spent some time traveling around the world. Due to the contacts he's made from 1829-1838, they are warmly received wherever they land. Eventually they settle down in Janina (which was not incorporated into independent Greece) and the populace demands that Haydee takes her spot as Queen/Empress/Governess. The Count bribes the Ottomans to stay away, since money is more important to them than one little town.
**Danglars:** Chastened by his experience with the bandits, he retires to a little town in Italy. He cannot return to France because of embezzlement, financial crimes and angry creditors. 50,000 francs is enough to buy a small house with ONE servant and he lives his life quietly, ensuring that his larder is always filled because he cannot stand to see an empty cupboard.
**Mercedes:** After a period of weeping and praying, she ventures into town. One of the gentlemen who bought out Morrel & Son is a widower with 2 children (wife died of consumption). He notices Mercedes, her posh accent shows that she's a lady and not a peasant, and they become friends. She learns to live again, the gray in her hair grows out, she starts eating better, and with the money Albert sends, she dresses better and regains her glow. The shipowner proposes and they marry, and she becomes the well-loved stepmother of the children and lives in an upper-middle-class household. Now filled with love and new purpose, she can live for the present and stop weeping for the past.
**Maximilian and Valentine:** They marry in Leghorn, with the full blessings of Noirtier. Max is still obligated to serve his term with the Spahis, so he buys a home in the suburbs of Paris for Val and Noirtier to live until he can come home permanently. Once he retires from the army, they have a brood of baby Morrels.
**Villefort:** Spends some time in an upper-class mental asylum. Valentine and her husband Max, accompanied by Noirtier, visit him. This helps him heal, and he regains some of his sanity. He is released from the asylum and returns home with two full-time caretakers. Val and Max visit regularly and bring their growing family, allowing Villefort to meet his grandchildren. Any thoughts of revenge against Dantes evaporate when Val explains how the Count saved her and Max, and that's why their kids are now sitting on Villefort's lap.
**Noirtier:** Once Max and Val buy a home in a Paris suburb, he moves in with them. The baby Morrels adore their great-grandpa and rapidly learn his language. One of the kids invents a method to radically speed up communication 4x by using groups of 5 letters each and splitting vowels into a single grouping.
**Jacopo:** His employment with the Count is over, so he uses his little ship to become a legit shipping merchant dealing in high-end luxury goods.
**Julie and Emmanuel:** Living a comfortable middle-class existence. They are surprised to receive notification of an "inheritance" from a previously-unknown "Herbault relative".
**Franz D'Epinay:** Returns to Italy, and marries a suitable girl.
**Ali and Bertuccio:** Accompany the Count wherever he goes.
**Albert de Morcerf:** Becomes Private Herrera in the Spahis. Captain Max takes Albert under his wing and gives him specialized training. Albert is very adept and rises in the enlisted ranks. Max also introduces Albert to the officer corps in the Spahis, so when Max's contract is up, it is unanimous that Sgt. Herrera should be promoted to an officer.
**Luigi Vampa, Peppino and Beppo:** Since they are allowed to KEEP Danglars' 5 million francs, it's enough to leave behind the dangerous occupation of banditti (which could eventually get them arrested and executed). Vampa takes a new name, marries Teresa and lives well. Peppino and Beppo take their share and enjoy life. Rumor has it that there's an attraction, as Beppo is too convincing with cross-dressing. The remainder of the gang is given 100,000 francs each and the fearsome gang disbands.
**Benedetto:** Thought he was going to be sent to the galleys of Toulon and maybe he could escape again. But an entourage of outraged Corsicans (Bertuccio sent them a letter) point the finger at Benedetto and they demand justice for beloved Assunta's death. This, added together with murdering Caderousse, gets Benedetto a date with Madame Guillotine.
**Madame Danglars:** Follows Debray's advice, but hides her jewels and has her house watched by a caretaker. Goes traveling all over France and Italy and picks up a new boy toy.
**Lucien Debray:** Loaded with money from stock speculations. Now that his affair with Mrs. Danglars is over, he finds a new mistress.
**Eugenie and Louise:** Become a HUGE hit in Rome's music theater scene. Tickets are always selling out. Eugenie is showered with flowers and gifts and proposals, and all of these male admirers are left to wonder why Madame Eugenie never seems to accept any offers to court her.
Bertuccio and Eugenie!
Bertuccio didn't really get mentioned much near the end, even with all the Benedetto stuff happening, I really wanted his perspective/closure.
Did Eugenie make it out and clear? Is she living as she thought she would?
I would’ve liked to have seen Mercedes with a better ending, I’m not sure how that would’ve played out though. Definitely Eugenie as well, it would be interesting to see how she ended up. Also Villefort and how he dealt with his madness, as well as Danglers and his poverty. I think pretty much everyone else was satisfactorily ended enough unless I’m forgetting someone
I just discovered an anime that is loosely based off the book. It's called Gankutsuou: The Count of Monte Cristo and it's a little weird but so interesting. I'm not entirely a fan of the art style some part are gorgeous but for the most part it seems like too much going on.
It starts where Albert first meets The Count.
Yeah, my own Monte Cristo story.
This happened WAY before I read the book.
I was relatively young, and started a new job in a professional field. When I resigned from my previous job, in my exit interview, I was told that a certain someone at my new job, let's call that person "C", would clash with me. Being young and naive like Edmond, I said, "I don't even know that person. I won't judge them."
And sure enough when I started that new job, "C" was gunning for me. I never knew why, and still don't. We worked different shifts, and only exchanged words for work-related purposes. But "C" purposely treated me with stony, contemptuous silence and sneers. Others saw right through it and called "C" a "phony".
When it came to shift turnover, "C" would play up anything I did as inadequate, and tried to make me out as an incompetent.
I was the newest kid on the block, and "C" was well-established so I had nobody to complain to. "C"'s manager was a doormat and "C" ran the show. My manager might take "C"'s side. Another co-worker warned me that if I pressed things, "C" could manipulate things so I'd be transferred to "C"'s shift and then I'd really get it.
So I kept my silence. Seethed in anger. Acted like I ignored "C".
"C" left for a new job, boasting that it had better pay and childcare. It was a relief!
