The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas has always stood among works such as Hamlet that are extremely difficult to fully adapt to the big screen. That’s not to say that film versions of either property are hard to make as both
literary sources have at least five adaptations under the belt.
However, both stories have such an in-depth level of material to deal
with that remaining truly faithful to the story is really an exercise
in futility for the most part. With highly complex storylines, overtly
lengthy plots, and wide arrays of characters, both novels have had to
suffer great cutbacks and changes within most of their adaptations. The
difference between them however is that while Hamlet managed to escape it with the 1996 film adaptation, The Count of Monte Cristo didn’t
see another attempt at it for many decades until the 2002 version
directed by Kevin Reynolds rolled around. Is it an entertaining film?
Certainly, but how does it measure up to the source material? Not so
equally.

As in the novel, the film tells the story of Edmond Dantes (Jim Caviezel): an honest and content sailor engaged to the love of his life Mercedes (Dagmara Dominczyk). Jealous of his friend Edmond and lusting
after Mercedes, Fernand Mondego (Guy Pearce) participates in an
insidious plot that results in Edmond being falsely charged with
treason and sentenced to life within the Chateau d’If. Faced with no
prospect of survival or escape outside of his own thirst for vengeance,
Edmond finds his efforts occupied upon meeting a spiritual man named
Abbe Faria (Richard Harris). Together, they gradually dig a tunnel
through the walls of the Chateau d’If, while Faria begins to provide
Edmond with tutoring on a wide array of areas including reading,
writing, mathematics, politics, and fencing. Dying before he can
escape, Faria provides Edmond with the means to escape and the tools to
enact his revenge, as he gives Edmond a map to the island of Monte
Cristo, where near limitless amounts of treasure are hidden. Escaping
after 13 long years within the island prison, Edmond finds the treasure
and focuses it on his need for avenging himself, and getting even with
his betrayers. To that end, Edmond utilizes the money to become the
titular Count of Monte Cristo and slowly manipulate his way towards his
enemies’ weaknesses and ultimate demises.

For starters, the film is not a faithful one to its source in the most literal of senses, as it does cut out numerous characters and plot elements from the book. Ultimately what this film is a simplified
version of the story: watered down to two hours and supplemented with
gratuitous amounts of action sequences. That’s not to say that this
detracts from the film, as the spirit of the novel is generally kept
alive, and the handling of many of the film’s themes is quite
well-done. The motifs of revenge, scheming, and belief are all kept
intact and the character relationships are molded down to their truest
(if somewhat diluted) forms. This was one of the things that made the
film interesting to watch, as the story was always engaging and
presented rather effectively.

That being said however, the main problem with the film centers around its execution as that falls below the mark within most areas. For one thing, the acting is only passable at best for the majority of
the film, as there appears to be little to no emotion devoted to any of
the characters at all. Caviezel’s Dantes is complete tripe to listen
to, as the actor wanders through his lines like Snow White lost through
the woods on the way to meet the Seven Dwarfs. Guy Pearce is quite over
the top as Mondego, Mercedes is ineffectual, and most of the other
characters are left feeling bland. This is al quite bad, but nothing
compared to the cinematography of the film, which was quite horrendous
to a fault. The film seems to hide itself in the shadow of bad lighting
and uneven editing, as we never get a clear sense of what’s going on,
and often finding ourselves glad we don’t whenever a drab shot does get
through. It’s completely off-putting in its visual mediocrity, and
almost enough to derail the film.

However, the film was generally entertaining and found itself bolstered simply by one thing: Richard Harris. Harris’s performance as Abbe Faria was simply brilliant and served as the glue that held the
film together when it threatened to fall apart at the scenes. Upon his
arrival into the film, everyone and everything seems to improve
significantly: the acting becomes more tolerable, the camera work
easier to look at, and even the action sequences can be good from time
to time. From then on the movie transforms into a decent enough
adaptation that won’t knock your socks off but will never leave you
bored in your seat. Granted, it’s a highly flawed film, but most good
popcorn films are right?