Paul Magne Haakonsen Being somewhat familiar with the essence and the story of Dorian Gray from literature, but not having actually read the book, then I must admit that I had some expectations for a movie such as this 2009 rendering of the story by director Oliver Parker. However, it is not before late in 2017 that I actually got around to find the time to sit down and watch the movie, despite having owned the DVD for years.I found the storytelling in the movie to be slow paced, actually too much so for my liking, and it was taking a serious toll on the enjoyment of the movie for me. It rambled on and on and took forever to go almost nowhere. And I ended up feeling rather bored and finding the storyline itself to be rather pointless.What made "Dorian Gray" bearable for me to watch was because they had gotten together a group of talented actors and actresses to perform in the movie. I am not familiar with the work of Ben Barnes, but he carried the movie quite well and was well cast for the lead role of Dorian Gray. But of course with names such as Ben Chaplin and Colin Firth as well, then the movie was secured some pretty solid acting performances.While the storyline was rather boring and slow paced, then the special effects department really put together some really nice visuals for the movie, and it was a real treat to watch that on the screen. I must admit that I was impressed with the CGI that they had in this movie, and that alone does count for a great deal in terms of making the movie somewhat watchable.I was disappointed with the overall result of this 2009 rendering of the Dorian Gray tale, but I stuck with the movie to the very end. I can't claim to have much of any interest in ever watching this movie again, then I am more inclined to pick up a physical copy of Oscar Wilde's classic and give that a read.

Francisco de Leon The novel is like a play itself; it's one of those books that would look best on the screen just as they are, line by line.Far from that, in the movie, they make a very bold -and unrealistic, from my point of view- interpretation of Lord Henry Wotton's character, and some serious changes in the story development.Scenes that looked great in the book were changed with no apparent object but the desire of being original, and other good scenes from the novel simply didn't make it into the movie.While eroticism in the novel is only suggested with sharp delicacy, it adds some explicit, unstylish scenes to the movie.Only good thing I can point out is Colin Firth's acting. I already thought he was perfect for the role before knowing about the film.The story is so different from that of the book that I'm really amazed at how some people dare say it's as good an adaptation as they could expect. It's not just that I have seen far better than this in other book adaptations, but this is really one of the worst I have ever watched.Finally, since, besides Colin Firth's acting, everything good about the movie is what little was taken from the novel -and also looked better in the novel-, I must say this movie has no credit of its own, therefore, I consider it terrible.

lillylazuli Boy, do I regret staying up late to watch this!! Gratuitous sex scenes were laughable and annoying. Honestly, I cannot add anything new that others haven't covered in their reviews of this (bad) film. And the only reason I'm writing more than two lines - the concluding sentence - is because IMBDb has a minimum of 10 text lines for submission.Colin Firth was passable, and the reason for giving this one star. Honesty, I'm struggling to think of anything good about the film to fill up the required minimum text.... set design...All I will say is just go straight to the original film of 1945, The Picture of Dorian Gray; do not pause, do not even consider watching this remake.

Ari97 I decided to watch this film some days after I read "The Picture of Dorian Gray". If you watch the film and haven't read the book, you will probably find it an OK movie. However, if you have read the book, this adaptation will leave you disappointed.The original storyline by Oscar Wilde is very good, so I do not see why the adaptation went so far from it. I have nothing against a modern touch, but here the original ending is changed to a large extent. If the author wanted a girl to change Dorian, or a whole new second part, he would have written it himself.The character of Basil had some very strong lines in the book, but in the movie he just seems like a weird artist. Also, the scenes which show Dorian among naked women were, to me, totally irrelevant.However, I have to say that Barnes was OK as Dorian. Even if he could have shown some more character development, his acting was not bad. Also, Firth was really good as lord Henry, I would like it if he had more lines.I'd give a generous 5 out of 10.