The Importance of Being Earnest

Films like this need to be more widely available. It was showing at one theater 45 miles from my house, but it was worth the drive to go and see it. The script was witty, and seemed to be fairly true to the Oscar Wilde play (at least a lot of the funniest lines were retained). What a great cast! Colin Firth and Rupert Evert were both wonderful as rogues. I loved the "fight" scene!! As did most of the others in the theater, as there was lots of laughter all around. Reese Witherspoon did a good job with her British accent, and she and Frances O'Connor were both a lot of fun to watch. Judi Dench was marvelous, as usual. I highly recommend this movie...it wasn't really deep or anything, just very funny!

It is a rare treat when you go to the movies expecting not very much but walking away with so much more! After reading the reviews here as well as some professional reviews, I almost decided to pass this one by and what a pity it would have been. Sounds like my unfamiliarity with Wilde's play and the previous version of this movie was to my advantage. After all I could view this movie based on its own merits without any other comparisons getting in the way. What a glorious summer treat and a wonderfully fun vehicle to discover Oscar Wilde's hilarious play and for that matter Wilde in general. Couldn't have asked for a better audience to watch this with here in the South. They were enthusiastic, obviously familiar with Wilde, remained for the credits, and clapped at the end. Can't remember the last time that happened,can you? Again, what a lovely surprise this movie was with absolutely marvelous chemistry between Mr. Firth and Mr. Everett, a sweet supporting cast, not to mention the beautiful production values. After seeing the movie, I almost immediately hunted for the text of the play and read it straight through.

I didn't like the new, added dialogue (Gwendolyn getting a tatoo, Lady Bracknell having been a musical hall dancer). However, the film is well-paced, has some very funny scenes (Algy and Jack's musical number, for example) and is well-acted. Frances O'Connor (Gwendolyn) and Rupert Everett (Algy) are wonderful, and Reese Witherspoon (Cecily) pulls off a passable English accent. Anna Massey and Edward Fox are superb as supporting characters Miss Prism and Lane the butler.

From reading these reviews, it appears that many of them find this to be the inferior film adaptation of Oscar Wilde's play. However, they appear to contain "Older-itis," which is to say the constant insistence that the older thing is always the better thing. This film is excellent adaptation of this play. Let me reemphasize that word there: "adaptation." Contrary to what many of the people in these reviews think, this film is not meant to be and does not have to be an exact performance of Oscar Wilde's script. The writers, cast, and director did an excellent job of taking "The Importance of Being Earnest" and making it their own creation without utterly disrespecting the source material like some film adaptations of plays sometimes do. Rather, I believe it IMPROVES Oscar Wilde's original vision by keeping what everyone loves about the original play and expanding on the lacking aspects of it. The cast of "The Importance of Being Earnest" is delightful; Colin Firth and Rupert Everett (Jack/Earnest and Algernon respectively) have fabulous chemistry and work off of each other to great effect. Reese Witherspoon plays her character marvelously, as do many of the other cast members. The line delivery is good, perfectly suited for the kind of dry humor and wry wit this play excels at. Speaking of the characters, this film does a fabulous job of expanding on characters that were disappointingly two-dimensional in Oscar Wilde's version. Cecily's daydreams are a lot of fun (and definitely not something that would have been possible in the original play) and many of the side characters that originally did nothing more than act as glorified signposts got their own little side plots and personalities.

It wouldn't be right of me to just carry on praising this movie without acknowledging certain downfalls this movie possesses. Perhaps greatest of all is the nonstop wit present. As funny and as clever as it all is, there is a point where starts to become tiresome and old, leaving one wishing for a bit of dialogue that doesn't contain some wry remark or snarky comment. This was a problem with the original play as well, but it becomes more apparent in this movie due to the lack of variety and visual interest in these scenes; most of them consist of people standing around and talking to each other, and when they all are saying the same things it can get a tad boring. Aside from this issue, as well as a few quirks that date this movie to the 2000s, there are no glaring problems that ruin this movie. It's not my first choice (I had to watch it for school), but I'm sure it would be of interest to a large host of viewers; those especially partial to Jane Austen might find the wit and satire of this movie appealing (plus Colin Firth was in "Pride & Prejudice" and now appears here). It's a decent film and is a perfectly adequate version of "The Importance of Being Earnest" in full color and good sound. If you're reading this review then you probably are trying to decide if you should watch this movie. If so, then I would say, "Yes, go ahead." Thus ends my review. Thank you.

I agree that the '52 version captures the essence, and I think the delight, of the play. Add to the cast mentioned in the previous review Joan Greenwood, and you have even more delights occasioned by the unique players of the "original." And Margaret Rutherford.

As long as I can see the former, I seldom prefer the latter. Some things should be left alone - definitely not re-invented.

Any success in remakes seems to come from sticking to the original, just "fresh" players. If the old stuff works, why mess with it? Do something different along similar lines, but rename it. Don't change it all about and call it the same thing.

When people like former versions (evidenced by initial AND enduring interest), they generally enjoy new (but TRUE) versions, if done half well.

Personally, I enjoy newer versions that stay with what I liked in the first place, but deplore "updates," "modernizations" and "reinventions" which basically depart from what formerly delighted. It's just annoying.

Do whatever you like, but don't call it by the same name. Create or refresh; don't despoil.

One person's opinion.