The Libertine

At first I thought that it was another Marquis de Sade movie (a la Quills), but then realized I was close, but not exactly right:

Originally Posted by Rotten Tomatoes.com

An antidote to the sunny period pieces adopted from Jane Austen, which feature impeccably coiffed aristocracy engage in the witty banter of drawing room dramas and culminate in a most delightful denouement, THE LIBERTINE highlights the underbelly of the Britocracy of centuries past. Adapted from the play by Stephen Jeffreys, the plot follows the dastardly debauchery of the Earl of Rochester (a mischievous Johnny Depp). A hedonist who makes Oscar Wilde seem moralistic, the Earl spent his days and nights in beds, brothels, and bars, awakening from drunken blackouts only to stumble to the nearest whorehouse. Yet this ravishing rake was also possessed of a predilection for poetry, and turned his escapades into acid-tongued witticisms that pepper this frisky film.

IMDB entry.

I'm still very interested in seeing it -- mainly because it's Depp playing in a period piece as a depraved man with long, dark, curly hair.

This movie confuses me greatly, at least as far as release dates are concerned. From what I can tell, it was made in 2004, had a premeire somewhere in November of 2005, and is finally being released nationwide(?) this Friday. Anyone else interested in it? Thoughts? Have you already seen it, since it's been around a while?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Bah, nobody saw this movie?

Well, I did. I really don't know why it was controversial at all (which is part of the reason that it didn't get released after it was made). Depp does steal the show, but it's not an uplifting movie at all (it does have humorous points, but they are not the focus). It was a decent movie, but I wouldn't place it up in my favorites. There were some interesting cinematic techniques, such as a scene in which Depp can barely stand yet is addressing the House of Lords (?). Every time he starts to lose his focus, the camera goes out of focus, thereby making the audience see how Depp is seeing.

The music somehow was annoying to me, unobtrusive as it was. Whenever I did notice, it would bother me. No particular reason, just an observation.

So did anyone else see it? Come on, even just for Depp??

There's nowhere I can't reach.

exactly. cause of Depp. not many people saw it. lol. I'll probably check the movie out later. But if the music sucks then im not sure if i should =/.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

It really did have a few scenes that reminded me of Quills -- no big surprise there -- but I can't imagine using it in a comparison to Eva . Well...maybe. Hell, I don't know what Eva philosophers talk about.

And the music isn't horrendous. It just bugged me for some strange reason, I don't think it's a reason to avoid the movie by any means. But unless you're really itching to see Depp looking sexy (occasionally), it's probably a renter. Not to mention I believe it isn't enjoying that wide of a theatrical release: it's only showing in our 'indie movie' theaters around Austin, and it wasn't even showing in some of the smaller towns outside Austin.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I'm getting the impression that Libertine is more subdued than what is being advertised. Hopefully, I will be proven wrong after renting it.

Ark, glad you brought up Quills in this discussion. It's a brilliant film. 18th century risqué done right.

To my surprised Libertine took place one century before the Marquis de Sade. Would've guessed it to be the other way around.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Is it already out of the threatres? They really didn't advertise it too much.

I would have gone to see it - like you said, Ark - just for Depp. But I don't go to theatres alone, you see. And my friend (a HUGE Depp fan) even refused to go to see it. She claimed that it is allegedly "one of the worst movies made." Of course, no one could really deduce that without actually SEEING it and forming their own opinion on it.

I will wait until it becomes available for rent. But it seems it already HAS? Could someone clarify?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

I've seen it, Sass. This movie is absolute crap. I'm a big fan of Quills, for the record, and this movie is utter garbage compared to it. Now, I love the Earl's poetry, I always have. He's one of my favourite writers of all time. Too bad it was Charlie and the Chocolate Factory Depp who showed up, instead of Scissorhands or Pirates Depp. Absolute waste of time. The acting is horrendous, the gloss over the subject matter, and they treat the movie watcher like a retard. Don't even waste rental money.

How ya doing, buddy?

why was it quote/unquote "the most controversial film of the year"? that's what the commercials billed it as.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

If there was something terribly objectionable in it, I must have missed it. I mean, there was maybe one scene. There are many other films that are more offensive, I'm sure. When my roomie and I went to see it, there was an older couple in there that was probably around 65-70 years old. Maybe they were those kind of kinky old people, but they didn't really strike me as that type. In any case, they watched it. So yeah, nothing terribly shocking. At all.

And Quills was much better than this movie, for this type of period film. I'm not as familiar with the Earl's writing as with the Marquis, but somehow I don't think that has much to do with my opinion. I haven't seen any ads for it in a while, but it isn't out to rent (or illegally download, for that matter -- I tried that first). The reason for the screwy release dates is because they couldn't find a distributor for the movie after it was finished in 2004, then they showed it in a very limited release in late 2005, and finally nation-wide this year.

Jam it back in, in the dark.