It is pretty much a given for any adaptation of a literary work to the big screen that there will always be complaints about the movie not being close enough to the story on paper. Oliver Parker's Dorian Gray if, of course, no exception. Take, for example, the following user review published on the IMDB website:

The Picture of Dorian Gray, as penned by the Irish wit Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), is a tale of high-brow debauchery and limitless pleasures of body and soul and the corruption, by one Lord Henry Wotton, of the young, handsome and soon to be narcissistic 19th century rock'n roll hell-raiser Dorian Gray.

Ealing Studios have translated Wilde's controversial novel into a celluloid den of iniquity that somehow comes across as rather shallow. Like the characters seen here too; it seems that as a work of symbolic gesture of how the upper classes conduct their sordid lifestyle of hypocrisy, deceit and lust it lacks any deep and thoughtful intrigue that any good 19th century Gothic horror story should be.

To fully understand the ethics of a Victorian London that Oscar Wilde has so wonderfully reflected with his novel here, we see, too, with this latest interpretation using, as Wilde may have done, the picture purely as a metaphorical means. Yes, we see the selling of souls here and the lamb to the slaughter and the hedonistic teachings of Lord Wotton, but toward the end, the whole sordid affair becomes predictable.

Well, it is the problem with adaptations of well known stories —and Wilde's novella definitely is one. It is not so much that the movie itself is predictible as the fact that we all know the story before we enter the movie theatre to watch the movie. The story of Dorian Gray and his famous portrait are by now an intrinsic part of our Western culture, just like other similar myths (don Quixote, Ulysses...) that were incorporated into our cultural fabric. Taking this into account, it is nearly impossible to make a movie that is not "predictible". Actually, as with any other eternal myth, we know from the beginning that this one also contains a morale, a lesson to keep, which invariably means that good prevails in the end. We all know that as we watch it unfold on the screen. In that sense, I think it is quite naive to criticize the movie for being predictible.

While, as an actor, Oliver Parker seemed to specialize in horror movies (Hellraiser is, without a doubt, his best known movie), he seemed to take a different approach as a film director, choosing the adaptation of the classics instead (The Importance of Being Earnest, Othello). So, it is not surprising if in this case he chose to adapt a classic that some might consider a horror story. How did he do? I think he did pretty well. Unlike previous adaptations, severely limited by what at the time was considered to be decorous, this other movie shows the lust and carnal appetites of Lord Wotton and his young apprentice without much problem, just as it also shows their visits to opium dens and love of alcohol and any other excess. That is, if anything, closer to the true spirit of the original story than anything else, I think. Hedonism is hedonism and, in spite of all the social progress experienced in the last few decades, there are still people who would rather not see it clearly depicted on the screen in the name of some old-style morality. The way I see it, nobody forces anyone to watch a movie. If the story calls for the portrayal of an orgy (as this one does, although in a relatively mild manner), then why not show it on the screen? The issue, as I see it, is not whether not a particular scene was in the original story written by Oscar Wilde, but rather whether or not it is in the spirit of th ebook, and I honestly think that Oliver Parker's adaptation is.

Said all that, is this movie entertaining? I certainly think so. Could it be considered a horror movie? I doubt it, at least not in what we have come to understand for terror these days (i.e., gore, a nerve-wrecking thriller or music conveniently timed to make your heart fly out or your open mouth). Dorian Gray is, in the end, a literary story. It is a fantasy, a myth about a man who sells his soul to the Devil in exchange for a life dedicated to all the pleasures available to a young and attractive gentleman, a life of excesses. It is also a moral story, a warning about how pleasure (and youth, as well as beauty and wealth) is not everything. For, in spite of it all, Dorian ends up being deeply unhappy. It is, as I say, a moral story.

---

Entertaiment factor:6/10
Artistic factor:6/10

---