Hello, again!
I had the idea of this blog almost two years ago, but somehow I couldn't follow
the road I imagined at that moment.
Since then,
however, movies have become a constant interest for me and I do have great plans for
the future concerning film studies.
I actually consecrated almost the entire first half of this year to a study of the adaptations of The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas. For over a month I watch and analyzed the movies (wow, they are so many), then I spend a few weeks to write my paper. The purpose of all this: to participate in a conference on film studies, in Istanbul. It all started when I read again Dumas' novel (although it was like for the first time), this time directly in French, and I discovered a completely different story of what is usually considered The Count of Monte Cristo - meaning a story of revenge. In my eyes, Edmond Dantès' story developed in a much deeper way and if I were to reduce it to an essential idea it would be a man's relation with God and his (subconscious) search for redemption.
This is just a small introduction, but if you want to read more, you can find my full paper here.
Enjoy it and please do not hesitate to leave me your comments!
Hi Elena
RăspundețiȘtergereI have read your paper and wish to congratulate you on a well researched, well witten and brilliantly argued piece of work.
Sadly there are not many scholarly works on the novel, probably due to the fact that many consider it to be pulp fiction rather than a work with meaning such as Les Miserables. I agree that Dumas has less to say on the social problems of the day than Hugo however in Edmond Dantes, Dumas created a character with a great arc that is often overlooked. I feel you are right when you state it is significant how Dantes signed his farewell letter in the last chapter of the novel. This is the story of a man who lost part of himself and later found it again. You are right when you say Haydee is crucial to this transformation and adapters show a misunderstanding of the novel when they choose to alter or leave her out her story.
I am amazed that you were able to find so many adpatations of the novel. I have been looking for the 1908 short for some time. Where did you find it? I think there also a few other short movies before this but they are not thought to survive.
One adaptation you did miss out was the the 1913 adaptation by the Famous Players Company and starring James O'Neill. This was the first full length film and was based on the Fechter adaptation which O´Neill had performed on stage for over 20 years, turning him into a superstar. You may have guessed therefore that Haydee does not feature at all. A slightly above average copy was released on DVD by Grapevine video. By the way I read from an old newspaper that Dumas allegedly came to England and saw Fechter perform his version. He then met Fechter in his dressing room and told him that making Albert the son of Dantes was brilliant and he wish he had thought of it. I have no idea if this is true but I still prefer Dumas ending.
I find it interesting that there is no mention of Haydee in the fourth and final play in Dumas stage version of Monte Cristo. Monte- Cristo 4: Villefort ends with Dantes,Maximillian and Valentine on Monte Cristo and Haydee is nowhere to be seen. This is odd considering the previous installment hinted strongly that the Count and Haydee would become lovers. Emile Blavet did a new version of the Dumas play in 1894 which features Haydee in the final scene but removes,like most adaptations, the serial poisoner storyline.
I wonder how much modern sensibilities play a part in the treatment of Haydee. Many modern day adapters might be put off at the idea of a man falling in love with a woman he had known, and taken care of, since a child. I think they are much more comfortable with the Valjean/Cosette relationship in Les Miserables.
Anyway thanks for letting me read your essay. It is a must read for any Monte Cristo fans.
Just out of interest, which adaptation did you personally enjoy the most?
Kind regards
Robert
Hello Robert,
Ștergerefirst of all, let me thank you for your comment. I am very happy that you enjoyed reading my paper and grateful for your kind words. Your judgement - “It is a must read for any Monte Cristo fans” - honors me.
Indeed, Dumas is not that much preoccupied with describing the social problems of the times his characters live in, or at least not directly and at length. But on the other hand he knows how to create characters and strong personalities, and he "plays" with their thoughts and actions, so that in the end we get to have an extraordinary novel and character. I don't think I'm mistaken if I say that Edmond Dantès is the best written character in all of Dumas' work. Psychologically speaking, he is a very profound character and this opens the door for so many beautiful analyses. This time I chose to talk about Haydée, because I don't like how she is generally portrayed in the adaptations and I wanted to emphasize her importance in the novel. But I also have other ideas based on the novel and its adaptations. I hope you will read my next papers too when they will be ready.
