The Count of Monte Cristo
Andon Kiryazov December 14th, 2011 Last paper The books of Alexander Dumas are favorites of many generations of readers because of his interesting characters, tangled stories and dynamic plots. One of them, “The Count of Monte Cristo” was ended up in 1844. Given its dazzling story about love and vengeance in the 18th century, the book was brought to life for the first time in 1934 by director Rowland V Lee and skilled actors Robert Donat, Elissa Landi and Sidney Blackmer. Nevertheless, would it be worth it to do 2nd film based upon the same book? Joe Leydon from Variety thinks so.
He states his certainty in the director of the remake, Kevin Reynolds who “shows to be fully on top of his video game, infusing the grandly melodramatic permutations of the plot with firm conviction and stylish gusto” (Leydon). The old movie from 1934 was given a fresh, brand-new, compelling production in 2003 filled with a lot of awesome, distinctively visualized action scenes. The plot in both films is naturally no various. The serene life of Edmond Dantes, a twenty years old sailor on the “Pharaoh” ship, who plans to wed the stunning Mercedes, is shattered when his buddy Fernand wishes the beautiful Mercedes for himself.
3 other individuals want to harm Dantes for different reasons. Danglars is an accounting professional of the “Pharaoh” and fears that if Dantes ends up being Capitan, he will lose his job due to the fact that Dantes notices his abuses; young assistant district attorney De Villefort hesitates that his father’s connections with the dethroned Napoleon may be exposed, and the neighbor of Edmond’s dad is jealous of his success. On the eve of Mercedes’s and Edmond’s wedding, Dantes is slandered and accused of being a Bonapartist. He is sent out to the d’If castle, a jail fortress not far from Marseilles, without an opportunity to object his sentence.
Dantes is informed that he will stay forever in jail. He tries suicide, however he is suddenly conserved by the look of another prisoner– Abbe Faria, who for several years has dug tunnels and tried to escape, but due to incorrect calculations has ended up in Dantes’s cell. The two misfortunates rapidly become good friends. Abbe Faria is a highly educated specific and finds who sent out Edmond into d’If castle and what their intentions were. At that minute, he unsuspectingly sowed the seeds of revenge in Dantes. For 6 months, Abbe assists to inform Edmond in English, German and Spanish and introduces him to math, physics, history and philosophy.
After a year of planning their escape, Dantes and Abbe started to dig the tunnel to liberty. Unfortunately, incurable illness stalls Abbe from fulfilling their plan. Visualizing his death, the abbot reveals to Edmond his secret treasure hidden on the island of Monte Cristo. When the abbot passes away, Dantes takes his location in a body bag and is thrown into the sea instead of the dead Abbe Faria. It boggles the mind he endured. After miraculously managing to get away, he becomes the extremely rich and mystical Count of Monte Cristo, develops himself among the French nobility and skillful strategies his vengeance on everybody who stabbed him in the back.
He is overwhelmed by the desire to discover and assassinate his enemies, particularly Fernand Mondego who married his bride-to-be and had a child with her. The story of vengeance is long, loaded with action and unanticipated plot turns. The Count slips past the opponents and discovers their devastating secrets which help him in designing their suffering deaths. The Count of Monte Cristo first wins the trust of his bane’s and manages to get close to them to learn their weak points, which will be the reason for their ultimate death. Till the last minute of their life none of them recognizes the source of their difficulties.
The transformation of the ignorant, ignorant and kind sailor Edmont Dantes into the smart, aristocrat with a desire for vengeance is interesting. The star, Jim Caviezel, uses all aspects of acting– mimics, gesture, voice, eyes– to explain the transformation. His eyes appear to be the most prominent quality of his character. The performance of Jim Caviezel is so catching it looks like one of the most popular characters in the history of movie– Al Pacino in “The Godfather”. As hard as someone tries to find defects in the film, they can not. The direction of Kevin Reynolds is at an extremely high level without needing to utilize fancy or inexpensive results.
He knows where to stop a scene, what to do with it, and always selects the most proper angle in order to engage viewers in the minute. An example of this is the extremely first scene in the movie. 2nd mate Dantes and ship representative Mondego are aboard a sloop to Elba, the island to which Napoleon was eliminated and guarded. Edmont and Fernand get on coast to look for medical materials for their passing away captain. Upon seeing them, the British horsemen first assume Edmont and Fernand are here to free Napoleon. An action scene begins as the British open fire at the two ailors from the “Pharaoh” ship. The guards have no intent of listening to or thinking what Edmont tries to inform them (that they just seek medical assistance). The distinct aspect in “The Count of Monte Cristo” is the camera position and rotation which is used in the very first scene. The shooting is done from above, hence exposing the viewer to whole field on which Edmont and Fernand fight the British troops. The camera rotates around the stars and zooms in on their faces to display the facial expressions as they combat. Dim light from the moon shows in their sweaty faces.
Before we understand it, the electronic camera takes us back in the air again, and we can see more British troops rapidly approaching in the far range. Besides from above, electronic cameras are likewise recording from below (the moment when Napoleon appears). This consistent rotation from above to listed below involves the viewers in the scene. We are completely aware of the place of each character in the moment. After Napoleon “saves” our brave character seeking help for their dying captain, the previous Emperor of France accompanies them to the physician. At which point they enter his cabin and we discover the second distinct aesthetic component in the motion picture– darkness.
