O Retrato de Dorian Gray

'Dorian Gray', directed by Oliver Parker, is definitely a more graphic adaptation of the spirit of the book written by Oscar Wilde. Throughout, I wondered how Wilde would react to the film, were he still with us. On one hand, I believe he would have appreciated the touch of horror; I certainly felt it in his writing. He was quoted from another of his books (Lady Windermere's Fan) "In this world there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants, and the other is getting it." In this movie, the latter was certainly true for poor Dorian.

On the other hand, the book 'Picture of Dorian Gray' seemed fairly minimalist in affect (as was Barnes' interpretation of the character) so, would Mr. Wilde be a smidge put off by all the melodrama and overt sexual content? Who knows? He used a lot of symbolism and subtle innuendo in his writing, but the politics of the time could account for some of what he didn't literally spell out, I suppose. After all, he was imprisoned for his lifestyle and beliefs, for a time.

Wilde lived a deep and complicated life. His personality and character were revealed through his writing and oh, what I would have given to be on his list of friends. "A good friend will stab you in the front." -- Oscar Wilde

Alas, the book, in this case, pleased my pitiful imagination more than the movie. While the acting was superb, I had a difficult time reconciling myself with what I felt was an over-reach on the tenor of this great story. You know, the old 'less is more' adage.

My disclaimer to the literary elite: I am simply an appreciator of art, not a professional, so take my opinion with a grain of whatever you prefer.

"I don't say we all ought to misbehave, but we all ought to look as if we could." -- Oscar Wilde

The Picture of Dorian Gray, as penned by the Irish wit Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900), is a tale of high-brow debauchery and limitless pleasures of body and soul and the corruption, by one Lord Henry Wotton, of the young, handsome and soon to be narcissistic 19th century rock 'n roll hell-raiser Dorian Gray.

Ealing Studios have translated Wilde's controversial novel into a celluloid den of iniquity that somehow comes across as rather shallow. Like the characters seen here too; it seems that as a work of symbolic gesture of how the upper classes conduct their sordid lifestyle of hypocrisy, deceit and lust it lacks any deep and thoughtful intrigue that any good 19th century Gothic horror story should be.

To fully understand the ethics of a Victorian London that Oscar Wilde has so wonderfully reflected with his novel here, we see, too, with this latest interpretation using, as Wilde may have done, the picture purely as a metaphorical means. Yes, we see the selling of souls here and the lamb to the slaughter and the hedonistic teachings of Lord Wotton, but toward the end, the whole sordid affair becomes predictable.

Penned with an undercurrent of realism and too fantasy of the love of sin. It's a dark, dirty, dingy setting of a self-indulgent Victorian London that we are lead to believe is prim and proper on the surface but lurking just below this weak, temperate society lies pure greed, greed for experience, experience that will transcend the mind, body and soul to the wondrous dealings of what life has to offer. For, as always, a price, a price both Oscar Wilde and Dorian Gray would pay the highest sacrifice.

It is with a taint of sorrow that this latest performance too has paid a price too high, sensationalism over content, ironies aside, the film seems too concerned to show the sordid details of this lifestyle and its inhabitants'. It lingers on too far in the bedrooms of London and strays too far from the mental anguish that may have been. We see the trouble mind of our young (looking) man but we see not enough of his fears, regrets, sorrows and repentance, which are cast aside and squandered. Welcome to the 21st century Mr. Wilde.

By the time the chimes of time are echoing in the distance we have Dorian fading into the far reaches of the eternal abyss of the afterlife. With all the time in the world we are still wanting more to feed our palates, it's all to aesthetically pleasing, but at the same time oh so unrewarding, a taster we are given but the full flavour we are, regrettably, spared.

This too may have its target audience and in so having picked its target out it may have trouble standing the test of time, due to its lack of wit, lack of diversity and a lack of daring and commitment of its original source. It is a sad loss that such a literary work of historical meaning and wealth should have been robbed of its qualities.

I've been puzzled by the negative reviews i've seen for this as i really enjoyed it. It looks superb, with some excellent atmospheric Victorian locations. Ben Barnes is perfect as Dorian, good looking but not bland & still sympathetic throughout the film. The character of Emily which has been invented for the film works very well, and Colin Firth is magnificent in his pivotal role. Dorians gradual deprivation is well shown without heading off into exploitation and he is given real depth. His tragedy is very obvious.I must admit to not having read the original book as yet, but I do intend to now. I really enjoyed it but for its full benefit I recommend seeing it at the cinema.

Very good adaption with a nicely chosen cast with some fresh and familiar faces. Thought provoking about pleasure vs happiness like the themes of the namesake book it's based on. The main character's looks is important to the film and the actor delivers his change from innocence to experience to corruption pretty well.

A bit too long in the last arc. Not entirely sure about the final scene or it's contribution to the film-so the man responsible for corrupting Dorian revenges on him for bedding his daughter. Does he do any self reflection at all for his own suggestions and encouragement that led Dorian down this path? It seems to me like the film is missing this angle of development. This is an example of a missing layer of thematic complexity that prevents me from giving a higher score.

I don't recall the book that much but there might be a few innovations in this film such as the same sex scenes (since the author Oscar Wilde I believe was homosexual) and the motivation of Dorian to change and to compel him to his final act.

When I first heard about the Picture of Dorian Gray becoming a movie I was excited and overjoyed. I thought with this new technology the 21st century has, The Picture of Dorian Gray will receive the justice it deserves. However, I was very wrong. I just finished watching the movie and I felt compelled to write a review about it.The movie was horrible. A grand disappointment which had such potential to be great. Firstly, the movie should have claimed to be inspired by the novel not based on it. I say this because the movie was very different from the novel. All of Oscar Wilde's wit and beauty which truly made the novel classic was ruined and overshadowed by the changes the movie made. I understand that there can be biased when reading a novel before seeing the movie adaption, but this movie adaption was appalling. I wont give anything away but the movie seriously ruined Oscar Wilde's vision and above all his memorable characters. Once the movie changed aspects in the novel the whole thing became horrible. Trust me, you'll agree if you've read the novel first.

Ben Barnes is simply gorgeous but he hardly brought any character development. I never felt pity for him throughout the movie compared to the novel. The novel brought the characters to life and described the reality of London life. The movie made the classic novel very shallow. I must add that as much as I love Colin Firth he was not convincing as Lord Henry. The character was someone who was vindictive and unchanging. He drained Dorian and was never affected by the consequences of his own evil; Colin Firth failed at reincarnating the abhorred character. Whats worse is that the whole ending is changed, which ruins the whole message of the novel. In the end, Oscar Wilde's masterpiece remains legendary in its pages as opposed to its film adaption. Seriously, I think my rate of 4 is being to generous.