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!
Add a Review
-
ArizWldcat14 June 2002
-
spongemel-squareskirt10 November 2005From its opening night on February 14th in 1895, Oscar Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest has continuously attracted praise from audiences and critics alike, enduring time as one of the most hailed comedies in theatre. In spite of his film-making repertoire being relatively small, Oliver Parker (Othello, An Ideal Husband) does justice to Oscar Wilde's play with a lush and vivacious film adaptation to the nonsensical farce; more than a century later in 2002, it springs to life the hilarious satire of nineteenth century English society. This is due to the nonsensical plot and dialogue, the perfect casting and the settings and music of the film, which allow its audiences to experience the sheer humour of The Importance of Being Earnest. Set in late nineteenth century England, the story follows the amusing antics of two young gentlemen Jack (Firth) and Algy (Everett) as they both adopt the pseudonym of Jack's imaginary and wicked brother 'Ernest' in order to pursue on-the-sly activities. Hilarity ensues when both their respective love interests Gwendolen (O'Connor) and Cecily (Witherspoon) fall in love with the recently deceased "What a lesson for him! I trust he will profit by it!" and non-existent 'Ernest', resulting in a tangle of mistaken identities and deception. However, as the film progresses, we learn that they have been more 'Earnest' than they previously envisaged.
In addition, the superlative cast capture the very essence of Wilde's characters, and manifest the wit and wordplay in each line with both class and comedy. Despite being less subtle as the ludicrously earnest Firth, Everett sparkles as the eccentric and sharp Algernon Moncrieff, confidently delivering his character with fluency and exuberant humour. Dench plays the pompous Lady Bracknell with authority and ease; yet, her utter earnestness in candid comments and social criticism is truly entertaining: "I (do not) in any way approve of the modern sympathy with invalids. I consider it morbid." The supporting cast are also outstanding, performing the many facets of their respective characters with comic flawlessness.
Oliver Parker creates lush and over-elaborate settings and music that effectively enhance the exaggerated nature of the film. From the intricate ornaments and overstated decorations in Lady Bracknell's home to the luscious grass of Jack's Hertfordshire Manor House's rolling hills, the sceneries augment the flamboyance in all aspects of the film; this also allows the audience to experience the overstated character of the bourgeois world of The Importance of Being Earnest, which, despite Oscar Wilde's intentions, could not be expressed as clearly on stage. Moreover, the absurdity and farce of the situations is furthered by the music of the film. For example, Jack and Algy perform a bumbling and ridiculous rendition of Oscar Wilde's poem Lady Come Down in order to entreat their lovers to come down and forgive them for their deception; ultimately, it induces the audience to laugh at their circumstances.
The dialogue of the film consists largely of shameless jokes, ranging from criticism of permanent invalids to arranged marriages to muffins, all of which inject the funniness of The Importance of Being Earnest. With the exception of the substantial issue of the latter (which takes up several pages), social satire constitutes a major part of the film that leaves nothing sacred such as modern education, which, in Lady Bracknell's opinion, "is radically unsound it would prove a serious danger to the upper classes (and) lead to violence". This is in spite of Lady Bracknell's hilariously hypocritical line: "Never speak disrespectfully of Society, Algernon. Only people who can't get into it do that." However, in addition to long discussions regarding muffins and teacakes, Oscar Wilde adds zest with epigrams and one-liners, witty statements that are more than often satirical: "You don't seem to realise, in married life three is company and two is none." The amusing and mocking epigrams, wordplay and discussions both provide a major source of the humour of the film and drive the plot to keep it fresh and appealing.
As a result of the entertaining actors that brings the dialogue and story of the film to life, as well as the physical and aural aspects in its surroundings and music, The Importance of Being Earnest is a brilliant piece of entertainment. It has unquestionably aroused laughter in its audiences, and will certainly continue to in the future. -
mweston15 October 2002This is the story of two men in England in the late 1800's. Algernon Moncrieff (Rupert Everett) lives primarily in the city, while his good friend Jack Worthing (Colin Firth) lives primarily in the country. Jack calls himself Earnest when he is in the city, so Algernon calls him that. Jack also uses the name Earnest to refer to an imaginary brother who lives in the city and always needs assistance, giving him an excuse to go to the city. Similarly, Algernon is always leaving the city to attend to an imaginary friend named Bunbury.
