An Ideal Husband

It's quite a long time that i haven't seen such a perfect movie: a highly talented cast, a lavishing setting and a finely chiseled and powerful script.

Here, you got an all-star team: Driver as the eccentric but romantic young woman (unfortunately a falling star that hasn't shine for a long time), Moore as the Machiavellian lonely woman, Everett as the helpful friend, "Sir Robert" as the courageous man and ... Blanchet as the lovely wife whom characterization deeply moved me. In my tumultuous life, i was just wondering what's the special gift a woman can offer (me) to fall in love: beauty, wit, sensuality, wealth, power? Gertrude has nothing of that but her kindness, her attention, her devotion left me under the spell. She could become easily my ideal wife.

Then, the story happens in the Victorian time for which i have also a strong tie. I just really appreciate the British phlegm: you can say the more vile things but always with class. Here, you find cupidity, blackmail, lies, ambition but there's nor a fight nor a shout!

At last, the script is really well written: you don't know if this is a romance, a buddy movie, a thriller or a tragedy. I really like the morals questions the movie asks: can a bad action be redeemed? How can a true friend be helpful? Does love live with lies? The answers are not brought in a dull, academic patronizing way but playfully because all the characters seems to orbit around each other!

In conclusion, it's a sort of lighter and happier "Carlito's way" thus a great movie that is maybe really unknown.

One of good adaptations. For performances - Rupert Everett as the inspired choice for each "translation" of Oscar Wilde universe - but, in same measure, for a sort of freshness of a case of inspired use of the nuances of Wilde humor. A film about a man and his secrets and the prices of confidence. Seductive. And simple. And, maybe, lovely.

I saw "An Ideal Husband" at the Old Vic theater in London, and was surprised at the time how timely a 100 year old play could be.

When I saw the trailers, TV ads and posters for this version, it seemed like an entirely different story--will Rupert Everett get married off. That's certainly a thread in the movie, but in the marketing of this version, they made it appear as if it was the entire wardrobe.

I didn't see the film when it was in theaters because these ads, with their very modern music and fast cutting, made the film look like a joke.

But when it came out on video, I decided to try it, and am glad I did.

The film itself is excellent. Beautifully shot and paced, with an expert cast. Wilde's humor shines through, and the writer-director has done a wonderful job "opening" up the play into a film, without changing anything important. It's a masterful job of translating from stage to screen. It's really so crisply done, and very funny.

In years to come people will realise that this is a fine movie version of this play. And by then, hopefully, they will have either forgotten about the marketing campaign, or hopefully learned from it.

I recommend the film.

If I weren't so lazy, I would have checked the original play to see if my favorite line from the movie was in it:

Goring's father: I use nothing but my common sense. Goring: So my mother tells me.

Even if was concocted for the film, that line still contains the essence of Wilde and the essence of all modern British humor, for which, I should say, I'm a major sucker. While watching An Ideal Husband, I didn't object to the lack of suspense as long as Rupert Everett was working his way around those Wilde lines, which he does as well as anyone I've ever heard.

I used to think Stephen Fry was Wilde on earth, but Fry is something wonderfully different -- Everett is Wilde on earth, or at least the actor that Wilde should have had around to deliver those lines when he wrote them. I first saw Everett in The Madness of King George, for which he put on weight. Every review of that film mentioned this; I thought the attention excessive, but when I saw him lying shirtless in a sauna, I understood. The man is, shall we say, cut. I can only imagine the effect of that scene on straight women or gay men -- probably something akin to the effect Greta Scacchi's "I think we're alone now" smile at the end of The Coca-Cola Kid has on me.

An Ideal Husband is full of good performances, with one glaring exception: the usually great Julianne Moore. Her scenes are curiously leaden, and Parker -- whose fault this may be -- has the camera linger over her as though the exposure will convince us how evil she is. The one exception is her scene with Everett, which has a real "Will he sleep with the enemy?" tension. It may be that Moore was just outclassed by the Brits, who are born to this stuff.

Cate Blanchett, whom I've seen in three movies, two of which were British period pieces, continues to amaze me with her range.

The unsung hero of the movie is Jeremy Northam, who takes a thankless role -- the man in the play who isn't the Oscar Wilde figure -- and makes it emotionally compelling. He is responsible for the play's only real suspense and emotion, since the rest is word games, more or less.

All of which leads me to blame the production's shortcomings on its writer/director, Oliver Parker. He seems to have squandered an outstanding cast. The play's final scene is played as a series of French scenes -- a film term for a series of different scenes in the same location -- and this kills any momentum that scene might have had.

Three out of four stars, I say, which makes it better than 90% of the movies out there.

One of the principal sources of humour in Wilde's plays comes from pricking at the inflated egos, pious humbug and ignorance of the upper classes. There is always a Wildean character to reverse a clicheed expression or invert conventional 'wisdom.' Unfortunately, by stripping most of his characters of their stiff formality and rigid social code, the writer and director have removed the butt of the joke and Wilde's comments on absurdity are left without a punchline. The attempt to work in anachronistic social relevance leaves us with a set of feeble characters who fall in love with each other for no obvious reason. Because Wilde's language has been sterilised the actors have to use mugging to express the personalities Wilde created. Result, a charmless and dated 'political' drama as credible as a Jeffery Archer novel. Gertrude is insecure and fretful where she should be smug and priggish- Mabel is arch where she should be caustic- Poor Oscar - gets no 'Oscar'!