Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Console best movie i've ever seen.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Armand for me, one of films- source for lovely memories. because it has the force to seduce at whole.maybe , it is not the best adaptation of Wilde play but it is a beautiful movie. and its charm source is just the preservation of Oscar Wilde spirit. the tool - a wonderful cast who does a great work. the link between Everett and Firth is the key. especially for the art of Everett to remember not only the seduction aura of a character but the science of brilliance of Oscar Wilde himself. humor, spirit, high acting and a form of joy who becomes pure delight. a film like a spring wind. seductive, spiced, nice, charming. short, not bad invitation to discover Oscar Wilde universe. so, see it !

Forn55 This sad disappointment of a movie is what happens when you gather a group of top-notch actors together, give them one of the wittiest and funniest plays in the English language, and then put them under the direction of a film-maker who does not trust his material (which is a shame) and who furthermore believes that by tweaking it he may "improve" on it and render it more palatable for modern audiences (which is a scandal).To do director Oliver Parker some justice, "The Importance of Being Earnest" is a lighter-than-air comedy of social mores and is -- in its very essence -- not cinematic, but theatrical, as was its creator, Oscar Wilde. The witty absurdities tossed off by Wilde's characters can only truly become airborne in a theatrical milieu. An attentively listening theater audience engages in a sympathetic act of complicity with the actors on stage, one in which "the delighting ear outstrips the wicked tongue." But a movie camera is an eye, not an ear; it cannot provide the necessary complicity that would allow Wilde's arch dialogue to levitate. Robbed of that complicity, the characters die and the dialogue falls flat. Perhaps it is too much to expect this play ever to be given a 100% successful cinematic make-over.Parker cannot be faulted for trying to translate this play into a cinematic medium; he is, however, guilty of ham-handed 're-writes,' unnecessary excursions, ill-considered excisions, and a feckless attempt to jam his cast into cinematic "dress" that doesn't fit them and that leaves them looking foolish.Watching this film, I felt badly for all the fine actors ensnared in it. I'm betting Judi Dench has a superb Lady Bracknell somewhere in her... but it isn't on display here.My advice is to skip this movie if you're considering seeing or renting it. Try the much better '52 Anthony Asquith movie with an amusingly rebarbative Edith Evans at the top of her form.

thenachokiter Great film I must say. A good adaptation of the play. The lines where there, the characters (mean old Victorian Lady Bracknell), with a little change in focus of Earnest and Algy instead of Lady Bracknell and her Victorian manners.Great cast, great production = very fun pleasing film, walking away with more than just an adaptation of the play. Excellent wardrobe design. Yet I feel somewhat bothered by the bookworms, theater fans, film fanatics who feel discouraged to view a written work of art in a different manner from the original work. Little people who nag and complain if things are not represented in the exact same way they are made. That is why it is called an adaptation which is not the same as representing the exact work.I read the Importance of Being Earnest and I've seen various films about it, yet this one has an entirely different focus than the others, much like the many Shakespearean films about the same play made with different visions of representing it in mind...I must say critics to review anything in life one must know about its history, its inner and outer workings and learn how to review a work of art not just on biased opinions if you liked it or not, but on review of the work, of the production and the written play. Its not a misisnterpretation, is an adaptation...yes that means you O_O.

patender000 Earnest (Firth) lives in the country. Only in the country he is known as Jack. His family in the country believes he has a brother named Earnest, whom he goes up to the city to see because he's always getting into trouble and constantly needs his older brother's aid... Jack (or Earnest) returns from the city to inform those in the country that his brother, Earnest, died of a severe chill. The response to this woeful news is "what a good lesson for him! I trust he will profit by it!" But woe is me! Look! There is Earnest (the brother supposedly dead) in the rose garden (which would be Earnest's (or Jack's) friend, Algy (Everett), who went down to the country to meet Earnest's ward, Cecile (Witherspoon)by saying that he was Earnest's (or Jack's) younger brother Earnest (or rather, Algy)). Algy has invented a sick friend known as Bunbury, so he could escape to the country to see Earnest's (or Jack's) ward, Cecile. At the end of the movie, this Mr. Bunbury seems to have quite 'exploded' due to the wishes of his doctors...I trust you are thoroughly confused! This is a mild taste of the humor in this amazing comedy. It is undoubtedly one of my favorites! I thoroughly enjoyed it! And found it quite diverting...and I constantly quote it's witty script."To lose one parent, Mr. Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness." "Indeed, when I am in really great trouble, as any one who knows me intimately will tell you, I refuse everything except food and drink." "I do not approve of anything that tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. The whole theory of modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any rate, education produces no effect whatsoever. If it did, it would prove a serious danger to the upper classes, and probably lead to acts of violence in Grosvenor Square." ....and many more! Most entertaining!