Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

aramis-112-804880 One of the most wickedly delightful plays ever written is brought to the big screen in this fine adaptation (1952).Two trained stage actors (Michaels Redgrave and Denison) give superb performances as John Worthing and Algernon Moncrieff, modulating their style for film (watch, for instance, the flicker Redgrave gives Worthing's mustache as Gwendolen hits around his guilty secret).The rest of the cast reads like a menu at a top restaurant. Joan Greenwood, who starred in several classic movies of the time ("Man in a White Suit"; "Kind Hearts and Coronets") lends her smokey voice to Gwendolyn. Dorothy Tutin, here in her first movie role as Cicely, would go on to great success on stage and screen. And the wonderfully dotty Margaret Rutherford and Miles Malleson set the bar high for anyone who later approaches the roles of Miss Prism and Canon Chasuble. The perfect cast reaches right down to Richard Wattis, appearing for a matter of seconds and with no lines, providing eyebrow-raising hilarity as "Seton."The pride of place, however, belongs to Edith Evans. Lady Bracknell was one of her signature roles on stage. Here, in a performance both perfectly suited for the big screen yet dominating it as well, she is somehow able to hit every note of the human voice in words like "handbag" and, perhaps even more brilliantly, "found?" (In a much later radio version, Dame Judi Dench proved a letdown as Lady Bracknell, after too much familiarity with Evans' extraordinary voice modulations).The script is a bit disappointing. While I found it perfectly sparkling on my first viewing (and my tenth), later reading and watching other versions of the play on the stage and on tv, I found this version cuts whole swathes of Wilde's dialogue. To be fair, the play exists in more than one version. And a full movie version of nothing but talk would spill over two hours, while this version runs slightly over an hour and a half. And, to be honest, Wilde's paradoxes are occasionally overwhelming (and even tiresome when they're all strung together). But many great lines are cut and at least one unfortunately truncated (Gwendolen saying, "The suspense it terrible!" In the play, it continues, "I do hope it will last!")Perhaps due to the play's preternatural artificiality (especially the crassness and lack of feeling Wilde puts in the mouths of his characters) the movie has a curtain-raising and -lowering framing device. If nothing else, it helps those unfamiliar with Wilde or the play know it originated on the stage. The sets are obviously artificial, but Wilde's lines belong in an artificial world. Some have criticized this movie as "static" (not opening out the play as Branagh did for Shakespeare forty years later). But this play is nothing but talking heads in their own universe; the movie serves as an invaluable introduction to Wilde (it was for me), performed by some of the finest British actors of the time. No villains appear in the piece (unless the proto-Wodehousean aunt Lady Bracknell is one). No one is going to blow up the world. No one has a gun. The characters lead complex lives that need untangling in a comic way. That is all. If you can't sit through ninety minutes of truly wonderful actors mouthing some of the cleverest lines ever written for the stage, this movie's not for you.Perhaps not one of the great movies, but a finely-cast filmed version of a great play. After pointing out the many cuts made to the play, the one sour note in the thing is the introduction of a distant cuckoo in the catty tea scene between Gwendolen and Cicely. It's a bit too much. Otherwise, as Wilde's contemporaries Gilbert and Sullivan might say, it's rapture.

TheLittleSongbird 'The Importance of Being Earnest' is one of Oscar Wilde's most best known works for very good reason, and among the wittiest, thought-provoking and charming plays ever written.Have yet to see a better filmed version of 'The Importance of Being Earnest' than this 1952 film. Not only that, but to me it is one of the essential filmed adaptations of any of Wilde's works. It may be theatrical and stagy to some, with the touch of the curtain at the start and end of the film and the unfussy (in no way a criticism) cinematography reminiscent of a filmed staged play. There are films based on plays that can suffer from this, but not 'The Important of Being Earnest', that it sticks to its theatrical roots is not only a large part of its charm but also one of the reasons why it works so well.As an adaptation, 'The Importance of Being Earnest' couldn't be better. Almost all of the text is intact and in a way that's succinct and always cohesive rather than muddled or cramped. Even though there are alterations and omissions here and there, structurally Wilde's story and writing is very much recognisable and so is the spirit, instead of resorting to extraneous padding, additions or character distortions that don't belong.While not exactly expansive and decidedly unfussy, in no way is this a criticism of 'The Importance of Being Earnest', the film is still beautifully shot in sumptuous Technicolor which does justice to the extravagantly opulent costumes and settings. Benjamin Frankel's music score is sometimes understated and elegant and also with an appropriate whimsy.Despite a deliberately steady touch, Anthony Asquith's direction is still controlled and polished. Under such a touch, the classic comedic story of manners, morality and morals is gently deliberate but still with a lively energy, largely thanks to Wilde's writing and a splendid cast who give it everything they've got.One cannot criticise the sparkling script, where Wilde's witticisms, wit, charm, whimsy, polished barbs and bons mots shine firmly to the fore. The cast are without fault, with not a weak link. Michael Redgrave is composed and suitably fastidious, while Michael Denison enjoys himself in the more colourful of caddish of the two. Joan Greenwood is charmingly whimsical and Dorothy Tutin delightfully coquettish, while one can count on Margaret Rutherford to steal scenes. Miles Malleson, Richard Wattis and Walter Hudd fare very well too. Upstaging (possibly) them all is Dame Edith Evans' battleaxe and hilarious Lady Bracknell, her quavering delivery of "a handbag" being a highlight of British cinema.In summary, a wonderful film that sees Oscar Wilde in his glory. 10/10 Bethany Cox

