The Importance of Being Earnest

source: The Importance of Being Earnest

I saw a marvelous performance of the play at the Utah Shakespeare Festival. Now I've seen the movie. The screenwriter was not Oscar Wilde. The Director in opening up the play dropped the pacing, crucial to the verbal humor that made Wilde a great playwright. The acting was passable, but remember film acting is nothing like playacting. I give the play a 10 and the movie a 5. In so doing, I'm stretching generosity like spandex on a portly man's derrier. Incidentally, screenwriter, how dare you drop some of Wilde's wittiest dialog. Aren't we fortunate that the theater doesn't have a cutting room floor.

I've read the comment stating that those who knew the book would be disappointed. I disagree. Sure, some of the additions were less than satisfactory (eg. the tattooing), but in general the triviality of them sits fine with me in the Wildean tradition of lampoonery. I would rate this adaption highly above that of "Minority Report" which (in my opinion) sucked big time. Even though the treatment seemed at times to almost overshadow the text, it's hard to stop Wilde's gems from shining. Much as I was amused at the frivolities the cast engaged in, it was still Oscar's dialogue that was the highlight. Of course, I think that the casting was the best think about this movie. Perhaps any half-decent attempt at making this movie would work, but the luminosity of performance these actors (especially the women - especially Judy Dench) give is wonderful to see.

Oscar wrote a fantastically witty story to start with, so you can't really go wrong with it and I have to say that this version does exactly what it says on the tin. It stuck to the original and delivered it well, however it didn't wow me, but neither did it disappoint. Colin and Rupert are ideal for their parts and Dame Judi is superb, as is Edward Fox as the butler. An enjoyable watch for a Sunday afternoon, made for those who like a classic.

Largely positive, 2002's 'The Importance of Being Earnest' is fairly funny. Rupert Everett is amusing as Algy, especially across the early scenes. Colin Firth is good as Jack, as are Frances O'Connor and Judi Dench in their roles as Gwendolen and Lady Bracknell. Of the main cast, Reese Witherspoon (Cecily) is probably the weakest of the lot; her accent isn't the greatest. The premise is entertaining to watch play out, even if you can somewhat guess where it's all heading. It has comedic moments and is relatively short, it isn't one to be taken seriously but is nonetheless a more than satisfactory film.

I am not a fan of Oscar Wilde, but after this movie I want to see more of his writing. The crux lies in the duplicity of the main characters Jack Worthing (Colin Firth) and Algy Montcrieff (Rupert Everett) and the challenges that arise out of their double lives. There is great chemistry between Jack and Algy. They appear to be having fun on-screen that it is contagious. You feel as if you are a part of their dirty little secrets-the audience plays co-conspirator! The characters want to have a bit of fun and they create doubles to live out their fantasies. Both of the ladies that are the object of their affections, believes them to be "Earnest", who are neither. The movie is paced right, the script is fun, the casting, the direction, the cinematography, and the ending are unexpected joys. I went in to the movie expecting to be bored, and ended up smiling.

this contains a few spoilers, i think. although its not the best movie in the world, i think it was a wonderful adaptation of the play. its wit, charm, and poise reflects those of oscar's orginial play. the fantasy sequence's of cecily's were a good way to fill time, and i think they reflect the integrity of the play itself. oscar fans will laugh at certain lines that they remember from the play, and if you havent read the play you might not understand what they are laughing at. i thought rupert everett did an excellent job as algy - he was able to brace the character better than colin firth embraced jack (although both actors did a marvelous job in their roles).

I really have to say, this film was a disappointment. I am a fan of all of Oscar Wilde's work, and I have performed as Cecily on the stage, and this version was sad. While a few of the extra sequences were humorous, the blend of the original version and the version revised by the author was humorlessly arranged, thus creating an unfortunately bland film from a brilliant play. I actually fell asleep partway through the scenes that would be equal to act three/four, depending on the version. Also, I felt that some of the lines were not given with as much expression as they could have been. The 'too exciting' content of Cecily's diary was fairly accurate, but her character was not performed to an especially enjoyable quality. Several of the most witty lines from the most pertinent scenes, too, were omitted, such as a good three-quarters of Cecily and Gwendolen's meeting in the garden.

This was, probably, one of the best films I have seen this year. I thought the casting was fantastic and everyone played such wonderful characters. Reese was a bit off with her English "accent" but good anyway. The rhythm was perfect.

Just wonderful. I saw it about three times. Always a treat. Just a romp. Fanastic. Love, love that tune, "Lady Come Down." This is a superior adaptation of Wilde's play. A movie that is not to be missed. Lively, fun dialog and casting is perfection, especially Rupert Everett. The story of two men who woo two women who are in love with the man's name of Ernest. After all, such a name "inspires the utmost confidence",they say, so who wouldn't love a man named Ernest. I recommend seeing this movie. You will be entertained from start to finish. It is interesting that although the story took place in England, it seems to be such always "charming weather", another line from the movie. What else is there to say. See it for yourself.