March 9th, 2010 at 06:48pm
Thanks for the feedback guys. :)
And [b]SaveMeSaidTheSaviour[/b] I agree with you about Basil and Dorian's relationship. I always thought the fact he was so against exhibiting the painting because it revealed too much about himself was really important to that.
Don't get me wrong; the movie was good. The book and movie, in certain aspects, level each other out. Ben Barnes was a believable Dorian, Colin Firth was an utterly fantastic Lord Henry and the man who played Basil was perfect. However; Emily? That never happened! I know she was devised specifically for the motion picture, but all the same. She was nowhere near Hetty, or believable in my opinion.
And Sibyl Vane? The entire relationship was portrayed wrong! Ben Barnes was slightly wooden, I found, when dismissing Sibyl's death, though very convincing upon hearing the news.
The movie focused too much on showing Dorian's lifestyle (the sex, the drugs, the parties); not on the various dimensions of Dorian's character himself. Whilst the movie was enjoyable, to an extent, it distorted the fantastic ending; which was so fantastic because of how beautifully Wilde showed how Dorian stabs the portrait in a desperate fit of passion!
As for the portrait itself... It never moved. That's what made it so chilling. And what was with the maggots? It was subtlety, not movement, that makes the picture so frightening. But I appreciated the effort and how they made their own way work.
The movie was good; it just focused too much on sex for the majority! But I love the book and movie, all the same.
Sorry. You've brought out the inner-fan from within.
Fantastic article; superbly written! A* all the way, my dear :)