Jack is in love with Gwendolen Fairfax (Frances O'Connor from "Artificial Intelligence: AI"), who lives in the city and therefore knows him as Earnest. Gwendolen's mother is Lady Bracknell (Judi Dench), who is also Algernon's aunt. And the final main character is Cecily Cardew (Reese Witherspoon), who is Jack's ward, and who Algernon introduces himself to as Earnest. This of course makes sense to Cecily because she knows of Jack's brother (but obviously not that he is imaginary).
There is more to the story, but I don't want to give away too much, not that the story is really the important thing anyway. This is a comedy and not a serious period drama, and what makes it work is the dialog, which is based on the play of the same name by Oscar Wilde and adapted for the screen by the film's director, Oliver Parker. I enjoyed it more than I expected to, but I have not read the play or seen any other adaptations. My wife, who has, was disappointed, because apparently too little of Wilde's words remain in the finished product.
The acting talent is first rate, including, in addition to those mentioned above, Tom Wilkinson from "In the Bedroom." They do very well with the material, but it's so light you don't think about the skill required.
The bottom line is that this film is a good choice if you are looking for something frothy and entertaining, yet respectable, and you keep your expectations fairly low.
Seen on 7/15/2002. -
windspray6 July 2002It 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.
-
MsMovie24 October 2003... but thank God he was in it, he was the ONLY good thing about it (well, Reese Witherspoon did a good accent, so that was good too).
This is a classic, brilliant Oscar Wilde play and it was totally boring, very unfunny and very stilted. They all seemed like actors pretending they were living in the era, in amongst over the top sets and oodles of extras.
I can't say I laughed out loud at all, so the hilarity I have always experienced on seeing this in the theatre was totally missing.
The locations were lovely, but the script was either a bad adaptation or else it was just so badly directed that it just couldn't ever work.
Thank God Colin Firth rose above the mediocrity of this awful movie, and Reese Witherspoon and he, will both remained unscathed by this unwatchable remake.
And by the way, Judi Dench was at her very worst in this movie, even she didn't seem to believe what she was doing!
I would recommend anyone to wait until this movie comes free to TV, that way you can sleep through it and not be miffed you paid to see it! -
RJBose18 November 2002A lot of Hollywood (and English) starpower was brought to bear on this adaptation of Oscar Wilde's well-known drawing room comedy "The Importance of Being Earnest" but simply assembling a group of big names (the better to sell tickets with)and loosely attaching them to a mediocre adaptation of a brilliantly written play (written for the stage, long ago) does nothing for the original story, or the viewer's entertainment. Colin Firth (known to us as the "good" suitor from "Bridgit Jones' Diary)plays his usual English uppercrust role. Rupert Everet also simply reprises his take on an upperclass layabout who is somehow found to be charming, and Dame Judy sleepwalks through her customary iteration of pretentious English nobility. Reese Witherspoon, apparently inserted into the mix to attract American viewers after her success and resultant fame in "Legally Blonde" wanders hopelessly about the set evidently enjoying playing dress-up but failing to hold a consistent English accent from one line to the next. What saves the exercise from being completely dreadful is the original cleverness and wit of the original play, which even this leaden mess cannot completely obscure. In plays of this type, mistaken identities, double entendres and wild melodramatic plot twists amused audiences of a simpler time. The play itself is still brilliant, but transposed to the movie screen largely lacks the fast-paced dialogue and delivery on which it so depends. The elaborate manor house settings and period costumes are pretty to look at, but the film rings hollow, (when you can actually hear what's being said) and it drags unnecessarily. Then again, the whole thing was unnecessary, but probably sold enough tickets, and I suppose to them that's what's really the most important thing of all.
-
MidniteRambler11 June 2004Wealthy London bachelor Jack Worthing falls for Gwendolen, cousin of London socialite Algy, who has in turn fallen for Jack's ward, Cecily. Amongst other barriers to both relationships is the determination of both ladies to marry men called Ernest, leading Algy and Jack to pretend that Ernest is, indeed, their given name. Another stumbling block is the ubiquitous Lady Bracknell, Algy's aunt and Gwendolen's mother, who refuses to accept Jack as a suitor for her daughter because he was a foundling, discovered as a baby in a handbag at Victoria Station. Playwright Oscar Wilde put into Lady Bracknell's mouth some of the most delicious comments in stage history: "To be born, or at any rate bred, in a handbag, whether it had handles or not, seems to me to display a contempt for the ordinary decencies of family life that reminds one of the worst excesses of the French Revolution".