Regarding the adaptations, they are indeed so many. But luckily, I found most of them on the internet, sometimes after hours of searching, other times by pure chance. The 1908 version, which is thought to have been the first one, is available here: https://www.fandor.com/films/the_count_of_monte_cristo. As you say, there are also many other short films (French, American, Italian), but I could not find any trace of them. I knew about the 1913 version, but I wasn't able at the time to get my hand on the DVD. As soon as I will have it, I will add some observations in the article. It is interesting what you tell me about Dumas' supposed comment on Albert being made the son of Dantès. Even if it were true, I too would still prefer the original ending. Such a change in the story would have too many consequences on the main character - if you remember, he made quite clear in the beginning that Mercédès was not his mistress, but his fiancée, so this would mean a change of thought, at the very least.
I did read the play adapted by Dumas and I think that Haydée’s absence from the last part is somehow understandable: he separated completely the two stories, of Fernand and Villefort, and Haydee’s presence was much more necessary in the the first arc. Not to mention that Haydée and Valentine were played at that time by the same actress. In a way, Dumas separated the ending of the novel between the two parts of the play: the third shows us the Count in love with Haydée, the last closes with him uniting Maximilien with Valentine. So, if you think this way, it won’t seem odd anymore that she is not mentioned in the last part.
ȘtergereI have to say that I haven’t taken into consideration the possibility of a repulsion of the adapters towards what I see as Dumas’ re-interpretation of Pygmalion’s myth. It is a possible explanation though, but definitely not for all the adaptations. However, I’m afraid that Haydee’s shallow treatment comes rather from a lack in understanding the novel in its profoundness. Unfortunately, for many, Dumas’ literature means adventure and nothing more. As for Valjean-Cosette relation, it might be more comfortable to witness to at first sight, but if you think that Valjean loved her somehow more than as a daughter…
Your question in the end is, in its simplicity, quite difficult to answer to. And that’s because I payed so much attention to the degree of faithfulness of the movies to the novel, that I judge them more from this point of view. Unfortunately I haven’t found any that doesn’t ward off significantly from the novel, in form and/or meaning. But I could say that the Russian version surprised me in a very pleasant way and also the British one from 1964. My favorite Haydée is however in the 1954 French film. What is your favorite adaptation?
If you haven’t seen all the adaptations I wrote about, I’ll be more than happy to tell you where to find them. Just send me a private message naming the ones you want to see and I’ll send you the links. I already wrote too much here - a professional flaw, I think.
All the best,
Elena
Hi Elena
RăspundețiȘtergereThank you for your detailed reply. It was almost as long as the novel itself! ha only joking. It must be great to study a subject you are really passionate about.
I didn't know that Haydee and Valentine where played by the same actress. That's quite interesting actually. I need to find the cast lists.
The main thing I dislike in Dumas' play is that Danglars becomes a minor character. As the last two plays are concerned with the fate of Morcerf and Villefort respectively, Danglars arc is totally forgotten. I feel this is a shame as Dantes decision to spare Danglars was a sign that he was starting to feel connected to humanity again. Emile Blavet's version of the play (which you can find online) has a brief mention of Danglars fate in the final part where it is revealed he starved to death in his safe where he keeps his money! This sounds more horrible than leaving Danglars fate unresolved and again shows a misunderstanding of the novel.