Practically half of the film is filmed in the dark and typically the only light offered is by the Moon’s reflection (outdoor scenes) and candle lights (indoor scenes). This aesthetic element helps the viewer experience what lighting might have been like throughout the Renaissance period. About one 4th of the film occurs in the dreadful chateau d’If which is the absolute perfect example of how to utilize virtual darkness in scenes. With Dantes’s arrival in d’If castle, we are teleported to his brand-new “house” for the next 16 years, filled just with darkness and ghastly whippings.
What do we think of when we hear the word “darkness”? Fear, death, misery? This is precisely what the director wants us to feel when we are seeing scenes from d’If castle. Worry– from the annual whipping they offer all innocent detainees. Death– that eventually comes either from hunger or suicide. Misery– being exposed to only a little window of light and one meal a day. Another visible visual aspect in “The Count of Monte Cristo” is using the blur result. The director often blurs the background to set more focus on what’s happening in the scene.
We see this aesthetic component throughout the whole movie, mainly during dialog accompanied with a close up on the characters faces for instance, the scene of Mercedes and Edmont speaking by the rocks. The cam is concentrated on their faces when we see Fernand approaching from the distance. Seconds later on, the focus is altered to Fernand as Mercedes and Edmont are blurred to the audiences. When Edmont shares the news of his promo we can see the jealousy and aggravation on Fernand’s face. Speaking of characters faces, the motion picture also concentrates on the representation of characters’ eyes.
The clearest example of this would be the supper scene at Fernand and Mercedes’s mansion for their kid Albert’s birthday. After conserving the youngsters life, Count Monte Cristo was welcomed to the Mondego home for Albert’s birthday celebration. Throughout the entire night, Monte Cristo and Mercedes exchange looks as the Countess Montego begins recognizing the love of her life, Edmont Dantes, in the new French aristocrat. They exchange expressions, looks, smiles which reveal to us what the characters are thinking. Such details make “The Count of Monte Cristo” a “lavishly installed and appealingly old-fashioned swashbuckler” (Leydon).
The reviewer of “The Count of Monte Cristo” on Range– John Leydon– supplies a great summary of the motion picture. He writes about the stars, plot and direction without entering depth on a specific subject or applauding/ slamming the motion picture in excess. Those are the specific qualities of an excellent film review. This brings up a burning concern– who can compose a film review? In the post “Film criticism in the age of the Web” the editors of Cineaste recommend “it often seems that everybody is a critic” (Cineaste), and we can all agree with that.
Nowadays, individuals can view, comment and write anything online. Anyone can register on a blog or online forum and start writing evaluations of motion pictures. It doesn’t even matter how good their writing is or what position they takes since today “everyone’s a critic” (Cineaste). The expression “quality over quantity” can quite correctly use here. There are increasingly more film customers on the Internet, to whom Cineaste describes as “beginners” (Cineaste), “berserk teens” (Cineaste) or generally– modern-day film critics.
Tobias Grey’s thoughts on this brand-new age of criticism in his article “Disputing movie criticism” is that “contemporary film criticism is far too subjective and not nearly analytical enough” (Grey) in addition– “criticism is considered to be dead, movie criticism particularly so.” (Jesse Walker). While this might seem bad, I like the fact that if you do not take pleasure in a certain movie, you’re not necessarily a bad customer or an individual with no taste in film due to the fact that “you have a soulmate in the online world, and he posted his thoughts (which are identical to yours) on a now-defunct interactive Website” (Walker).
So, what does all of this tell us? The large amount of movie criticism on the Web eliminates the real meaning of quality level film criticism, nevertheless it exposes us to more authors’ thoughts and opinions. The editors in Cineaste reveal their hope that “good criticism will predominate over bad in both magazines and the Internet– and that increased quotes for corporate and government control of cyberspace will not muffle, or silence, the numerous dynamic online voices (a few of whom are represented in our seminar) that have currently changed the face of modern film criticism. “The Count of Monte Cristo” is a capturing and remarkable film. The classical love story in the 1800’s intrigues the audience and the action grabs your attention. It is a preferred film for individuals of all ages due to the fact that it reveals human qualities that last permanently such as greed, desire for revenge, love and more. Evaluating the motion picture as art I paid more attention to the camera motion and lens zoom which made me recognize how fantastic the film actually is. The director communicates with us through visual language and the characters reveal their ideas through their facial expressions.
A close up on the primary character’s distressed face or shaking eyeballs can tell us a lot more than dialog. I like “The Count of Monte Cristo” for the special attention to information. They connect us with to film and we experience it in a various method. Such small information might seem like not a huge deal if you watch the movie for its story, however if you focus and view the film as art you ‘d see there is far more than dialog and action scenes to “The Count of Monte Cristo”. Bibliography “Movie criticism in the age of the Web. Cineaste Fall 2008: 1. General Reference Center GOLD. Web. 6 Dec. 2011. Grey, Tobias. “Discussing film criticism: Europeans share opinions on the pics they examine and likewise on the qualifications for being a well-rounded critic. ” Variety 29 Oct. 2007: A2+. General Recommendation Center GOLD. Web. 6 Dec. 2011. Leydon, Joe. “The Count of Monte Cristo.” Range. n. pag. Web. 24 Jan 2002. Walker, Jesse. “Everybody’s a critic: Don’t shed any tears for cinephilia. ” Factor June 2002: 62. General Referral Center GOLD. Web. 6 Dec. 2011.