The story follows the ups and downs and deceits of the two men whilst they pursue Gwendolen and Cecily, dogged by Algy's creditors and Lady Bracknell, whose opposition to Jack's origins proves insurmountable. On the way we learn of Jack's brother who does not exist yet manages to die in a Paris boarding house, and Algy's invalid friend Bunbury who also never drew breath yet nevertheless explodes on the advice of his physician. The situation remains unresolved until the final scene, when all the protagonists have collided at Jack's country estate.
This interpretation of Oscar Wilde's play may not suit purists. Oliver Parker takes a few liberties with the original, adding a couple of off-the-wall touches such as Gwendolen having "Ernest" tattooed on her rear end. None of this detracts from the film precisely because this is a film and not a filmed play and as a stand-alone movie this is highly enjoyable fare and remains graced by Wilde's eternal and inimitable wit.
The cast, too, is outstanding. Reese Witherspoon as Cecily mastered an English accent and, along with Colin Firth as Jack, Frances O'Connor as Gwendolen and Judi Dench as Lady Bracknell (Aunt Augusta), is first-rate; the film also boasts Edward Fox, Tom Wilkinson and Anna Massey in supporting roles. Lastly, no-one plays Wilde's nihilistic, aristocratic and insouciant wasters quite like Rupert Everett, who was designed for such parts.
Oscar Wilde's play is timeless and priceless and his wit dominates the proceedings; matched to a cast with the acting talent of this troupe, it does not fail. Wilde and English period drawing room comedies are an acquired taste and, for those unsure of their nature, can be distinguished by the conspicuous absence of gunfire, vulgar Anglo-Saxonisms, explosions, wizards, references to def-con 2, giants, breasts, giant breasts and Steven Seagal: if any of these is your cup of tea, look elsewhere. If, on the other hand, you want to watch a team of gifted actors delivering with great aplomb some of the smartest dialogue in English literary history, The Importance of Being Earnest is not a bad way to spend an hour or two.
"Is Miss Cardew at all connected with any of the larger railway stations in London? I only ask because until yesterday I had no idea that there were any families or persons whose origin was a terminus." -
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. -
dmombit25 June 2002As a huge fan of the play, I didn't expect to see a theatre production. Get real! A movie calls for a much more full-bodied vino and that's what the movie-goer gets with this film.
The production values were excellent, the costuming superb, and the actors brilliantly cast. Including Reese Witherspoon who more than held her own in the august British cast.
Judi Dench was quintessentially "denchian" as was the outrageous Rupert Everett. Always a delight to behold on the beeg screen. The actress portraying "Gwendolyn" was saucy and sexy and fun. But, saving the best for last, I was most impressed with Colin Firth's range. Generally cast as the tall, dark, brooding and Byronic hero, it was fun to see him showing real visions of his acting abilities. His facial expressions were a visual treat and we chuckled in our theater seats during the closing credits as the "Gwendolyn" tattoo was being applied to "Jack's" derriere. The reactions he showed us had a very real ring to them.
Yep! This Colin Firth fan is having a hard time to clinging to the duo "Mr Darcy's" of "Pride and Prejudice" and "Bridget Jones' Diary" as her fav roles now that she's seen him in "Earnest."
Can't wait for it to go to video (DVD-o) to add it to the burgeoning collection of his work.
It was funny, irreverent, slightly modern, and an enjoyable Sunday afternoon treat. -
=G=13 November 2002Oliver Parker's "The Importance of Being Earnest" seems only worthy to the extent that it embodies the epigrammatic genius of Wilde the playwright. To the extent that it embodies Parker's own ideas and translation to film, it is all downhill. The result is a reasonably enjoyable watch which is missing something - perhaps a combination of things such as tempo and timing, a touch of class, a sense of authenticity, etc. The film does make annoying excursions into the surreal, the music is overstated, and the casting questionable. Regardless, the film is worth a look by Wilde enthusiasts and others interested in Brit period flicks. All others should pass on this one. (B-)
-
DennisLittrell21 April 2003This is an inventive and artful production of Oscar Wilde's play, but I can confidently say that were Oscar Wilde alive today, he would be appalled at the misuse to which his play has been put. Indeed I think I feel the ground rumbling as he rolls over in his grave, and yes he is actually spinning in anguish.
