NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Sabah Hensley This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

ralamerica While watching the movie, I was shocked that it took so long for the son of the count to get even with George Sanders as the ruthless Gurko Lanen. The son of Monte Cristo, as the Torch, spends a lot of time trying to save Joan Bennett from the evil clutches of Saunders. Why, by golly, he had the most famous cop in the world and the hero of the Old West to help him out. Lieutenant of the Guards is played by none other than that masked man himself, Clayton Moore (the Lone Ranger). As the film begins we also see Ralph Byrd (the essential Dick Tracy) duking it out with Sanders. And to top it off, Rand Brooks is on hand to give aid to the Torch. Rand, as many should recall, would a couple of years later play Lucky Jenkins, one of Hopalong Cassidy's crime-fighting sidekicks. Is it s coincidence that with these two cowboy stars on hand that the script resembles more the "Mark of Zorro" than a sequel to "The Count of Monte Cristo"?

kramerafii-1 Well, it might have a good bit of Ruritaninan clichés, and we might just guess the outcome, but it is a fun "B" sword dasher. George Sanders never looked so threatening until he showed up as Addison DeWitt in "All About Eve". He did have the face of menace. And it is good to see any of the Bennett sisters on screen. It does tweak your memory. Is it Joan? Is it Constance? Is it someone that I remember from some other movie on the Saturday afternoon filler? And then you do have Florence Bates as the best friend (maid) to the star. This role would be taken by Thelma Ritter in about ten years. Although, Thelma Ritter looked as if she contended with Macy's and Gimbels's. I cannot picture her in period costume. Unless, Klein's on the Square (14th Street and Union Square) ever went high hat. Thank goodness not!

webbbarton 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?

rsoonsa Screenwriter George Bruce concocted a pastiche with affection in this film, wherein each scene and, indeed, each read line of dialogue is parodic in nature, although the work is so well crafted and edited that it has been accepted as simply an example of a swashbuckling adventure featuring some major studio players, including Louis Hayward and Joan Bennett. The plot involves a contest between Hayward, as the Count of Monte Cristo, and the redoubtable George Sanders as his rival, Gurko Lanen, for the hand of Bennett, who portrays Zona, Grand Duchess of the imaginary Balkan state of Lichtenburg, during the mid-nineteenth century, and ancillary issues involving Lanen's craving for the small state's throne. The three leads give full-bodied performances with straight-forward interpretations appropriate to a pastiche, while Hayward's rapid-fire intonation and expressions create a unique characterization, contrasted nicely with Sanders' satiny villain, all supported well by numerous Hollywood stalwarts, notably Ian Wolfe, Montague Love and Clayton Moore. Direction by Rowland W. Lee perfectly matches the clever Bruce scenario, and the cinematography by George Robinson, production design by John Schulze, set decoration by Edward Boyle (the latter two Academy award winners for their efforts) and the Saturday matinee serial music of Edward Ward are about as pertinent as can be imaginable, while the excellent print enhances a neatly packaged tale of derring-do.