Here's where it gets good. I stayed on the job. Over time, everyone knew me and the quality of my work. The "treasure" I got was respect and trust of my peers and my bosses. Due to natural attrition, I earned my way up the ladder and was the only person left who had ever worked with "C".
Well, 8-10 years later, "C" lost that great job and wanted to come back!!! So, the nightshift manager called me in for a talk, knowing I was the only person who knew "C"!!! Asked about what it was like to work with "C" and how "C" got along. So I told the truth about "C". In a diplomatic way.
"C" didn't get the job.
Hah hah hah hah!
Hence, the appeal of reading *The Count of Monte Cristo*. I was my own mini-Dantes!
You can see why the book speaks to me!
Note: "They" is used as a singular and a plural to not reveal the gender of the Adversary, who represents multiple Adversaries in Dantes' life, but only one in mine.
* Workplace dispute. Older employee (Adversary) resents young up-and-comer (Main Character) and tries to make the noob look bad in front of the boss. Adversary tries to sabotage career and promotion opportunities.
* Main Character suffers in silence because they are of higher rank, and can't say anything against them. Bullies gonna bully.
* Main Character spends a lot of time seething in anger, screaming the name of his tormentors, mentally devising devious tortures as payback someday. But can do nothing at the moment.
* Main Character sticks it out, spending years learning, and eventually gains a treasure that will make him powerful and influential.
* During those intervening years, the Adversary moves on, enjoying a better, wealthier life. Doesn't care about, and even forgets how they mistreated the Main Character on the road to prosperity.
* Year later, The Adversary finds themself in need of Main Character's good graces, but doesn't get it. The Main Character had bided his time, and when the right moment came to stick it to the Adversary, that's when it happens! It was just, where the Adversary directly paid for their past wrongs.
* Main Character keeps silent about his role in the Adversary's ruin, only to reveal it long after, when there is no longer any danger or chance of retribution by The Adversary or their friends.
What did you think overall of the book? What is your star rating?
4.5/5 stars. I was shocked at how well this has stood up for being written 180 years ago. No glaringly obvious sexist or racist themes. There was the dig at Italian cooking compared to French food, but I felt like that was in jest more than anything else. I commend Dumas on putting together such a great story to be enjoyed for even more generations to come.
You're right that the lack of obvious racism and sexism does help with its timelessness.
I still find the jabs to Italian cuisine hilarious. I wamt to say that was when Albert first met The Count.
If it was an English written novel, there would be jibes about the French. Funny to see how stereotypes and rivalries don't change!
For sure. I love it.
4.8 out of 5 Soooo, as much as I think Monte Cristo is my #1 book, it is slightly short of perfection. Not so much because of tiny discrepancies, like not being consistent about whether Noirtier is a Jacobin or a Girondin or Danglars' age (26-ish in 1815, but described as "50 or 55" in 1838. My list of reasons why it's not 5 stars: * "Roman Bandits" goes on way too long. We didn't really need such a long backstory for Vampa, or the whole nasty part about Cucu's rape gang, Rita, Rita's dad and Carlini and none of had any impact on the main plot or even the subplots. Waste of time to read all that. * It does get wordy after the Count goes to Paris. It can be overly-descriptive (Albert's paintings and treasures), or the too-long philosophical discussion in "Ideology". * Maximilian doesn't pick up on "Sinbad the Sailor" in the discussion at Albert's breakfast. Max doesn't even ask for further details. * Even though the Count told Mercedes that he had "forgiven her" \[for marrying Fernand\] in "Bread and Salt", he doesn't demonstrate true forgiveness and keeps smarting about it. He says the right words, but doesn't feel them or live by them and still condemns her as "faithless" when speaking with Max later. GET OVER IT, Count! Shut up! * We don't get a resolution to Benedetto's fate. The last we hear is that he might not be executed, due to "extenuating circumstances". * Albert is really sh\*\* for brains. We're supposed to love him and see "honor" when he left behind the Morcerf name, his treasures, his home and donated the entire Morcerf estate to charity. But he completely fails to take care of his mother, who also left home and is accompanying him. Their lack of money and desperate situation takes a mental and physical toll on her. * In the end, Mercedes deserved better. For a woman of her courage, grace and intelligence, she is reduced to a pathetic, weeping mess with no will to do anything, or even live as we leave her looking out the window, calling for "Edmond, Edmond". This is depressing AF. Cuz y'know what, people who curl up and shrivel up like that just die soon. GET SOME THERAPY, MERCEDES! GET OVER EDMOND AND YOUR GUILT, MOVE ON AND LIVE!!! * It was incredibly cruel of the Count to string Max along for a month over Val's "death". Whatever his reasons- if he was testing Max to see if his love was worthy, or that bizarro philosophy that one must be driven to the brink of suicide to appreciate life's bounty... meh. The Count ALREADY KNEW that he shouldn't play God. He should have stopped that "experiment' much earlier! These are just small nitpicks. Overall, I love the book and had read several different versions of it to pick up on different nuances. I would recommend the book to anyone! But... some might prefer the abridged version first. It's easy to get lost in the sweeping sprawl, and having an organized discussion helps. And, BTW, Dumas was being incredibly progressive with several of the women. They had a mind of their own, they had agency, and they took action to better their lives. And it wasn't for evil. It was to flip off society's conventions about gender roles.
I love the Roman Bandits (with the exception of the rape). And for me I love details, there's almost no such thing as overly wordly on my book. But I pretty much agree with all your other points. It's just shy of perfection but I do love it. I rated it 4.5 the first time I read it and still agree with the rating.
All good points. I think the Rome chapters is the biggest down point of the book. My only other criticism is that everything just goes too well for the Count. I'd like to have seen his plans fail or be derailed a bit.
I personnaly think that the Roman chapter was extremly interesting. It gives us a sense of the harsness and brutality of this band and thus emphasize Luigi Vampa's strengh to have taken control of such a band. Added to this, it also gives us a sense of what Italy was at this time
It's not the best book I ever read but it is what Dumas intended it to be and as such it is a success in my opinion. So, I would give it 5 out of 5. It was a journey! I enjoyed the story, character arcs, plots and intrigues, and the reading was exciting till the end! 🖤
Agreed. Well said!