I am actually quite interested in the stage versions of Monte Cristo. Of course the Fechter version was the most dominant one from 1868 until the 1920s but I have some earlier English versions. I have a version by William Parsons from 1866 which is an abridgement of Dumas version with a invented final scene featuring a reunion with Mercedes. I have a version titled The Adventures of the Count De Monte Cristo or Terrors of the Chateau D'If. Haydee isn't in this one at all. It is a three act play and the problem with short plays like this is that a lot of time is quite rightly taken up with the arrest and imprisonment that the "revenge" story feels a little rushed. In this version Dantes gets all the villains together in his house, exposes them and has them arrested. Morcerf tries to shoot Dantes but is shot dead by Ali. Mercedes, who does not have a son in this version, then reunites with Dantes. Finally I have a version by Hailes Lacy which was released the same year as the Fechter version. It's a confusing attempt at compressing the four Dumas plays into one. The final scene is set in Dantes house where he reunites Maximillian with Valentine. Right after that Haydee appears and the scene from the end of "Part 3: Morcerf" is repeated. I think the reason why the Fechter play was a success is that didn't try to compress all the plots from the novel into one play. Most of the critical reviews I have of the stage versions of Monte Cristo all criticise its length. Fechter did was Dumas could not and made an enjoyable play that could be performed in one night. The downside was that the spirit of the novel was lost. What we were left with was simply an adventure story. In the final act of the Fecther version, Dantes says to Danglars "you are going to die". Dumas' Dantes would never stoop so low. Still the crowds loved it.
Anyway back to movies. I like the 1964 BBC production. I only just realised now that it is the only British production of Monte Cristo. I think the acting and production is great and it is certainly better than the Norwegian, Italian and Spanish series. Although I wasn't even alive then, I have read that the show was hugely popular in the 60s and was repeated several times. I don't like that Valentine's storyline was dropped, the resurrection of the Pharon was glossed over (a real dramatic moment in the novel) and Dantes' father was not featured at all.
I enjoyed the French movies, although sadly I cannot speak French and most don't have English subtitles. My favourite is the 1929 silent version. However I don't understand why they all leave out Danglars and have Caderousse take his place. Maybe they thought Danglars financial woes would be too boring for the viewer?
Thanks for the advice regarding where to find the adaptations. It seems that Fandor is a streaming service that is not available in the UK. I will try to see if some of my friends can access it.
I will look forward to further research from you on this and other subjects.
Kind regards
Robert
Something I just remembered. The 1918 movie was originally a 15 part serial. The total length was thirty reels which is about five hours. I believe the version online at the European Film Gateway is only three hours. I have no doubt some important scenes with Haydee are missing. A contemporary review said the serial was very faithful to the book and every scene was included.
RăspundețiȘtergereHi Robert,
ȘtergereYou can find the cast list at the end of each of the four parts of the play available here:
http://www.alexandredumasetcompagnie.com/.
I would like to read various stage adaptations of the novel too. As I told you, I read Dumas’ and I found out about one written by Charles Morey, I just have to purchase it. I looked for Emile Blavet’s version, but could not find it. Could you send me the link, please? The other versions you tell me about, do you have them in printed form?
About the length of Dumas’ play, here you can see some funny illustrations of the time: http://www.dumaspere.com/images/oeuvres/montecristo_cham.jpg (the text is in French, but it’s not very difficult to understand).
Regarding the movies, the elimination of Danglars in many of the adaptations is indeed a big left out. It would be very interesting to know why. But I think we can only guess. As you say, there are many other big changes in the storyline. I don’t like the absence of Dantès the father either. He is very important, among others, in understanding the son’s reasons for revenge. Ali also is sometimes disfavoured and misrepresented in the film adaptations, although he is one of the main “instruments” of the Count.
How did you watch the Norwegian series? Did you find some subtitles or do you speak Norwegian? This was for me the most difficult to watch - because of the language - and I was left with some questions at the end.
If you haven’t seen the Russian production, I warmly recommend you to look for it. It’s not completely faithful to the novel, but it does create a beautiful atmosphere.
I knew about the 15 parts of the 1918 film, but didn’t know its original length in hours, although the strange cuts in the version I saw should have been a clue that something was missing. You may be right about Haydée’s representation in it and it’s a pity that only the almost three hours available on EFG survived. Unfortunately, the “surviving” part is a problem for many movies and not only from the beginning of the last century. The 1964 BBC series was also considered lost, but fortunately for us it wasn’t so. Do you have the review of the 1918 film or do you know where can I find it?