SimonJack As with all categories of movies, and their many subgroups, satire isn't for everyone. And, judging from a few reviews on IMDb, if one doesn't get the satire, the humor may be lost as well. But many of us do relish satire – especially the wit and farcical spoofing in great works such as "The Importance of Being Earnest." So, the humor isn't lost on us in the satire, but is brought home boisterously and subtly, straightforward and by innuendo, in words and in looks. Make no bones about it – this is a satire on high society of England in the late 19th century. The language, dress, customs and mores of the time are all part of the story. So, they are dated, as they should be. Any retelling of this work that eschews the time-specific of the story, will naturally lose the satire. For, placed in a modern setting, or otherwise changed, the satire of Wilde's play loses its bite and sarcasm; and the script then becomes just a running dialog of jokes or puns. This 1952 rendition of Oscar Wilde's play is the best of any movie made for presenting this satire as one would hear and see it live on stage. I think the film even gives us an advantage over the stage. We can see actor's expressions quite vividly. Director Anthony Asquith uses his excellent camera work in many instances to show us close-ups of a range of expressions in the reactions between actors. These instances enhance the wit and humor of the barbs or bon mots just delivered.All aspects of this 1952 film are superior. The screenplay, cinematography, costumes, makeup, sets, and directing and editing are superb. But most of all, this film has an outstanding cast of actors – from all the leads to the smallest supporting roles. Each person gives something special to his or her character. The key focus of Wilde's satire here is in the person of Lady Bracknell. Edith Evans excels in the role of the domineering, nonsensical society matriarch. She gives hubris to the contemptible icon of high English society of the late 19th century. Her exaggerated portrayal fits well the obnoxious, autocrat that Wilde puts at the center of his mockery of upper English society of the time.The Michaels – Redgrave and Dennison, excel in their roles as Jack Worthing and Algernon Moncrieff. They play perfectly off each other throughout the film. It's with Redgrave especially, that the humor of some of the witty lines is made all the more laughable by the expressions we see on his face. Dennison adds a very pleasing bounciness that gives life to the otherwise idle lifestyle of Algy. But I think the ladies again steal center stage in this wonderful spoof. Joan Greenwood plays the best possible snobbish, pretentious, hilarious Gwendolen that I can imagine has ever been done live or on film. She is riotously funny as the snooty, arrogant and pompous object of Jack's romantic affections. And Dorothy Tutin gives an excellent portrayal of the demure, innocent but silly Cecily. She just isn't quite the snob, nor is she quite as pompous, for her youth and lack of experience that Gwendolen has had.The wonderful Margaret Rutherford is Miss Prism. She brings smiles to our faces with her humorous lines and expressions. And Miles Malleson is a nice match for her as Canon Chasuble. Was Wilde giving us a touch of his wit also in the choice of some of the names of his characters? A chasuble is the outer vestment worn by clergy in the Anglican and Catholic churches. And a prism is a type of lens through which objects take on many different shapes and colors. The actors who play the butlers and man-servants are very funny in their roles as well. One other thing that bears comment is Redgrave's age. A couple of reviewers said he was too old for the part – although they liked him in it. Modern movie buffs would do well to note that people – men, especially -- 100 and more years ago generally looked much older than they do today. Since the mid-20th century, the physical appearances of Western men have gotten younger. Look at old high school photos to see that most teenagers a century or more ago looked more mature than they do today. Most 65-year-old men today don't show as much age as did 50-year- old men in the past. So, the 44-year old Redgrave in 1952 could very likely pass for a man 28 or 35 in the previous century. "The Importance of Being Earnest" is one of the finest satires on society ever written and put on film. And this 1952 movie is the best ever made of the great Oscar Wilde farce. It's a wonderful treat from start to finish. But I warn anyone who may not enjoy satire – you may find yourself laughing at lines you don't think should be funny.

bkoganbing I've always felt that Oscar Wilde's work while good was better in parts than the sum of the whole. There isn't anyone with some degree of literacy who hasn't relished some delectable quote of Wilde's, either some offhand remark or a quotation from one of his. I'm willing to bet that Wilde has one of the largest sections in the English speaking world in Bartlett's Familiar Quotations.But unlike his contemporary George Bernard Shaw who was prolifically writing things of social significance, Wilde took society as he saw it, wrote and amused his public about the foibles of same, but his characters have no great purpose driving their lives. Ironically for Wilde it was his whole life and how he lived and loved that became the biggest question of social significance for him to deal with.Thus it is for Ernest Worthing and Algernon Moncrieff a pair of upper class aristocratic types who apparently don't put in a 9 to 5 day, but flit about making observations of others in their station. But among other things that is uncovered is that Ernest is a foundling adopted by the Worthing family, thus making him not a suitable heir for the hand of Algernon's cousin Gwendolen played by Joan Greenwood. A game Michael Redgrave as Ernest has been playing is discovered by Michael Denison as Algy. He discovers a cigarette case inscribed from Cecily to Jack in his possession and Dennison worms a confession out of Redgrave that when he occasionally goes to the country he assumes the identity of a brother Jack for his ward Cecily played by newcomer Dorothy Tutin. Denison is quite amused by the whole thing and follows Redgrave out to the country pretending to be his brother Ernest. He also takes a liking to Tutin.On this plot which is no sillier than some American film comedies hang some of Oscar Wilde's celebrated lines. Knowing they're coming is the treat here. Everything of course is rather neatly resolved in the end with nurse Margaret Rutherford making confessions that resolve everyone's problems paternal and romantic and most of all social for the dowager head of the family Lady Brackenall played by Edith Evans. When Wilde was abruptly stopped from creating by the mores of the Victorian public his like was not seen by the English speaking world until Noel Coward who additionally performed as well as wrote. I've often thought that the only reason Coward did not suffer Wilde's fate was that he had the good sense to cultivate royalty.As for The Importance Of Being Ernest it's a play about a lot of idle people who do say some of the cleverest things ever written in English. It's bright and entertaining and the witticisms certainly haven't lost any edge in over a century.