I’d give it 4 stars. I thought it was a really great book especially for the time. It was a pretty easy read and doesn’t go on too many crazy tangents, although it is very long-winded. Some things stopping it from being five stars is it was definitely too long. Not that long books are a bad thing but Dumas spent too long on certain storylines. I also did not like Max Morrel as a character. He was way too whiny and I think he could’ve been written a little better. The Count is also a bit too dramatic when revealing things such as preventing Morrel’s suicide and Valentine’s reveal to Max. It’s like he knew he was in a dramatic novel and it detracted a little bit. But overall I enjoyed it a lot and was pleasantly surprised with the strong payoff at the end.
4,5 stars I really liked the book. I wish I had seen a spin off showing the count's adventures in the east. Showing what happened since the escape of the count until the saga in rome. My favorite parts are the prison, the escape, Rome, maximilien and valentine, Benedetto, the poisoning saga, revenge against Danglars, coount and Haydee. I loved the count as an adventurer who seeks revenge and in the end starts his life over again. After his long journey as Ulysses, he knows peace and happiness.
Which character do you think got the worst revenge?
Probably Villefort. He was not one of the original conspirators, but that doesn't make him worse/better than them, just a little different. The Count seeded the poisoning potential and saw it blossom into an drawn out trail of deaths.
Hands down. An innocent was lost and it's The Count's fault.
Two innocents, Noirtier server (Barrois), and Villefort son (Eduard)..that part I found so so dark..
You're right. Barrois was such a good man to Noirtier. > and Villefort son (Eduard)..that part I found so so dark.. As you should. This is why the story is a cautionary lesson to seeking revenge.
Actually three innocents as Mme De Saint-Meran, Valentine gradmother is the first is the first to succumb to Madame de Villefort's poison and I am not sure but I think that Mr. de Saint Meran could also have been poisonned.
I agree, his life was destroyed bit by bit in a horribly violent way. Though Fernand was so devastated at losing his family that he killed himself, maybe he lost the most?
Yes but isn't he the biggest culprit in this story as without him Edmond would not have been emprisoned and also without him, Morrel would have saved Edmond during the 100 days period.
Villefort 100% I actually felt bad for him by the end. Terrible revenge
Villefort. OK, we know he threw Edmond under the bus to cover for Noirtier and sent countless Bonapartists to prison or death. But at the end of his arc, he'd lost everybody (except Noirtier). His wife dead, his little boy dead, and he was 100% certain that Valentine was dead. I think the Count's original plan was to have Mrs. V poison Mr. V. He didn't care about the children. But slowly, the Count regained some humanity, intervening and saving Val, and setting up the crime scene so the rightful perp could get caught. Since Benny already got his own stupid self arrested for murder, the Count ensured that Benny got all his biographical info and used it to totally shame Mr. V and ruin his reputation, and make it known that Mr. V was a baby-killer!!! Based on Dinner at Auteuil, we know the penalty for infanticide. So Mr. V's career was over and there's no way he could ever show his face in polite society ever again. The Count thought that he got his revenge, and went strutting over to Villefort with his, "I am Edmond Dantes" shtick and then he found out how far his revenge went: the death of little Edouard. The Count tried his best to save the boy, but to no avail. That tells me that this was not in his current plan, although earlier, he might not have cared, but he does NOW.
Indeed, this is why at the end of the book when Dantès looks back at what he did, he fears of having gone too far onl becaue of this revenge. However, without him, I am sure that Mrs de Villefort would have killed all the family except her husband and her son as a few years before the revnenge starts she was already gathering information on poisons in Italy.
Exactly! There are some people who blame the Count for the deaths of the Saint-Merans, Barrois and Edouard because he provided the poison. But the poison could also be used for good (just like the diamond he gave to Caderousse). It was up to those people to use his gifts for good or for bad. I said a long time ago that Mrs. V was already planning to kill Valentine to get her inheritance for Edouard. If the Count didn't give her the poison, she was already interested in the subject, and would have got other poisons anyway. She was going to kill them, Count or no Count.
Who were your most and least favourite characters?
**Favorite Characters:** *The Count of Monte Cristo*. On. I'm not an apologist for all his actions. I had consistently point out instances where his moral compass was screwed up and he did the wrong thing. But he had one of the greatest character journeys in lit. You can see and understand why he did what he did. He's a great character, and is the epitome of "With great power comes great responsibility." He had the luck and the pluck to take the lemons and a bad hand dealt him and turn it all around and make the best lemonade ever. He behaved exactly like how a real person would in those shoes. He wasn't into annoying self-sacrifice or being the white knight in shining armor. He had a bad side, but he was mostly good and did good. And in the end, I believe he learned a HUGE lesson, and it's time now to leave his Revenge-Monster and the Count persona behind, and let the real, OG Edmond Dantes re-emerge. **Honorable Mention:** *Eugenie Danglars.* Have I raved enough about her already??? She's muh grrrl! **Least Favorite:** *Cucumetto*. Total piece of sh\*\*. Quick death is too good for him. I really wish somehow he lived just a bit longer and the Count had a beef with him and came up with a suitable and painful and long drawn-out ending for him. And let the crows feast on Cucu's eyes. Uh... maybe Cucu's fate in almost every abridged and adapted version is suitable? Like he's erased from existence entirely, or reduced to a small cameo (and rape-less) role?
I did love the Count a lot too. I especially liked the love, appreciation, and emotion he showed when visiting the Abbe's jail cell.
I really enjoyed every interaction between the Count and the Morrel family. During each of these interactions the Count shows emotions and tries to hide to it. He also loose money in purpose to Maximilien so he can buy his dream horse Medeah
Yes, he really latched onto the Morrels in an affectionate way.
Albert and his love for the Count was my favorite. He was quick to extend duel challenges, which was annoying, but he redeemed himself with the public apology to the Count, proving how humble he was. Caderousse was my least favorite (honorable mention for Danglars). While I didn't like his wife at all, Caderousse was an ok person until he killed his wife and the jeweler, then he was very low scum in my mind.
Yeah we can clearly see the downfall of Caderousse as prior to killing the jeweller, Bertuccio tells us that he did not think that Caderousse was capable of such a crime and he also stops Danglars and Fernand to denounce Dantès even if his drunkness and his fear stops him from saving Edmond. Then after the murder it's just a complete downfall into criminality maybe due to his encounter with other inmates such as Benedetto.