Oliver Parker, who directed and wrote the screen adaptation, simply misinterpreted the play. He focused on the "dashing young bachelors" when the real focus of the play is Lady Bracknell, the absurd and beautifully ironic representation of the Victorian mind who was then and has been for over a hundred years Wilde's singular creation and one of the great characters of English literature. She is supposed to steal every scene she is in and we are to double take everyone of her speeches as we feel that she is simultaneous absurd and exactly right. Instead Judi Dench's Lady Bracknell (and I don't blame Dench who is a fine actress) is harsh and stern and literal to the point of being a controlling matriarch when what Wilde had in mind was somebody who was both pompous and almost idiotic yet capable of a penetrating and cynical wisdom (so like the author's). Compared to Dane Edith Evans's brilliant performance in the celebrated cinematic production from 1952, Dench's Lady Bracknell is positively one-dimensional.
The point of Wilde's play was to simultaneously delight and satirize the Victorian audience who came to watch the play. This is the genius of the play: the play-goer might view all of the values of bourgeois society upheld while at the same time they are being made fun of. Not an easy trick, but that is why The Importance of Being Earnest is considered one of the greatest plays ever written. This attempt turn it into a light entertainment for today's youthful audiences fails because this play is not a romantic comedy. It is more precisely a satire of a romantic comedy. Its point and Wilde's intent was to make fun of Victorian notions of romance and marrying well and to expose the mercantile nature of that society. It is probably impossible to "translate" the play for the contemporary film viewer since a satire of today's audiences and today's society would require an entirely different set of rapiers.
Parker's additions to the play only amounted to distractions that diluted the essence of the play's incomparable wit. Most of Wilde's witticisms were lost in the glare of Parker's busy work. Recalling Lady Bracknell as a dance hall girl in her youth who became pregnant before being wed was ridiculous and not only added nothing, but misinterpreted her character. Lady Bracknell is not a hypocrite with a compromised past. She is everything she pretends to be and that is the joke. Showing Algernon actually running through the streets to escape creditors or being threatened with debtor's prison was silly and again missed the point. Algy was "hard up" true and in need of "ready money" but his bills would be paid. Gwendolyn in goggles and cap driving a motor car also added nothing and seemed to place the play some years after the fact.
The big mistake movie directors often make when making a movie from a stage play is to feel compelled to get the play off the stage and out into the streets and countryside. Almost always these attempts are simply distractions. Some of the greatest adaptations--Elia Kazan's A Streetcar Named Desire from 1951 comes immediately to mind--played it straight and didn't try anything fancy. Here Parker seems obsessed with "dressing up" the play. What he does is obscure it.
On the positive side the costumes were beautiful and Anna Massy was an indelible Miss Prism. Reese Witherspoon at least looked the part of Cecily and she obviously worked hard. Rupert Evertt had some moments in the beginning that resembled Wilde's Algernon, but he was not able to sustain the impersonation.
My recommendation is that you not bother with this production and instead get the 1952 film starring, in addition to Edith Evans, Michael Redgrave and Margaret Rutherford. It is essentially true to the play as Wilde wrote it, and is a pure delight.
(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!) -
loofahcat4 July 2002I loved this movie!! I had read the play before seeing it and enjoyed the play but I absolutely LOVED the movie. I enjoyed the adding of the fantasy scenes and the tattoo. I thought Colin Firth was wonderful as Jack/Ernest and I enjoyed how he, as usual, says so much with his facial expressions and doesn't even need to speak a word for the audience to understand the way he is feeling or what he is desirous of saying. And his singing was pretty good too! :) I also thought Judi Dench was excellent as Lady Bracknel in her desire to make sure her daughter made a proper match. Frances O'Connor, Reese Witherspoon and Rupert Everett all were also very good. However the man that kept my main attention was the very handsome, very talented actor, COLIN FIRTH!