You may know this website already, but here it is: http://www.pastichesdumas.com/. It’s only in French, but it’s very interesting to browse through. They present almost all the sequels and books inspired by Dumas’ works.
Did you know that you can find on the internet the newspapers in which The Count of Monte Cristo was published for the first time? Here is the archive of the newspaper: http://gallicalabs.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb39294634r/date. The novel appeared in 139 numbers: 28.08-19.10.1844, 31.10-26.11.1844 and 20.06.1945-15.01.1846. Even if you don’t speak French, I think it would be nice to have a look at them.
Thank you again for your feedback. I hope we’ll stay in touch.
(If you care to read another research I made, there is one available on my Academia.edu profile, just like this one. It’s a philosophical approach of the movie The Artist. I hope you’ll enjoy it. Any feedback will be most welcome.
Right now I’m working on a new research for a conference I’ll attend to in October. If everything works alright, I’ll publish it too by the end of that month.)
All the best,
Elena
Hi again Elena
RăspundețiȘtergereThank you for the link to the newspaper archive. It actually helped me solve an old mystery. I always wondered why some versions of the novel had an additional chapter entitled La Maison des Allées de Meilhan which was created by splitting Le Départ into two. It seems now that this chapter was in the newspaper version whike the first book version merged the two chapters into one. I have no idea why thus was done as there was no changes to the actual text.
I saw the Norwegian version on the NRK archive site. Like you, I had no idea what was being said.
I liked the Russian version and the production was really good for a Soviet era film. The electronic soundtrack did seem a little odd.
Here are some links:
William Parsons play (page 237 onwards)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-kxJAQAAMAAJ
Emile Blavet version (US access only sadly but I might have a copy):
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jCU-AAAAYAAJ
Lacy version, again US only:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LQ5aAAAAMAAJ&q=LQ5aAAAAMAAJ&dq=LQ5aAAAAMAAI
Publicity for 1918 movie:
http://www.europeanfilmgateway.eu/node/33/detail//text:ZDA5NzZlMTYtZDFkMy00MmQ5LWIzMTQtZDg5YmVkY2VmM2NjX1VtVndiM05wZEc5eWVWTmxjblpwWTJWU1pYTnZkWEpqWlhNdlVtVndiM05wZEc5eWVWTmxjblpwWTJWU1pYTnZkWEpqWlZSNWNHVT06Om5vbkF2Q3JlYXRpb24uRElGL0RJRl9Ob25BVkNyZWF0aW9uXzEwMzc0NzkwMDAwMDAwNjYwODM=/paging:dmlkZW8tMS00LWltYWdlLTEtNC1zb3VuZC0xLTQtcGVyc29uLTEtNC10ZXh0LTEtNA==
The rest I have in handwritten form from the British Library. I hope to transcribe them.
I will check out your other research papers.
Thanks
Robert
Hi Robert,
ȘtergereI’m glad I could help you with that mystery. It was probably the editor’s decision or, who knows, maybe actually just an error, which then perpetuated.
Regarding the Norwegian adaptation, it was something refreshing about it after all. Not knowing the language (although, in the end, I managed to catch some words), I was “forced” to pay much more attention to the image, to the acting.
You are right about the soundtrack of the Russian series. For a moment I forgot about it. But I was struck by it too. It’s something that one would not expect to hear when watching a classic story. It must be something like a Russian “signature”.
Thank you for the links. I was able to download William Parsons’ and Emile Blavet’s versions. Unfortunately, the Lacy version didn’t work in US either.
I just remembered I have a booklet about the 1929 version, made after its restoration in 2006. But I can’t remember where I found it. I only have it in my computer. If you do not have it, I could send it to you somehow.
Good luck with transcribing the plays! I wish I could help you in some way. It feels so good seeing other people just as dedicated and passionate about something as I am.
Have a wonderful week!
Elena