Dorian Gray

source: Dorian Gray

Trailer—Das Bildnis des Dorian Gray

Das Bildnis des Dorian Gray

it is his film. in so measure, than seems be created around him. because he is Dorian Gray. without any effort. in clear way. and the message remains the message of book - the art as form of escape from the pressure of every day life. so simple and pragmatic. the difference from other adaptations - maybe the science of using the details defining the lead character in careful manner for give the portrait of selfish under noble appearances. maybe, the science to suggest more than a B movie for the science of Herbert Lom to use the sparkles of role. maybe, for the presence of Helmuth Berger who could be enough for a theme who preserves in clear manner the spirit and life and fall of Oscar Wilde.

Dorian Gray (1970) seems more like a soft-* movie than a take on the famous classic. Seems that everyone, and I mean everyone wants to get Dorian Gray into bed in this stinker. Mr. Gray has sex with various beauties, all whom fall madly in love with him. As a matter of fact, two beautiful women whom he has bedded, are so desperate to sleep with him again, that he pawns them off to each other, and the two beauties are so "sexed-up" that they end up having sex with each other. Our hero always winds up in the shower with a 50ish Gay man, as well as having sex with an over 50 woman in a horse stall. Dorian Gray (1970)is okay for a few laughs. There are some sexy ladies too, but aside from that, it's not much.

I enjoyed seeing this on TV over the years. It is typical of pictures that came out during that time period. No not all were perfect with exquisite editing or immaculate soundtrack and how all the modern critics insist a picture must be perfect or you may not like it. Wrong. It is art and a story is told and some B-grade films enjoy tremendous adoration. I like how this showed the guy as basically decadent and wanting to have his fun and all the props are contemporary so the film is a wonderful time capsule. The target audience would seem to be men IMHO. I recommend you watch it, should it ever come on TV where you live, but I doubt it will ever be released to DVD. The film is an easy, relaxed film, enjoyable to watch, and captures the essence of the idea well -- the question is whether you will ever be able to see it. These old gems are hard to find.

After seeing the versions of Dorian Gray from 1945 and 2009, I really like all three and for different reasons. But don't compare them, and don't judge against the book, they are each likable and interesting in their own way. This version is a trashy soap opera with fabulous costumes and characters boasting raging libidos! The acting is decent but the direction and script are where this turns to camp. That said, it's still fun and entertaining. It just doesn't have a serious bone in its body. It's mindless entertainment to watch while drinking your favorite beverage. I would not call it bad. Not at all. It has its own merits. In other words, it's not funny because it's poorly done, it's funny because the trash is intentional and so over the top. Soap operas have their place and that is exactly how I interpret this film. Nobody would expect an Oscar from this, nor should they. But you should expect laughs and trash.

I was certain that no cinematic representation would do justice to the book. However, the clever idea of making a contemporary film made it interesting and original. Even the focus on Helmut Berger looks is not faulty, since this is the spirit of the book. Thankfully, all the girls were also very pretty. Although it's no masterpiece on its own right, Oscar Wilde would have liked it.

A faithful plod through Oscar Wilde's Victorian shocker. Nearly eighty years after it was originally written, the time was uniquely ripe during the sybaritic pre-AIDS early seventies for a film version of Wilde's original that fully did justice to its florid homoeroticism (although the early seventies quickly ended, while the period during which young Dorian remains eternally youthful lasts much longer in this telling). Despite being shot in London with a couple of reputable British-based actors leading the supporting cast (Herbert Lom's Henry Wotton looks an unlikely 'Daily Mirror' reader, despite being depicted immersed in a copy at one point), the constant vertiginous zooms and obviously post-synced dialogue symptomatic of the era in which it was made definitely enhances its continental-style depiction of the joyless hedonism of the milieu Wilde was really writing about and renders it far more dated than had it actually been set in the 1890s.

Massimo Dallamano's film of Oscar Wilde's work places the story to the London of the 1960s. Even though many reviews obviously didn't like this and wrote rather negative about the film, I think the story works surprisingly well. Helmut Berger is excellent and undeniably gorgeous as the (in the end tragic) title character, but also the other actors deliver their best. Especially Herbert Lom as Henry Wotton acts absolutely great, and most of the women are not only very pretty, but also deliver convincing performances. All in all, "Dorian Gray" surely is the most unusual film version of the writing, it is rather drama than horror, but that's what Oscar Wilde's work is too, isn't it? I guess that Oscar Wilde would have liked this.