-
rmax30482321 July 2013Nicely executed comedy of mixed-up names and fake identities leading to an improbable happy ending.
It's interesting to compare this with the 1953 version that starred Michael Redgrave and Richard Wattis. They're both successful but I think the modern version slightly edges the earlier version out, although it's difficult to beat that 1953 cast -- Joan Greenwood, Dorothy Tutin, Edith Evans, Miles Malleson.
The earlier version has a lighter and less subtle approach. Everyone involved seemed to know this was a comedy and it's all very gay and casual.
There's more subtlety here, especially from Colin Firth because he plays it as if he were an ordinary, richly embarrassed man. The guy is superb. Anna Massey is great too as the governess. It's making me feel ancient to remember that she was such a goofy-looking but sexy dish in Hitchcock's "Frenzy." If you must have a replacement for Margaret Rutherford as Miss Prism, Massey will do. As the two girls involved, Reese Witherspoon is very Aryan and Frances O'Connor is canny.
Judi Dench is Lady Bracknell and she has some of the funniest of Wilde's more extravagant lines. When a man is on his knees, about to propose to a girl, she orders him to "remove yourself from that semi-recumbent position; it's most indecorous." Even Edward Fox, in the small part of Firth's butler, is exemplary, muttering in his usual obsequious tone as he serves the tea about his overdue wages.
The director departs from the earlier format by not shooting it as a staged play. Ladies gallop on horses, men grapple over a bunch of bluebells, the source music is close to ragtime, there are a couple of whimsical fantasies shown that are more colorful than engaging.
But -- well, how can you beat those florid expressions? A doorbell rings and someone sourly observes, "It must be a relative. Only relatives and predators would ring in such a Wagnerian manner." -
trendell-129 May 2002Years ago I read a satirical piece by Fran Lebowitz in which she formulated the ultimate put-down for a young man whose intelligence, or lack of same, had inspired her displeasure. He was, she said, the sort of person whose lips moved while he watched television. It's a wicked slight, but I confess to thinking that Oliver Parker might have had that very fellow in mind when he butchered Oscar Wilde's brilliant play to make this awful film.
And it's really too bad, because the portents for the production were - on the surface at least - very good. You start with a great play by a great writer, who was also a great humorist. It's probable that only Shakespeare penned more quotable lines than Oscar Wilde did. And even Shakespeare probably did not write so many that were funny. The cast choices also looked good: Colin Firth and Rupert Everett as the male leads, the two false "Ernests"; the formidable Judi Dench as the even more formidable Lady Bracknell; Frances O'Connor as Gwendolen Fairfax; and Reese Witherspoon as Cecily Cardew - Witherspoon doing a creditable "Gwyneth Paltrow" turn with an English accent.
A bankable American star appears to be a standard requirement these days when presenting an essentially British production to viewers on this side of the Pond. Otherwise, so the illogic apparently goes, few people "over here" would turn up to see it. Of course, James Ivory did very well a decade ago with superb films like "Howard's End", and with nary an American star in sight. One supposes that Parker can be forgiven for overlooking that fact: after all, he was preoccupied with revving up the editorial chainsaw to dismember Wilde's text.
The problem with Parker's approach to the play is that Wilde wrote specifically for the theatre. Language was his tool, and few writers have used language half so brilliantly. "The Importance Of Being Earnest" is a drawing-room comedy, one of the best in the repertoire, a very funny, extremely literate play about manners, attitudes and conventions in Victorian England. It's a clever and tightly integrated work, a small masterpiece, where dialogue begets more dialogue, wry observations and witticisms proliferate, all of them ultimately spun into a seamless satirical whole.
That's not to say that Wilde can't be made into a "motion" picture. Three years ago, Parker did a creditable, if slightly sappy job on "An Ideal Husband". Perhaps buoyed by that modest success, he felt he could take Wilde - through "The Importance Of Being Earnest" - to a new level. And he has. Unfortunately, the place he has taken it is so far below theatrical sea-level that oxygen is required for basic survival. In hacking the text to ribbons - it seems that almost half of the dialogue has been discarded - he has so compromised the context of the piece that the end result is almost incomprehensible. Think of it as the ultimate dumbing-down of Oscar Wilde.