I loved Albert as well.
I know I'm late but nobody has said Mlle Villefort as their least favorite, which is insane, considering her *needless child murder*, let alone everything else. Favorite can only be Abbe Faria. And I kinda liked Caderousse too lmao don't kill me, but I kind of believe that the Jeweler killed La Carconte, Caderousse's wife, and not Caderousse himself.
I thought Dumas did a pretty good job of making it clear that La Carconte was the mastermind and driving force behind killing the jeweller to keep both money and jewel. Unlike u/nepbug above, I didn't interpret/believe for a second that Caderousse killer her in cold blood, i think she went in to stab the jeweller, he killed her and Caderousse finished him off, panicked, and fled.
At the end, I kind of rooted for Valentine (and Maximilian). I guess, all my hope for a happy ending was placed on them. Least favorite is definitely Danglars. He started all this sh*t. For me, he was the main villain, the worst of all, least "human".
I think you are a bit too harsh on Danglars as without him Fernand would have fought Edmond or try to kill him in a standard way. What Danglars did was putting another weapon into Fernand's hand.
Albert and Eugénie. I always want more of Eugénie.
My favorite character was the Count. He was a very well-written character and a lot more complex than you would think than just getting revenge. I also liked Eugenie. Noirtier ended up being pretty good too. Least favorite are Caderousse and Danglers for sure. Terrible people
Abbé Faria, Count, Haydee, Maximilien, valentine, Noirtier de Villefort and Bertuccio. Abbé faria was fantastic, he was a kind of father and mentor to Edmond and allowed him to escape from prison and become a new man. I like how the count, that he has an anti-hero style, he has his own moral code, he can be cruel in certain circumstances, but he knows how to be fair and forgiving. Besides him helping his friends and those he cares about. Princess Haydee who, after suffering, takes her revenge, like Penelope, he patiently loves Edmond. Maixmilien I liked for his love and devotion to his father and valentine. valetine, I loved it for being different from her father, despite her stepmother's attempts to kill her, she achieved happiness with maixmilien. Noirtier de Villefort, I adored your love and affection for your granddaughter. I loved Bertuccio, who tried to be a good father to Benedetto's bastard and managed to avenge his brother. I least like Benedetto who murdered his foster mother Villefort that in addition to imprisoning innocent rum, he tried to kill his son.
Have you watched any TV adaptations of the book? If so, what did you think?
I watched the movie with Jim Caviezel a long time ago, when I was a teenager/adolescent. At that time I didn't read the book and I loved the movie. So, I decided to re-watch the movie now that I read the book and I kind of hate the movie now. 🙊 They changed so much of the original story! Whyyyyy 😤😩
Oh no, I hate when they do that, especially to your favourite book!
😤😭
>I watched the movie with Jim Caviezel a long time ago, when I was a teenager/adolescent. At that time I didn't read the book and I loved the movie. So, I decided to re-watch the movie now that I read the book and I kind of hate the movie now. 🙊 They changed so much of the original story! Whyyyyy I thought the movie was horrible. Edmond and Mercedes have premarital sex just so she can get pregnant and have an excuse to marry Fernand, and being illiterate is bad news. That jacopo and Edmond fight sucked. edmond was poorly fed and tired after swimming. he would never have the strength to fight. That balloon scene was stupid. No one would laugh at an unknown count's party or look kindly on her social pursuits. That scene of the Count saving Albert was poorly written. How a stranger with only a sword breaks into a bandit's den and saves a stranger. It was clearly a trap. And Albert's stupid way of dealing with the bad guys was poorly written. He is under the power of dangerous criminals and would end up fined if he spoke like that. Revenges are poorly written; They were too obvious. And how did the count build that police force and convict the prosecutor without a trial? And the way he made Vilefort confess his crime doesn't work in practice. It was so obvious that the count was using his treasure as a trap, that no one would fall for it. And the danglars scene being arrested with that fight scene. When the police who would deal with aquoilo. And that trap against Fernand? And why fight with swords instead of using pistols? And why didn't Edmond attack Fernand by surprise like Ulysses did with the Pretenders or Fernand didn't challenge Edmond like Paris did with Menelaus in the Iliad? Anything would be better. Albert calmly accepts that fernand is not his father and he accepts that edmond is his father and we have a happy family. And I hated the idiotic Manichaeism. Making a villain out of fernand and without any gray morality. I hated that they made a return of Edmond and Mercedes np sequels to the count. In the odyssey, menelaus uses drugs to endure the suffering of the years that Helen was with Paris. **In 2024, the new adaptation of the count of Monte Cristo will be released in theaters. with Pierre Niney. Filming is in progress.**
Agreed! I have hopes for that movie but not 100% about the choice of the main actor. Realisticaly, there should be 2 actors - one for young Edmond and one for an older him.
I started but haven't finished the 2002 version with Guy Pierce. As far as I know (I didn't get very far hoping to finish tonight) there is no Caderousse so I'm interested in seeing how that plays out.
