this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
87 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43948 readers
771 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I really loved The Three Musketeers and The Count of Monte Cristo. I was surprised at how well they held up over time.
Is the three musketeers really on par with the count? I've been meaning to read it for months but I always got the sense it would be disappointing.
Maybe unpopular opinion here, but I just read The Three Musketeers, and it's not even close to The Count of Monte Cristo.
The characters wildly change in tone and basic morals, the heroes are dirtbags, and the plot wanders.
I still enjoyed it, but it just wasn't the same.
I think so. It's top-tier adventure storytelling. The sequels are also great.
The sequels are worth it.
I only read the Count, and I loved it
No. The Count of Monte Cristo is a much better and deeper novel, but The Three Musketeers is much lighter and more fun. They're both good reads for different reasons.