kolinos4 I guess I have to read the book now :) Dumas is always five stars anyway!I saw this Soviet movie as a kid and remembered it as gloomy and scaring thriller that I liked much. Now I can state that this film is profound, mature and authentic, has great style compared to other version I saw.Music is great, however I do not think Gradsky was best match, because with more "adventure" kind of music it would be less gloomy than with this creation of his, which is great, but rather fatalistic and dramatic. His lyrics are so intense and freaky that distract from the story itself :)I saw the Hollywood version and this version too and there is so much Fundamental difference in the plot, you know, that I wonder what Dumas wrote originally :) This version highlights much more the revenge part, describing past in flashbacks and develops each villain one by one. SPOILERS: the fundamental differences I recall:The majority of names are different - LOL, no comment :) What happened on Elba is absolutely different in two versions. Edmon's son was his son, and not his in other version. Edmond was officially declared executed and just disappeared in other. For an exact person the revenge is different in two versions. Edmond gains his wife back and gets a new love in other version.

umid85 This is a movie I would get at any cost on DVD. Being in Russian, and later translated into Uzbek, languages so elegant and full of quirky clichés, this excels anything I have seen until now. Truly, it made me desire to become just like Edmond Dantes or Count Monte Cristo: learn Latin, engineering, languages, literature and philosophy to shape my personality into Ubermenschen, although I would never become what Dumas created in his novel. Oh and the soundtrack, screenplay, solemn look of the actor Dvorzhetsky all enhance what is called the Art of Cinema of the old Soviet times. The Western Audience should definitely see this movie just for a change from the mainstream Hollywood cinematography.

iconians *update* I originally wrote the review in 2002, but I have had a chance to watch it again. Mostly the movie was faithful to the book, but I think there are still some elements that weren't done well.1. The prison scenes, I think the flashbacks were done exactly how it should but the rest wasn't. For example: In several years that they spend together, we should have had a clearer idea of how the abbot was teaching Edmond to be and behave like Count. 2. The part where he was rescued by the captain after escaping and until the scenes of 10 years later, the missing parts were important. For one, the book describes how they had a falling out and in a knife duel he spares his life, thus gaining a loyal friend for life. 3. The ending was not too clear as some parts were a bit confusing.Anyway, I think it's about 7/10 out and with few chances/additions, it could be 9/10. I just don't think anyone can make a 10/10 movie, that's as good as the book.*update* Since this movie was done in Russian not many people who aren't native to Russia may not have have seen itI seen most euro/USA remakes of this wonderful book, however none of them even come close to the excellence of this version.While its a big long (almost 4 hrs) i think its fair length, since the book is about 1600 pagesthe 4 hrs you spend watching the movie are 4 hrs that you are unable to move from your seat until the movie has ended. It relays the intrigue of the book almost as well as the book itselfI have to applause ussr filmaking of the past time for not caring for size but caring about the quality

jshainsky The film doesn't betrays the soul of the book in favour of money.Americans just unable to make something comparable because of their love of action.