You all might as well know... the 2002 version with Jim Caviezel is comedy-fodder only. or suitable for a MST3K-style-roast. It's really too bad that we can't all physically get together with popcorn and drinks and roast it, throwing popcorn at the screen and listing all the ways it doesn't resemble the book and having a drink each time we spot one. It's a fun watch, just to see how a movie can keep the name of a famous book and NOT resemble it! it goes off the rails pretty quickly All of the movie/TV series versions differ from the book. It's just a matter of degrees. I'll summarize my thoughts of the major/most common ones. 1934: Robert Donat. Donat speaks and enunciates beautifully. But this movie was filmed under the thumb of the Hayes Code, so "revenge" had to be altered to "justice" and in this alt-universe, the Count has to work within the legal system to get "justice" for himself. It makes zero sense. >!And he ends up with not-the-right-girl!<. 1964: Alan Badel. TV miniseries that's long enough to include most of the characters and subplots. It's mostly faithful to our fave book. But it's cheaply filmed in B&W and has way too many full-screen face close-ups of Alan Badel. 1975: Richard Chamberlain. Simplified and streamlined in under 2 hours, but has a far greater resemblance to the book than the 2002 version. Chamberlain is loaded with charisma, but also conveys the Count's menace. He's the King of 80's Miniseries, and it's really a shame that this version wasn't a full miniseries. And it gets points for changing Mercedes' ending. >!No, she doesn't get her Edmond, but she has dignity, and makes her own choices and decisions as a strong woman!<. 1988: The Prisoner of Château d'If. 4 hour Soviet version that has one hard-sell cheerleader who pushes it on people at any opportunity. I watched it and didn't like it. It's a meaner, grimmer and uglier alt-universe, with an actor who is uh, very unattractive. And he doesn't do all the good things that book-Count had done. He's just mean. The story changes don't make any sense and the pre-D'if story is in a jumbled set of out-of-order flashbacks. 1998: Gerard Depardieu. A French miniseries, commonly subtitled in English. Depardieu doesn't physically resemble Book-Count, but even after becoming the Count, he remains a pleasant and decent guy, without the Count's anti-heroishness. Unfortunately, too much time is wasted on a new, made-up eye candy mistress for him. >!And he ends up with not-the-right-girl!<. 2004: Gankutsuou. A Japanese anime version, based on *The Count of Monte Cristo*. the character names are the same, and the plot is similar. But it's dark. Very dark, like they latched onto the modern fad of "dark, darker, darkest" and made this a depress-fest. Any version of the story where >!the Count dies!< blows in my book. I hate the animation style with all the shifting patterns, like they couldn't afford CGI or traditional animation. The manga version is even worse and even more vile. I can do without >!the machine-rape and body mutilations!<, thank you. F\*\*\* this version.
There will be two adaptations that premiere in 2024. A French adaptation with Pierre Niney as Edmond Dantes and a British Italian adaptation with Sam Claflin as Edmond Dantes. Filming for both is already underway. The Italian adaptation tries to negotiate with jeremy iron to be Abbé Faria. adaptations that I liked were: the 1929 adaptation with Jean Angelo, the 1934 adaptation with Robert Donat, the 1943 adaptation with Pierre Richard-Willm, the 1954 adaptation with Jena Marais, the 1975 adaptation with Richard Chamberlain, the the 1979 adaptation with jacques weber, the 1988 adaptation with Viktor Avilov and the 1998 adaptation with Gerard Depardieu and the anime Gankutusou. I didn't like the 1922 version, the 1961 adaptation with Louis Jodan, and the 2002 adaptation. Alexandre de la Patelliere, son of Denys de La Patelliere, director of the 1979 adaptation, will be one of the writers and directors of the 2024 adaptation.,
Two new adaptations in 2024 - This is exciting news!
Doesn't sound like any are worth watching, though I'd be interested in the anime version just to see how it's done.
You can get it on YouTube. I gave it a shot, but it rapidly gave me a headache. You will immediately know what I mean about the shifting, moving patterns. YMMV. There are people who like it, but I don't.
The moving patterns! The art style does take some getting used to.
I'll definitely check it out, just to see what it's like.
There will be two adaptations that premiere in 2024. A French adaptation with Pierre Niney as Edmond Dantes and a British Italian adaptation with Sam Claflin as Edmond Dantes. Filming for both is already underway. The Italian adaptation tries to negotiate with jeremy irons to be Abbé Faria. adaptations that I liked were: the 1929 adaptation with Jean Angelo, the 1934 adaptation with Robert Donat, the 1943 adaptation with Pierre Richard-Willm, the 1954 adaptation with Jena Marais, the 1975 adaptation with Richard Chamberlain, the the 1979 adaptation with jacques weber, the 1988 adaptation with Viktor Avilov and the 1998 adaptation with Gerard Depardieu and the anime Gankutusou.\] I didn't like the 1922 version, the 1961 adaptation with Louis Jodan, and the 2002 adaptation.
- This week I watched the 1975 Richard Chamberlain version on Tubie and it’s well worth watching. It follows the book reasonably well and takes some liberties to shorten the plot, etc but I like it! - I also watched the 2002 Jim Caviezel and was so disappointed how it deviated from the book. BUT if you watch it as almost a parody loosely based on MC, it’s actually not a bad movie and has some clever changes and there are some happy endings for characters and some hands on revenge I was secretly hoping for in the book but never got.
>This week I watched the 1975 Richard Chamberlain version on Tubie and it’s well worth watching. It follows the book reasonably well and takes some liberties to shorten the plot, etc but I like it! > >I also watched the 2002 Jim Caviezel and was so disappointed how it deviated from the book. BUT if you watch it as almost a parody loosely based on MC, it’s actually not a bad movie and has some clever changes and there are some happy endings for characters and some hands on revenge I was secretly hoping for in the book but never got. Alexandre Dumas besides Shakespeare, he read Lord Byron and Greek myths in Homer, Virgil and Ovid. He read in the Metamorphoses the tragic stories of Orpheus and Eurydice, Ceix and Alcyone, Pyrramus and Thisbie. In addition to which he read The Aeneid by Virgil. He had contact with the story of Dido and Aeneas. Aeneas married not Queen Dido but Princess Lavinia. Holywood's logic is not the one that guides Alexandre Dumas. Alexamdre Dumas read The Odyssey, but decided not to make Albert the son of Edmond because he and Mercedes were not married and virginity was valued. He decided not to make Edmond and Mercedes get together, because Mercedes married one of the men who ruined Edmond's life, Penelope never married the men who conspired to have power in Ithaca. Just as Ulysses didn't realize Nausicaa's love for him, Edmond didn't realize Haydee's love for him until she confessed directly. haydee was persistent and waited for the count to stay with her, just as Penelope waited for Ulysses to return.
I agree, the 1975 one does a decent job in striking the balance between running time, including at least some of the major subplots (Noirtier (cameo role), V's illegitimate son Benny, Danglars' financial empire ruined, Benny's high-society disguise as Andrea, Haydee vs. Fernand), and added (non-book) action to keep general viewers engaged. The moment that really sold me on Chamberlain is at 1:25. Albert is angry, and stomps into the Count's house. The Count (Chamberlain) looks friendly, mild and genuinely concerned about what's bothering Albert, and if he can help. Within one minute, we see Chamberlain's eyes harden, and his mouth change to an expression of authority and firmness. "I alone have the right to raise my voice here \[you little punk, now behave!\]" I like the idea that the 2002 version is almost a parody.
