Truly Dreadful Film

Dreadfully Boring

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Louis Hayward never got quite the acclaim that swashbuckling actors like Tyrone Power and Errol Flynn did for these roles. He was an independent and never had a big studio to back him. This film, The Son Of Monte Cristo was an Edward Small production released by United Artists and it shows Hayward at his best advantage as a larger than life hero who fought for honor, his lady's as well as a cause of freedom.As we know from Alexandre Dumas's novel The Count Of Monte Cristo, he became the wealthiest man in Europe with a taste for the cause of liberty and a man who as a banker knew how to settle all kinds of accounts. His son Edmond Dantes, Jr. is following in Dad's footsteps and they've brought him to the Duchy of Lichtenberg whose military dictator George Sanders rules with a brutal hand in the name of the Queen, Joan Bennett. But Sanders ambition knows no limits as the viewer of this film learns, he'll make Lichtenberg a satellite of a major European power if he can be king as well as military ruler.The film borrows from both The Scarlet Pimpernel and The Mark Of Zorro as Hayward turns Monte Cristo into a dandified fop representing his banking house. By night however he becomes the hooded Torch, symbol of liberty for the people of Lichtenberg who keeps striking where Sanders least expects it.This film along with The Man In The Iron Mask from the previous year marked Hayward's apex as a film star. His service as a combat photographer with the Marines during World War II earned him a Silver Star. But his absence from the screen put a halt to his rise to the top of the Hollywood pinnacle. Other stars like James Stewart, Tyrone Power, and Clark Gable made it all the way back, but sadly Hayward never did.Joan Bennett is a beautiful heroine willing to bear the unbearable for her people and life with Sanders as a husband and king is pretty unbearable. Montagu Love who is usually a bad guy in these kind of films is a good guy here as the minister Bennett has confidence in. Ian Wolfe who usually plays nebbish types is a particularly sneaky and nasty spy for Sanders and he really gets what's coming to him. You'll also recognize Clayton Moore with that distinctive voice in a part without the Lone Ranger mask and young Rand Brooks who was Olivia deHavilland's brother in Gone With The Wind plays another eager young patriot. As for Sanders this film is business as usual for him as he plays yet another distinctive cad as a villain.Heroes aren't real heroes in our more cynical age which is the reason that sadly films like The Son Of Monte Cristo aren't made any more.

SON OF MONTE CRISTO, a swashbuckler with elements of ZORRO, ZENDA and SCARLET PIMPERNEL that, despite the familiarities, I found entertaining and watchable. However it would have been far less entertaining were it not for the performance of George Sanders as the villain, whose character is more than the two dimensional villains normally connected with films of this genre. He has human frailties in his makeup, yet comes across as a leader with charisma -- many would follow such a man. Really, I had forgotten over the years what a consummate actor George Sanders was. SON OF MONTE CRISTO is his film, and his film alone, no doubt about it. There are underlying political implications here, released as it was on the eve of World War II. The crew-cut Sanders with his military bearing and the ever present Iron Cross on his chest really represented Adolf Hitler; both of them highly ambitious self-made men from the lower class, contemptuous of aristocracy and fully determined to oust the old established order. Thru his determination and ruthlessness Sanders nearly accomplishes his goal. Louis Hayward turns in a fairly good performance as a Pimpernel-style hero with his best moments in scenes with Sanders, and the mental fencing between them both. I am always aware of Hayward's physical movements in his films; he moved like a cat. Heroine Joan Bennett, is, well, Joan Bennett. Enough said. As an aside, I would like to comment on the fact that George Sanders hated dueling in his films, although when he had to, as here, he did well enough it seems. Later on in THE BLACK SWAN, he wore a red beard along with his dueling double to disguise the fact that it was not he with the sword against Ty Power, the latter incidentally, the second best duelist in Hollywood, in the footsteps of Basil Rathbone. One viewing of MONTE CRISTO will do for me, for it is not ZENDA, ZORRO nor the SCARLET PIMPERNEL.

Another bigger than usual budget for an Edward Small film that is very much in the same pattern as THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK, with the same stars--LOUIS HAYWARD and JOAN BENNETT--with Hayward again as the man who assumes a disguise (as a fop) in order to win the freedom of the Duchess of Litchtenberg from the clutches of villainous GEORGE SANDERS and his traitorous ways.Full of intrigue, swashbuckling and occasional moments of romantic byplay, it's handicapped by Bennett's ice princess manner of performing in these costume roles as a damsel in distress--beautiful but expressionless. LOUIS HAYWARD, on the other hand, is very animated and charming in the title role, showing prowess with the swordplay and finally getting the upper hand in a duel of wits and swords with Sanders.It's enjoyable but full of deja vu for those who've seen other swashbucklers of this ilk. FLORENCE BATES has a few wry moments as Bennett's maid, and MONTAGU LOVE is effective as a wrongly imprisoned nobleman.The musical score by Edward Ward is helpful in sustaining an air of adventure but certainly not one of his more notable scores.Summing up: Standard entertainment that must have made Saturday matinée audiences happy in the '40s--but it's all just too familiar with no original touches.

Since this comment compares the entire plot of the movie to World War II in 1940, don't read this if you are avoiding spoilers.I could not help noticing while watching the movie that the basic roles of the characters in the story match very closely to the major nations' roles in the war going on at the time.Gurko Lanen - Powerful, corrupt, ruthless, uses spies, back stabs - he is clearly the Germans Zona - Strong heart, good intentions, pure but realistic. How can she win against such overwhelming force? - the British, who, at this time stood alone against the Germans.Baron von Neuhof - Allied with Zona, outwitted and imprisoned - The French Prince Paul Pavlov - Signs a secret treaty that protects Lanen against a war with the French, secretly 'selling off' the citizens of Lichtenburg (who represent the Poles (or perhaps all of the free peoples of Europe), I think) - The Soviets (who else?) And finally - 'The Torch'/Count Monte Cristo - The savior that is willing to risk his life for Zona, even though he has no interest in Lichtenburg - his ambition is to fight oppression wherever it lies - The USA Naturally Stadt represents the German SA (Ernst Rohm) that was betrayed by Hitler after building the Nazi party into a viable force, and also obviously the Gestapo (German secret police).Remember that in 1940, The Soviet Union was NOT at war with Germany. In fact, the Germans and Soviets conquered Poland and divided the nation in accordance with a 'secret' clause in their Non-Aggression Pact.It is so similar that I can't imagine that the movie wasn't a veiled attempt to encourage the USA to join the war on the side of Britain.In fact, the plot of the movie even has The Count lending money to Lichtenburg. The USA was officially neutral, but certainly mostly Anglophilic at the time, which would be consistent with this theme.Maybe I am reaching a little bit, but I have a strong feeling that this is the case.Does anyone know of any official connection? Has this been discussed before?