Revenge stories don’t really go out of style. They’re always changing forms, telling versions of the same basic storyline but updating it every now and again, to be reintroduced to an entirely different audience that has not been ready for this resounding success.
This seems to be the case with The Count of Monte Cristo, a recent adaptation of Alexandre Dumas‘s classic novel. The series has recently reached number one on Apple, according to the Netherlands-based analytics website FlixPatrol,even without the kind of major production, advertising, and distribution effort that typically would precede such a major success. It’s outperforming other series simply because it’s proven interesting enough to earn a near-perfect Rotten Tomatoes score of 88%.
Why ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’ Is Climbing the Apple TV Charts
Edmond looking up at a rocky cliffside in The Count of Monte CristoImage via PBS Masterpiece
There’s nothing especially modern about the premise itself, and that’s part of the appeal. Betrayal, imprisonment, reinvention, revenge — it’s all familiar territory, but what distinguishes this adaptation is how deliberately it approaches those beats. The eight-episode series features Sam Claflin, is directed by Bille August, and has a large-scale dramatic plot with plenty of detail, a slow-moving pace, and every event of considerable significance.
It’s the patience in the series’ pacing that provides so much momentum and ultimately sets the tone. Once the pivotal betrayal takes place, there is no attempt to build suspense for the audience; it is the result of a trajectory that has been in place since the series’ opening and has evolved over eight episodes. After this point, the series has taken a more measured approach, not rushing to avenge itself but instead methodically achieving that goal.
The story is set in 1815, during the changing political climates of France in the years following Napoleon’s defeat. The story begins on the shore of Marseilles with Edmond Dantès (Claflin), a sailor whose potential is completely snatched away from him in one action. After being framed for treason by a group of men, out of jealousy and desire to save themselves from the consequences of their own actions, Edmond is imprisoned at the Château d’If, an island fortress designed to hold prisoners without trial and to prevent them from escaping.
Collider Exclusive · Oscar Best Picture Quiz Which Oscar Best Picture Is Your Perfect Movie? Parasite · Everything Everywhere · Oppenheimer · Birdman · No Country
Five Oscar Best Picture winners. Five completely different visions of what cinema can be — and what it can do to you. One of them is the film that was made for the way your mind works. Ten questions will figure out which one.
🪜Parasite 🌀Everything Everywhere ☢️Oppenheimer 🐦Birdman 🪙No Country for Old Men
01 What kind of film experience do you actually want? The best movies don’t just entertain — they leave something behind.
02 Which idea grabs you most in a film? Great films are driven by a central obsession. What’s yours?
03 How do you like your story told? Form is content. The way a story is shaped changes what it means.
04 What makes a truly great antagonist? The opposition defines the protagonist. What kind of opposition fascinates you?
05 What do you want from a film’s ending? The final note is the one that lingers. What do you want it to sound like?
06 Which setting pulls you in most? Where a film takes place shapes everything — mood, stakes, what’s even possible.
07 What cinematic craft impresses you most? Every great film has a signature — a technical or artistic element that makes it unmistakable.
08 What kind of main character do you root for? The protagonist is the lens. Who you choose to follow says something about you.
09 How do you feel about a film that takes its time? Pace is a choice. Some films sprint; others let tension accumulate slowly, deliberately.
10 What do you want to feel walking out of the cinema? The best films leave a mark. What kind of mark do you want?
The Academy Has Decided Your Perfect Film Is…
Your answers have pointed to one Oscar Best Picture winner above all others. This is the film that was made for the way your mind works.
Parasite
You are drawn to films that operate on multiple levels simultaneously — that begin in one genre and quietly, brilliantly migrate into another. Bong Joon-ho’s Parasite is a film about class, desire, and the architecture of inequality that manages to be darkly funny, deeply suspenseful, and genuinely shocking across a single extraordinary running time. Your instinct is for cinema that hides its true intentions until the moment it’s ready to reveal them. Parasite is exactly that — a film that rewards close attention and punishes assumptions, right up to its devastating final image.
Everything Everywhere All at Once
You want it all — and this film gives you all of it. The Daniels’ Everything Everywhere All at Once is one of the most maximalist films ever made: action comedy, multiverse sci-fi, family drama, existential crisis, and a genuinely earned emotional core that sneaks up on you amid the chaos. You are someone who responds to ambition, who doesn’t want cinema to choose between being entertaining and being meaningful. This film refuses that choice entirely. It is overwhelming by design, and its overwhelming nature is precisely the point — because the feeling of being crushed by infinite possibility is exactly what it’s about.