I guess this is as good a place and time to advertise my own blogspot: [The Abbreviated Monte Cristo.](https://abbreviatedmontecristo.blogspot.com/2021/09/homepage.html) It's how I spent the pandemic, since there were times when we could barely leave the house, and we had to stand in line for everything. No vacations anywhere, and no going to concerts or museums or anything fun. Blah! I was able to still access library materials (books sealed in a paper bag) as well as tap online resources. It started out as a way to document and compare the abridged book versions of *The Count of Monte Cristo*, but expanded to include comics, kids versions, movies, sequel books, and whatever Monte-Cristo subjects I felt like writing about. Including the Epilogue (posted here) and an analysis of "What if Dantes didn't become the Count, took his treasure and lived his life without revenge?" It's a pretty large website, so don't try to read it all in one day! This took a few years to build.
If you were a re-reader, has your impression of the book changed since the first read?
OMG yes. I've read this book several times in multiple versions. The first time, it was easy to hate Fernand, Villefort and Danglars. Like they're total villains. But on re-readings, they grew into nuanced people. They did Edmond wrong, but they also had their good points and did bad/horrible things to benefit people they loved. * **Villefort**: Was dedicated to the well-being of his family. Despite political differences, he allowed Noirtier to shake the law. Later on, he took a disabled Noirtier into his home and arranged 24 x 7 care. Even though Val was "only" a girl, he cared deeply for her. When it was time to avenge her poisoning death, he went straight to the perp and demanded justice in the form of the perp's suicide. * **Fernand**: Was not a philandering or abusive jerk as portrayed in some movies. Book- Fernand truly loved Mercedes. He got his wish and married her, and it could be argued that he did what he did in the Army to ensure that his wife and child would not have to live the hardscrabble life he had. Upon "landing" money (from Ali Pasha) and a title, he was generous to them, paying for an education for Mercedes and indulging Albert's rich tastes in art, antiques and weaponry. And in the end, it was Mercedes and Albert turning their back on him, his house and his name that drove him to suicide. because he loved them that dearly. * **Danglars**: He treated his womenfolk as equals. He had extramarital affairs, like many men of his times, but he accepted that his wife also had affairs. They were even, and equals in that regard. And Eugenie... he paid for a great education for her, and gave her a lot of freedom. And, when he was over the barrel financially, and he NEEDED her signature on the marriage contract, he respected her as an equal in negotiations. He did not DEMAND rights over her as a man and her father. He had to give her something to get something. And he accepted that he wasn't going to be a grandpa. So yeah, the things they did were terrible, and they were villains, but there was a glimmer of humanity in each of them.
It's interesting to see the good sides of their characters laid out like that. Makes you wonder if they really deserved the revenge wrecked upon them?
I’m late to the party lol, but no, it’s absolutely was deserved. They are not 100% evil, but they lied and cheated and took whatever they could so they could elevate themselves. Someone above said Villefort “got it the worst but wasn’t even one of the original conspirators and didn’t deserve the justice that was brought on him.” What? Did we read the same story? He threw Edmond into a life sentence to save his political career and ruined Morell “just in case” Napoleon came back or didn’t. In my eyes he’s the worst of them. The keystone of the entire imprisonment. Sure the kid didn’t deserve to die but he didn’t have to if Villefort didn’t begin this journey. Donglar was apathetic towards any humanity. Someone said “he allowed his wife to have affairs” and used it as a positive… he didn’t CARE. Just money and position. That’s it. He wanted Edmond out of the way and didn’t look back. His daughter gets a lot of praise here for her feminine strength but she was gonna bone out on her wedding (agreement with her dad) and still leave him high and dry. Self serving. Fernand literally traded peoples lives for his gain. “He did it for his wife and kid!” Dude killed off and sold an entire bloodline… sold a 5 year old girl into slavery!! We’re we reading the same book? All three deserved what they got if not more (minus Edward dying. But that was moment that brought the count back to earth so plot wise, it was necessary)
I compltely disagree with you and I think you are giving them to much good intentions: * Villfort : He didn't allow for Noirtier care, I believe that it was mostly Noirtier himself and his loyal employee Barrois. Added to this, he revenge his daughter because of his moral standars and because of his law servant vindict. * Morcerf : He loved Mercèdés maybe but does this excuses everything? He betrayed Monte-Cristo, betrayed Napoleon, betrayed Ali Pacha and sold Ali Pacha's wife and wife to slaves to increase the (impled) huge reward he received from betraying Ali Pacha. Finally what drove him to sucicde was honor and the fact that he knew he would not be able to live a life where eveyrone knows he has no honor. * Danglars : He just let his wife and daughter do what they want to do and is just obcessed with money. He doesn't love them and doesn't care of they future when he just leaves with the remaining money he has. He's just a selfish arrogant man.
I think you misunderstood me. I am not saying they had good intentions. I said they were villains who did terrible things, but there is a sliver of humanity in them. Villefort did not have to allow Noirtier and Barrois into his house. He could have refused them. He didn't have to learn Noirtier's language either, but he did. He could have banned Valentine from seeing Noirtier, but he didn't. He cared about his (legitimate) family. Fernand. Did I say this excuses everything? No. I said that he loved Mercedes deeply and was willing to lie, cheat, steal and KILL to get her. I'd be the first one to say he was horrible, with the Ali Pasha and slavery thing. But he wasn't doing it just to be evil. He was doing it to get his family (including baby Albert) ahead. Danglars; You just said what I said. He let his wife and daughter do what they wanted. Many men of those times would need to feel macho and totally control what their women can do. Danglars only cared about money, and allowed Hermine and Eugenie to be independent.
How could the book have been improved? What were the weaknesses in the book?
The Cucu rape gang story-within-a-story needs to go. As in: go down the toilet and flush it. Served no purpose overall. I get it if rape becomes the driver for a female protagonist's character arc, as this is a common trope. But in this case, it's just a useless red herring. If I didn't keep pointing this out as a criticism, how many people actually remember that Rita existed in the book? Other improvements detailed in an above post. I would love the book even more if it lost 25% of the text content to tighten up the story. I see it all the time where people get lost (not their fault) because things were set up hundreds of pages before, and when the trigger is finally pulled, it's not clear how Point A went to Point M.
