The Libertine (2004) - Review and Analysis by Scott Wood for Critical-Film.com

Please comment on "The Libertine", and it's review in our Forum.

The Libertine A film review by Scott Wood For Critical-film.com   I know that this will bring negative backlash from a few readers, but there is something about period films that I find aesthetically wholly displeasing, and as a general rule, I avoid forcing myself to watch them. I realize that there are perfectly wonderful films that embody different time eras, but this feeling of alienation that I get from these eras keeps me at arms length from them. “Shakespeare in Love” was a perfectly acceptable film, and I have no valid criticism of it. Yet, I didn't enjoy it. It is the kind of movie that just doesn't jive with me. There is something fake feeling about so many movies of its ilk, as though these filmmakers choose to romanticize about the past, without realizing how disgusting and dirty it must have been.   And then there's Laurence Dunmore's “The Libertine” which is a filthy film with filthy characters. There is nothing romantic happening here, as Dunmore is brutally honest in his technique, and that, along with Depp's expectedly brilliant performance, is the main reason that “The Libertine” is as good as it is. Not only are the actors bravely shot sans Hollywood glitz, but even the focus and the color of each frame looks soiled and gross. When I think of 17 th century England , the design in Dunmore 's film is what I picture. This is something that will likely keep people who are normally attracted to this type of film from truly enjoying it, as I believe their attraction is more of the revisionist romantic type. Since I do not suffer this affliction, I liked it.   There are genuine problems that may keep these people at bay as well, such as a storyline that is uneven at best, and not very well executed. Also, as good as Depp's performance is, and as much as he manages to carry the movie on his shoulders, the audience never really feels as though they understand his character. It could be because he has too extreme a personality, or (as I believe the case to be) his character was never really fleshed out well enough by the screenwriter (Stephen Jeffreys, based on his play), and Depp's vision at times conflicts with his.   But these points can not outweigh the technique that both actor and director show together on screen. This may be the best two man show since Oliver Stone and Eric Bogosian made “Talk Radio” together. Dunmore doesn't seem to realize that his plot is incoherent, and is focused on making his film distinctly displeasing to watch. Depp compliments him by being so utterly charismatic, that even when he is so riddled with disease that he is unrecognizable to the eye, he can still captivate an audience. Without Depp, “The Libertine” would be unwatchable. Without Dunmore 's vision, it wouldn't have been brilliant.   (Three and a half stars)   This review was provided in HTML format, as your browser is not capable of displaying flash content. To experience Critical-Film.com the way it was meant to be seen, please download the flash player from <a href="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash&promoid=BIOW">Macromedia</a>.