Oppenheimer
You are drawn to cinema on a grand scale — films that understand history not as a backdrop but as a force, and that place their characters inside that force and watch what happens. Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer is a film about the terrifying gap between what we can do and what we should do, told with the full weight of one of the most consequential moments in human history behind it. You want your films to feel important without feeling self-important — to earn their ambition through sheer craft and the gravity of their subject. Oppenheimer does exactly that. It is enormous, complicated, and refuses easy comfort.
Birdman
You are drawn to films that foreground their own construction — that make the how of the filmmaking part of the what it’s about. Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Birdman, shot to appear as a single continuous take, is cinema examining itself through the cracked mirror of a fading actor’s ego. You respond to formal daring, to the feeling that a film is doing something that probably shouldn’t be possible. Michael Keaton’s performance and Emmanuel Lubezki’s restless camera create something genuinely unlike anything else — a film that is simultaneously about creativity, relevance, self-destruction, and the impossibility of ever truly knowing if your work means anything at all.
No Country for Old Men
You are drawn to cinema that trusts silence, that refuses to explain itself, and that treats dread as a form of meaning. The Coen Brothers’ No Country for Old Men is a film about the arrival of a new kind of evil — implacable, arbitrary, and utterly indifferent to the moral frameworks we use to make sense of the world. It is one of the most formally controlled films ever made, and its controlled restraint is what makes it so terrifying. You want your films to haunt you, not comfort you. You are not interested in resolution if resolution would be dishonest. No Country for Old Men is honest in a way that most cinema never dares to be.
While in prison, Edmond meets Abbé Faria (Jeremy Irons) and begins to see things differently. Faria’s influence on him has a much larger impact than simply helping him survive. Through education, a new perspective, and eventually, the knowledge of a hidden fortune, the process of changing Edmond from who he was before into someone much more deliberate has begun. When he returns to the world, he does so as the Count of Monte Cristo – rich, composed, and functioning with such precision that it makes his acts of revenge feel more like they were pre-planned rather than simply doing them because he was wronged.
What stands out most in this version is its restraint. Where other adaptations might lean into action or immediacy, this series builds tension through structure. Every interaction has a purpose; every move Edmond makes is part of a larger design. While it can be argued that the series ultimately represents an evolution of classic revenge stories, it does so through an entirely new lens — one that emphasizes the shift from a singular act of gratification to a longer-term process involving planning, manipulation, and execution of a revenge plot. As such, this form of entertainment has a slower buildup (though more satisfying), allowing the episodic quality to illustrate the psychological elements throughout the narrative.
Why This ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’ Adaptation Stands Out
Edmond and Mercédès dancing, their foreheads pressed together, in The Count of Monte CristoImage via PBS Masterpiece
Filmed across France, Malta, and Italy, the series makes strong use of its locations without letting them overpower the narrative. There’s a noticeable contrast between environments—the harsh, confined reality of the Château d’If versus the expansive, carefully curated world of Parisian high society. August keeps the presentation grounded, even as the story becomes more elaborate. The result is a series that feels cinematic without relying on spectacle alone, using setting and atmosphere to reinforce the emotional shifts.
In a world filled with adaptations of The Count of Monte Cristo, a new version must provide its own justification for existing, and this one justifies its existence through a commitment to telling the story’s arc over eight episodes. The extended runtime allows exploration not only of our protagonist’s arc but also of the ripple effects of his actions on everyone around him. His enemies are not simply villainous, nor is the result of his revenge restricted to his immediate victims. The series does not shy away from showing the repercussions of his actions on other characters.
Claflin’s performance as Edmond Dantes exemplifies this complexity. His characterization is executed in a manner that reflects both control and instability. The viewer is left with the impression that his transformation into the Count isn’t entirely clean, and that unresolved issues persist within Edmond. The supporting cast of characters reflects that same dynamic through overt villainous and more subtle, morally ambiguous behavior. Even when the characterizations are examples of traditional archetypes, there is rarely a feeling of disconnection or disassociation from the story.
This is a series that displays the appeal of its source material and doesn’t try to outpace it; it builds on it — carefully, deliberately, and with enough confidence to let the story speak for itself. For viewers willing to settle into its rhythm, the result is a revenge thriller that feels both familiar and unexpectedly absorbing. And clearly, enough people are finding it worth the time.