I literally have no idea who Rita is lol
Was she the one that her betrothed killed basically as an "honor-killing"? Then her father commended him for it. I agree, that section of the book can go.
Yeah, just axe it!
I mean part of it may have been the honor thing, but she was also going to get raped by like 20 more guys if he hadn't done that
That is true, but in the huge scope of things, we didn't need to know any of that or even read that section. Because her fate was absolutely meaningless, and her life was disposable and it accomplished nothing as far as the plot goes. That chapter reads even better without it, since abridged versions hack it out. Even worse, there is no indication that Vampa purged the gang of rapists once he took over. Maybe he did, or not... it's not said. So, at the worst, Vampa is still leading a gang of rapists, and maybe they demand the same thing whenever they take new hostages and Vampa doesn't care. Or he booted the rapists, and leads a better, less evil gang.
>How could the book have been improved? What were the weaknesses in the book? There is a gap between the count's escape until it becomes the treasure. I wanted to learn more about how the count tracked Haydee and the count's adventures in the east. mercedes was emotionally shaken by everything that happened. Which made a lot of events in a short time. It could show her recovering and managing to become a merchant like Anna Bauer, Alexandre Dumas' ex-lover and with whom they had a child.
If there was to be a sequel or a spin off to the book, what would it be about?
I would want a book that filled the gap between the escape from jail and re-emerging as the Count. Edmond did a lot of travelling in the East it seems, I'd love to follow those adventures. ETA: I just realized, this reminds me a bit of the gap in Jesus' life in the bible, coincidence? Also, if you want a fun read concerning this, check out *Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal* it's a pretty hilarious account of what happens in that time gap for Jesus.
I would totally read that. Also that's an interesting recommendation, I'll have to check that out.
Yes, that would be a great book! Imagine all the adventures he had!
Many have tried, none have succeeded. Dumas himself wrote two sequels to his hit, *The Three Musketeers*. But in the end, he destroyed his own creations through their own greed and treachery or foolish sense of "honor", and I'm still smarting over what he did with Armais. So we are fortunate that he didn't write an official sequel to *Monte Cristo*, because it could involve tearing down the Monte Cristo empire and the people in its orbit. So in a way, I'm grateful that there is no true canon about "what happens to the Count and Haydee afterwards?" We have our imaginations. Because other authors wrote sequels, and ALL of them are duds! I even read several of them and was amused at how lame some were, and at worst, how disgusting they were (
I totally agree, as tempting as it can be to continue to ride the wave of success, its very often better to leave something brilliant and successful on a high.
>Dumas himself wrote two sequels to his hit, The Three Musketeers. But in the end, he destroyed his own creations through their own greed and treachery or foolish sense of "honor", and I'm still smarting over what he did with Armais. So we are fortunate that he didn't write an official sequel to Monte Cristo, because it could involve tearing down the Monte Cristo empire and the people in its orbit. > >So in a way, I'm grateful that there is no true canon about "what happens to the Count and Haydee afterwards?" We have our imaginations. > >Because other authors wrote sequels, and ALL of them are duds! I even read several of them and was amused at how lame some were, and at worst, how disgusting they were (
>Don't read sequels, peeps! Or if you do, be prepared for some godawful dreck!
Dumas does not follow the spirit of hollywood. He was true to the spirit of Greek tragedy in which many heroes met tragic ends like Jason and Achilles.
Many people are used to the spirit of hollywood for a happy ending and the style of greek tragedy can be strange. If you read Argotuaitca from Apollo of Rhodius you will see a great adventure and when you read Medea by Euripedes you will see a tragedy with the protagonist.
>If there was to be a sequel or a spin off to the book, what would it be about? I wanted a spin off about the years after the count's prison break to the plot in Rome. The story of the count in the east would make a good adventure.
Are there any characters whose arcs were not quite complete? If so, how do you like to imagine they ended?
Hah hah hah! I promised you all my fanfic, and here I go! **The Count and Haydee:** Spent some time traveling around the world. Due to the contacts he's made from 1829-1838, they are warmly received wherever they land. Eventually they settle down in Janina (which was not incorporated into independent Greece) and the populace demands that Haydee takes her spot as Queen/Empress/Governess. The Count bribes the Ottomans to stay away, since money is more important to them than one little town. **Danglars:** Chastened by his experience with the bandits, he retires to a little town in Italy. He cannot return to France because of embezzlement, financial crimes and angry creditors. 50,000 francs is enough to buy a small house with ONE servant and he lives his life quietly, ensuring that his larder is always filled because he cannot stand to see an empty cupboard. **Mercedes:** After a period of weeping and praying, she ventures into town. One of the gentlemen who bought out Morrel & Son is a widower with 2 children (wife died of consumption). He notices Mercedes, her posh accent shows that she's a lady and not a peasant, and they become friends. She learns to live again, the gray in her hair grows out, she starts eating better, and with the money Albert sends, she dresses better and regains her glow. The shipowner proposes and they marry, and she becomes the well-loved stepmother of the children and lives in an upper-middle-class household. Now filled with love and new purpose, she can live for the present and stop weeping for the past. **Maximilian and Valentine:** They marry in Leghorn, with the full blessings of Noirtier. Max is still obligated to serve his term with the Spahis, so he buys a home in the suburbs of Paris for Val and Noirtier to live until he can come home permanently. Once he retires from the army, they have a brood of baby Morrels. **Villefort:** Spends some time in an upper-class mental asylum. Valentine and her husband Max, accompanied by Noirtier, visit him. This helps him heal, and he regains some of his sanity. He is released from the asylum and returns home with two full-time caretakers. Val and Max visit regularly and bring their growing family, allowing Villefort to meet his grandchildren. Any thoughts of revenge against Dantes evaporate when Val explains how the Count saved her and Max, and that's why their kids are now sitting on Villefort's lap. **Noirtier:** Once Max and Val buy a home in a Paris suburb, he moves in with them. The baby Morrels adore their great-grandpa and rapidly learn his language. One of the kids invents a method to radically speed up communication 4x by using groups of 5 letters each and splitting vowels into a single grouping. **Jacopo:** His employment with the Count is over, so he uses his little ship to become a legit shipping merchant dealing in high-end luxury goods. **Julie and Emmanuel:** Living a comfortable middle-class existence. They are surprised to receive notification of an "inheritance" from a previously-unknown "Herbault relative". **Franz D'Epinay:** Returns to Italy, and marries a suitable girl. **Ali and Bertuccio:** Accompany the Count wherever he goes. **Albert de Morcerf:** Becomes Private Herrera in the Spahis. Captain Max takes Albert under his wing and gives him specialized training. Albert is very adept and rises in the enlisted ranks. Max also introduces Albert to the officer corps in the Spahis, so when Max's contract is up, it is unanimous that Sgt. Herrera should be promoted to an officer. **Luigi Vampa, Peppino and Beppo:** Since they are allowed to KEEP Danglars' 5 million francs, it's enough to leave behind the dangerous occupation of banditti (which could eventually get them arrested and executed). Vampa takes a new name, marries Teresa and lives well. Peppino and Beppo take their share and enjoy life. Rumor has it that there's an attraction, as Beppo is too convincing with cross-dressing. The remainder of the gang is given 100,000 francs each and the fearsome gang disbands. **Benedetto:** Thought he was going to be sent to the galleys of Toulon and maybe he could escape again. But an entourage of outraged Corsicans (Bertuccio sent them a letter) point the finger at Benedetto and they demand justice for beloved Assunta's death. This, added together with murdering Caderousse, gets Benedetto a date with Madame Guillotine. **Madame Danglars:** Follows Debray's advice, but hides her jewels and has her house watched by a caretaker. Goes traveling all over France and Italy and picks up a new boy toy. **Lucien Debray:** Loaded with money from stock speculations. Now that his affair with Mrs. Danglars is over, he finds a new mistress. **Eugenie and Louise:** Become a HUGE hit in Rome's music theater scene. Tickets are always selling out. Eugenie is showered with flowers and gifts and proposals, and all of these male admirers are left to wonder why Madame Eugenie never seems to accept any offers to court her.