A short list of items in the film that are astonishingly un-funny. Gwendolen Fairfax having "Ernest" tattooed on her ass in a disreputable London district. Algernon Moncrieff arriving at Jack Worthing's country estate in a hot-air balloon. Algernon leaping in and out of carriages, and climbing through windows, and scurrying down alleyways to avoid his herds of creditors. Algernon spitting food all over himself when he meets Jack at the country house. Algernon and Jack in a wrestling match over a plate of muffins. Jack having Gwendolen's name tattooed on his ass as the credits roll by at the end of the film.
Urgent memo to Oliver Parker: Oscar Wilde is not about slapstick.
It was suggested in an earlier comment on IMDB that if you've never seen the play, as written, you might find Parker's film amusing; but if you have seen the play, you probably won't. That's good advice. Happily, the original 1952 film is available on VHS, and will soon be available on DVD. It was directed by Anthony Asquith. Wisely, Asquith kept his film solidly within the theatre's embrace, even starting the piece with a curtain rising before an invisible audience. And he had an English cast that was to die for - Michael Redgrave, Michael Denison, Joan Geeenwood, Dorothy Tutin, Margaret Rutherford, Miles Malleson. Asquith produced a brilliant film, a triumph of intelligence, style and taste, everything that Wilde and his admirers could have wished it to be - and everything that Parker's film is not.
A final note. Shortly after the film was released, Colin Firth gave an interview that was published in The Globe & Mail, a major Canadian newspaper out of Toronto. In the interview, Firth lamented that he lived in a society - England - that pretended to be literate, but in fact was not. The irony implicit in his comment is almost too delicious. I'm certain that Oscar Wilde would have loved it. -
unclepete24 June 2003There do seem to be some scathing reviews here, but I have to say that I loved it!
I first started by reading the play, then watching the 1952 version, and then this latest reworking. The cast were absolutely stellar, though I'd go along with the criticism that they were just a little too deadpan in places. The sheer quantity of wit and wordplay in this script make it difficult to keep up, and it's often only in a reading that you realise that just about every other line is a hilarious gag.
I really can't understand an earlier criticism that a viewer couldn't make out any of the dialogue. I though it was wonderfully recorded with crystal clear diction throughout, but maybe that's an international difference. I'm lucky to make out about one third of anything the children say in 'To Kill a Mockingbird'.
Anyway - it was well filmed, great locations, and wonderful wit delivered by beautiful people. I loved it. -
I can't quibble with those who say this departs from the original material in some respects, because I never saw the original. All I know is I watched it tonight for the first time and found it completely charming, easy to watch, easy to enjoy and easy to love.
RUPERT EVERETT was the standout for me, excellent flair for light tongue-in-cheek comedy and COLIN FIRTH and REESE WITHERSPOON came in second with delightful performances. In fact, I can't find any fault with any of the cast members. It was all done exactly in the manner this kind of material calls for--and on top of that, the costumes, settings, photography, music--everything was pitch perfect.
Or it could be that I was just in the mood to enjoy some light diversion after all the barrage of news on the cable channels and needed some relief from "real life" for awhile.
At any rate, enjoyed the dialog between the two women, the two brothers, and, of course, with JUDI DENCH giving an imposing performance as the starch-collared Aunt Agatha who sees everything through the prism of class distinction.
Very enjoyable film--sorry if Oscar Wilde purists couldn't get past a few subtle changes. Some very funny lines recited so earnestly with straight faces that it reminded me what a witty man Oscar Wilde must have been. -
taikman2 September 2002Lady Bracknell: 'Are your parents living?'
Jack Worthing: 'I have lost both my parents.'
Lady Bracknell: 'To lose one parent, Mr. Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.'
Oscar Wilde was possibly the wittiest man who ever opened his mouth. If you haven't read his play, on which this movie is based, then I totally recommend it. It's the funniest thing I've ever read, and that includes Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett.
