Starring some soft-spoken guy as the Count, some other guy who looks like Val Kilmer as Fernand, and some girl who doesn't look at all like Mercedes. But I do give props for casting unknowns instead of the same names we're all tired of hearing about. The real Val Kilmer would have somehow made this movie worse (but funnier).

The majority of blurbs I've seen on the Web indicate that most of the viewers have not read the book. And if that's the case for you, then great! Read no more! This is a fun, action packed excuse to see some guys swordfight each other to the death over some chick with nothing more important than indeed their honor at stake. You know, the way duels to the death should be.

Okay, I'll stop. Even if you're innocently unaware of the book, this movie isn't that great. It's one of those Anachronistic Asshole movies, where action heroes from the 1990s are thrust back to a historic time with the same vocabulary, one-liners, bad attitudes, and incredible kung-fu skills that they picked up in the 90s, such that the historic setting makes their asshole personas even more unbelievable than usual. For some reason Hollywood thinks the classical periods are more interesting when they're repopulated with the biggest douchebags that ever lived. And this aspect contributes to the other categorization I give this movie: It's a Throwaway movie, meaning that it gives no human being any reason to ever want to see it again. In fact, my estimation is that this movie should be watched (on average) 0.7 times. Yes, that means you should watch about 70% of the movie—it doesn't matter which part—in order to get something out of it before being offended by realization of the whole. You'll be happier if you can only wonder at the parts you missed. But as my opinion here is becoming very specific, "your mileage may vary."

It saddens me that somebody out there is making another Throwaway movie as we speak, because movies ought to be a form of art, not just a way to trick people into handing over twelve dollars. Oscar Wilde says that a book is only worth reading if it's worth reading more than once, and I find this to be a very useful criterion in deciding whether your movie is crap. But anyway.

On to the most amusing part of this movie: how it compares to the book. Now I'm not trying to be a stickler, saying that every movie that isn't exactly like the book (all of them) sucks, but the changes were particularly funny in this case.

If you don't want spoilers, then my final message is: Forget this movie; read the book instead. It's really long, and it might feel a little slow and old at first, but it gets interesting fast and stays pretty compelling. When I finally finished it, I experienced a miniature withdrawal because I desperately wanted more. You can't say that about very many movies.

On with the spoilers!

Once you get over the fact that everyone in this movie was transported to 1815 from 1998, it starts out actually fairly accurate and follows the book pretty closely. There are some additional fights and confrontations at the beginning which allow Dantes (and the audience) to understand without a doubt who is responsible for his imprisonment, whereas in the book he remains miserably unaware and learns these facts over time. But it's actually rather convenient that the plot is made so clear in the movie.

Then Dantes goes to prison, where eventually he meets the guy in the next cell, a wisened old man who teaches Dantes everything he knows over the next ten years. This is the beginning of Dantes' transformation into the Count. So far, the movie is just like the book, more or less. Dantes escapes from prison, finds the hidden treasure, and step-by-step, returns to society as the newly invented Count. The plot continues mostly on track until, about 40% through the book, all of a sudden the Count confronts his enemies by sword, the movie has a half-assed conclusion, and the credits roll before you can laugh.

The divergence starts with Mercedes, Dantes' unfaithful ex-girlfriend. In the book, he never forgives her, and she becomes so ashamed that she practically joins a convent. But in the movie, the Count and Mercedes get back together, return to the island where he was imprisoned for fourteen years, and build a park there. I'm not making this up. The movie makes no mention of the hot new girlfriend the Count picked up after telling Mercedes to go fuck herself.

Better still, in the movie it's revealed that Albert, the plucky, teenage son of Mercedes and Fernand, is actually the son of Mercedes and Dantes! Yes, due to that sex scene that was inserted right before Dantes' arrest! Wait, what? In the book, Dantes and Mercedes never had sex (because in the book she's not a "slut", I guess), and the Count takes a liking to Albert after meeting him by coincidence and realizing who he was, not because he's his surprise predestined illegitimate son. One is a charming, bittersweet scenario, the other is forced to be charming.

The Count is rather disappointing in the movie, having only a fraction of the class, skill, and presence as in the book, wherein he's basically the James Bond of 1830, a superspy with amazing talents of disguise and persuasion and access to limitless wealth and information, and having a personality to match. This is what makes reading the book so much fun, whereas in the movie the Count is unexpectedly boring and wussy. It's true that the Count is a sensitive guy, but the movie portrayal lacks a certain bravado that necessarily comes with being the richest man in the world and knowing it's just a matter of time before you are totally going to get those fuckers. Further, the revenge executed upon the Count's enemies in the movie was a bit shallow. In the book he's more like the wrath of God, cursing not only the men, but also their women and children, ruining all their lives, driving them all to madness or suicide, without them even realizing it was him until the last minute. The swordfights and other fates portrayed in the movie were much too quick and painless. Yawn.

I have a few theories as to why the movie follows the book pretty faithfully 40% of the way and then twists into an abrupt surprise ending.

1. The director got bored.

The edition of the book I read was over 1000 pages, which is far more than we can expect any movie director to research. He probably got to page 500, then was like, "Fuck this. I've already got enough material to fill 120 minutes twice. I don't need to follow up on all these annoying loose ends. That final swordfight everyone's expecting will fit in just fine right here."

2. Desperate Artist Syndrome.

Some people, even though they're tasked with rehashing an existing well-known story, or rather, especially when doing so, feel that they must leave their "artistic mark" by changing things in perverse and unexpected ways. Dantes' girlfriend Mercedes? Yeah, she was a slut. Robin Hood's sidekick? Surprise, he was black. Batman's foe, the Riddler? Totally gay. (Okay, maybe that last one wasn't so far-fetched.) But thanks to our movie directors, these artistic contributions to our culture have just been so meaningful.

3. This movie was actually based on the previous movie, not the book.

When I was four or five, I saw an older Count of Monte Cristo movie that, like this one, ended in a sword fight shortly after the escape from prison. I was surprised to learn the imprisonment takes only about 20% of the book. Maybe this director didn't read the book at all but just watched the older movie(s) for inspiration.

4. Happy endings are required.

The book doesn't exactly have a happy ending. It's more one of satisfying justice. In particular, Mercedes gets the shaft, so maybe the director felt too sorry for her and vowed to give her a better fate. Likewise, having Dantes run Fernand through with a sword simply feels a lot better than putting him to shame with all that boring exposition and then leaving him alone to shoot himself in the head.