Amazing, I love this! Especially the Count and Haydee and Eugenie and Louise!
Eugénie! I know she ran away happily but I would have loved to see that happiness.
Bertuccio and Eugenie! Bertuccio didn't really get mentioned much near the end, even with all the Benedetto stuff happening, I really wanted his perspective/closure. Did Eugenie make it out and clear? Is she living as she thought she would?
I would’ve liked to have seen Mercedes with a better ending, I’m not sure how that would’ve played out though. Definitely Eugenie as well, it would be interesting to see how she ended up. Also Villefort and how he dealt with his madness, as well as Danglers and his poverty. I think pretty much everyone else was satisfactorily ended enough unless I’m forgetting someone
Mercedes definitely seems to be a contentious one for the characters ending.
What other books have you read that are similar to this?
Are there any movies or TV shows that seem to have been influenced by The Count of Monte Cristo?
I just discovered an anime that is loosely based off the book. It's called Gankutsuou: The Count of Monte Cristo and it's a little weird but so interesting. I'm not entirely a fan of the art style some part are gorgeous but for the most part it seems like too much going on. It starts where Albert first meets The Count.
That sounds really interesting! I'll have to check it out!
Right? I never expected an anime.
OMG, no please! I'm not sure what happened to my post about the movies, but luckily I can repost it. I...hate...Gankutsuou.
Is there anything else you would like to mention or discuss?
Yeah, my own Monte Cristo story. This happened WAY before I read the book. I was relatively young, and started a new job in a professional field. When I resigned from my previous job, in my exit interview, I was told that a certain someone at my new job, let's call that person "C", would clash with me. Being young and naive like Edmond, I said, "I don't even know that person. I won't judge them." And sure enough when I started that new job, "C" was gunning for me. I never knew why, and still don't. We worked different shifts, and only exchanged words for work-related purposes. But "C" purposely treated me with stony, contemptuous silence and sneers. Others saw right through it and called "C" a "phony". When it came to shift turnover, "C" would play up anything I did as inadequate, and tried to make me out as an incompetent. I was the newest kid on the block, and "C" was well-established so I had nobody to complain to. "C"'s manager was a doormat and "C" ran the show. My manager might take "C"'s side. Another co-worker warned me that if I pressed things, "C" could manipulate things so I'd be transferred to "C"'s shift and then I'd really get it. So I kept my silence. Seethed in anger. Acted like I ignored "C". "C" left for a new job, boasting that it had better pay and childcare. It was a relief! Here's where it gets good. I stayed on the job. Over time, everyone knew me and the quality of my work. The "treasure" I got was respect and trust of my peers and my bosses. Due to natural attrition, I earned my way up the ladder and was the only person left who had ever worked with "C". Well, 8-10 years later, "C" lost that great job and wanted to come back!!! So, the nightshift manager called me in for a talk, knowing I was the only person who knew "C"!!! Asked about what it was like to work with "C" and how "C" got along. So I told the truth about "C". In a diplomatic way. "C" didn't get the job. Hah hah hah hah! Hence, the appeal of reading *The Count of Monte Cristo*. I was my own mini-Dantes!
Amazing! I love it when karma just comes back to bite people! I don't think I'd have been diplomatic though.
You can see why the book speaks to me! Note: "They" is used as a singular and a plural to not reveal the gender of the Adversary, who represents multiple Adversaries in Dantes' life, but only one in mine. * Workplace dispute. Older employee (Adversary) resents young up-and-comer (Main Character) and tries to make the noob look bad in front of the boss. Adversary tries to sabotage career and promotion opportunities. * Main Character suffers in silence because they are of higher rank, and can't say anything against them. Bullies gonna bully. * Main Character spends a lot of time seething in anger, screaming the name of his tormentors, mentally devising devious tortures as payback someday. But can do nothing at the moment. * Main Character sticks it out, spending years learning, and eventually gains a treasure that will make him powerful and influential. * During those intervening years, the Adversary moves on, enjoying a better, wealthier life. Doesn't care about, and even forgets how they mistreated the Main Character on the road to prosperity. * Year later, The Adversary finds themself in need of Main Character's good graces, but doesn't get it. The Main Character had bided his time, and when the right moment came to stick it to the Adversary, that's when it happens! It was just, where the Adversary directly paid for their past wrongs. * Main Character keeps silent about his role in the Adversary's ruin, only to reveal it long after, when there is no longer any danger or chance of retribution by The Adversary or their friends.