The plot revolves around two wealthy and decadent men in London around the turn of the century. Both lead secret lives: Jack Worthing pretends to be his wild brother Earnest when in the city, so that he can live the good life and keep his good reputation, while Algernon Moncrieff has a conveniently sick friend called Bunbury, whom he 'visits' when he wants to escape into the country. Jack is in love with Algy's cousin Gwendolyn, but the marriage is opposed by her battleship of a mother, Lady Bracknell. Jack unfortunately was found in a bag left at a railway station, and Lady Bracknell refuses to establish an alliance with a man whose family heritage is a cloakroom. Things really begin to get complicated when Algy decides to woo Jack's ward Cecily, by pretending to be the infamous Earnest.
Clever as it is, the plot is no more than the coathanger on which the
wordplay and satire of social values are hung. The movie isn't the classic the play is, but it does do Wilde's brilliant script justice. Some great lines are cut out, but there are some good bits that are new, such as the scenes involving bills at The Savoy restaurant, which, unlike some film adaptions of famous literature, are seamlessly worked into the original story. The quality cast, including Colin Firth, Reese Witherspoon and Judi Dench, does a fine job of being seriously silly, though there were moments when I thought things got a little too serious. 'The Importance of Being Earnest' is a bit like a Monty Python movie in that way: the more absurd it is the better. The movie's best scene, involving muffins and despair, is it's silliest.
'Earnest' is all about frothy wit and rich British people with nothing better to do than stand around in gorgeous rooms making ridiculous statements. It has no more substance than a meringe, but it is just as fun to taste.
7/10 -
ThomasColquith5 December 2021"The Importance of Being Earnest" is a very good movie, so it is a shame that it isn't better known and more often screened or aired. It is of course based on the Oscar Wilde play of the same name so the script is witty and has his inimitable irreverent charm. A very well done production with a great cast and great acting. I would recommend. I rate it a 9/10. I deducted a point for the two tattoo jokes which I felt didn't fit.
-
SnoopyStyle5 December 2015It's late 19th century London. Algy Moncrieff (Rupert Everett) is a broke hard partying womanizer. His friend Ernest Worthing (Colin Firth) arrives in town to propose to Algy's cousin Gwendolen Fairfax (Frances O'Connor). He discovers that Ernest's name is really Jack. Jack's ward in the country, heiress Cecily Cardew (Reese Witherspoon), thinks that 'uncle' Jack goes to the city to take care of his younger brother Ernest. Algy has also invented an invalid named Bunbury in the country to escape any obligations. Gwendolen is eager to marry somebody named Ernest but her mother Lady Bracknell (Judi Dench) rejects him for being adopted and requires him to find at least one parent. Algy overhears Jack's country location and goes there pretending to be Ernest. The romantic Cecily is taken with the newly arrived cad cousin Ernest. Jack returns pretending that Ernest is dead and hilarity ensues. Then Gwendolen runs away to be with her Ernest which is quickly confused with Cecily's Ernest.
From Oscar Wilde's 1895 play, this still retains some of its sense of a fun romp. The cast led by Everett and Firth is engaging and full of pep. Maybe there is a need to adapt the material more to modern sensibilities. It could improve by getting everyone to the country mansion faster and letting the confused misunderstandings stew a bit more. This is a movie going for light fluffy fun and achieves it for the most part. -
Colkitto29 December 2006Whenever any play is adapted for the cinema, one will find people complaining "It's less than three hours long! It isn't all set in one room! What a travesty!" The fact is that theatre and cinema are different media, and adaptations have to recognise this. There are a lot of lines I miss in this adaptation but one can't put a play of this length on the screen without cuts, and one can't cut Wilde without cutting brilliant one-liners, so it was inevitable that some people's favourite lines would be gone. (Having played Lane myself, I'm attached to his comment that "I have only been married once, and that was in consequence of a misunderstanding": but the discussion had nothing to do with the plot and would have held up the pace of the film.) The 1952 version is one of the best examples there is of filmed theatre. This is a fine example of a play successfully ADAPTED to film. The scene switches are the only way to maintain on the screen the play's galloping pace. (Dialogue can do that unassisted in the theatre, but film is a visual medium: it may seem obvious, but a lot of critics don't seem to understand it. One that I've read has dismissed Kenneth Branagh's _As You Like It_ unseen because it will, er, actually render the Forest of Arden instead of asking the audience to imagine it. That's how blinkered they are.) The design is exquisite and the cast perfect (one expects as much from Judi Dench and Colin Firth, but Reese Witherspoon's flawless accent and extraordinary charm make her perhaps even more impressive, while Rupert Everett, an actor of frankly limited range, is for once in his element as a character one suspects is very like himself.) The "additional" dialogue is in fact mostly salvaged from the four-act version Wilde originally wrote, while the few lines which are added take care of necessary exposition economically and without the least incongruity.
No other filmed version can make me laugh as much as seeing the play live. This one can. Parker, after a disappointing start with _Othello_, has become an excellent film-maker. -
The Importance of Being Earnest is one of the wittiest plays in the English language. I think I know it fairly well, having directed it once and performed in it once (Alegernon). Great plays cannot be forever preserved in Amber, never to change, always mounted in the same ways and subject to the same old readings. In this film the director has attempted to bring Wilde's wicked wit to a contemporary audience, many of whom have not been taught how to think. Did he go too far at time? By all means. I agree that even a free thinking Gwendolyn would never get a tattoo, particularly on her back side. Nor would Jack nee Earnest. Suggesting that Lady Bracknell had been plucked from the world of the music hall was totally wrong. Most of the other changes served Wilde very well however. Like Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde's writing can survive tinkering by the gifted as well as by hacks. This version is not the work of a hack. Go for it!!
-
zellex10 May 2005I have always been a great fan of Oscar Wilde, and consider him as a playwright to be under-rated. His plays are often dismissed as shallow, but they are some of the greatest comedic writings of all time, in my opinion. The witty repartee that Wilde's characters engage in, particularly in The Importance of Being Earnest, is hilarious in most performances.
What a pity, then, that this production of it drags its feet like a drunken yeti (Yes, that's right, a drunken yeti. Use your imagination). It is slow and ponderous, where it should be quickly paced and light. It is morbid and dramatic, where it should be witty and amusing. The screenwriter of this adaptation and the director both deserve to be lined up against a wall and shot. And I simply cannot describe what should be done to Colin Firth, who plays an exceedingly dull and moronic Jack Worthington that would never have survived in London society.
In a movie that should have had the audience cackling with mirth from start to finish, the chuckles were very sparse. Most were provided either by Judi Dench, who brings some true Wildian spirit to the movie as Lady Bracknell, and Reece Witherspoon as the innocently shallow Cecily (but what the #@$& were those 'knight in shining armor' dream scenes?).
Wilde I may love, but not this movie. My rating? A disappointing 4 out of 10! -
Great film. The story is so interesting. It seemed a bit confusing when I first heard about the movie, but as you watch it, it's easy to follow. It's such a great romantic tale, and very innocent as well. The actors are all wonderful and made this movie really funny, especially Colin Firth (who I absolutely love) and Ruppert Everett. This is a film to watch over and over. Oh, and the singing is hilarious, and quite good! lol 10/10
-
jvframe1 July 2002The acting is as fine as anyone could expect.
The immediate problem for anyone already acquainted with Oscar Wilde's original script, is that all of the changes made for this film version are not only unnecessary, but also quite damaging to what was in fact a perfectly self-contained and concise dialogue.
Several omissions leave key set-up lines wasted, and all the additions seem both floundering and inadequate.
Plot continuity takes a skip as Lady Bracknell appears, with no attempt at explanation, at Jack's house in the country.
The occasional meanderings into visual and musical fantasy are annoyingly distracting.
All round it's a `6 of 10' film and all of those points are due entirely to the quality of the actors.
If Oscar Wilde's script was left in tact it could have been worth 8 or 9. -
nadiamerrill25 September 2002I understand that this play has already been filmed several times before, the best perhaps being the 1952 version. However, the liberties taken for this adaptation with flow and characterization were beyond what I could enjoy. A previous comment mentioned that the words were virtually uncut, but I beg to differ. With a running time of slightly over 1 1/2 hours, there was far too much cut. I don't believe I've ever seen a production that was shorter than 2 hours. I can never really understand how people can laud a playwright and then change his/her work. If you really think that Wilde holds up well today, why the need to "fix" his plays? And then there's the flashback at the end of the film involving Lady Bracknell that was way over the top. P-lease.