The Libertine
Weinstein Company, The | Release Date: November 23, 2005
7.0
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 56 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
38
Mixed:
5
Negative:
13
Watch Now
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
3
SarahB.Aug 23, 2006
Good actors, really foul script. Even this Depp lover couldn't stay awake for the entirety of this snorefest.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
9
PatO.Jul 9, 2006
Brilliant acting. Exremely difficult role and lines delivered with mezmerizing expertise. I thoroughly enjoyed the art of Depp.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DavidH.Dec 5, 2005
Amazing!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
LenaB.Mar 12, 2006
This is a terrible, terrible, terrible movie. The last movie I can remember that had a good pedigree but was this terrible was Enigma. I cannot understand how talented people could have made something this ridicucously absurd. Please This is a terrible, terrible, terrible movie. The last movie I can remember that had a good pedigree but was this terrible was Enigma. I cannot understand how talented people could have made something this ridicucously absurd. Please don't waste your money!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
BitB.Mar 10, 2006
Ok, apart from Depp's strong performance, purely as an actor, this film sucked big time. I love dark, contentious, bizarre films but this was really boring.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
KarenW.Mar 16, 2006
An amazing performance by Depp. But I wish the direction had been better. Really a thought provoking film if you take the time to think about what you've seen.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
[Anonymous]Sep 1, 2006
The painful choices of two women, wife and mistress, were as sensitively portrayed as was Johnny Depp
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AndyS.Dec 5, 2005
A bizarre and completely intoxicating experience unlike anything I have ever seen.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
CathyW.Mar 12, 2006
Extraordinary performance from Depp, Malkovich Morton and Pike. The restoration was not a pretty venue. History is history. And these performances are outstanding. The film may have some flaws. But overall it is a rivieting story and I am Extraordinary performance from Depp, Malkovich Morton and Pike. The restoration was not a pretty venue. History is history. And these performances are outstanding. The film may have some flaws. But overall it is a rivieting story and I am proud that Johnny did the movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
TomB.Mar 21, 2006
I dunno, it wasn't the worst movie I ever saw. It just wasn't very good. Suffered from very poor editing. When Depp is cast asunder by his dad, and he's playing a charlatan who has some potion that will cure the public's I dunno, it wasn't the worst movie I ever saw. It just wasn't very good. Suffered from very poor editing. When Depp is cast asunder by his dad, and he's playing a charlatan who has some potion that will cure the public's ills, he then has a bad eye. You figure it's something done to be 'in character' for the charlatan role. it's not - he's really sick, and he's gotten sick in the 6 months his father (the King) banished him. I could give you 10 other examples of that. Just really bad editing.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KevinC.Mar 25, 2006
All the reviews have missed the salient point. Wilmot is bi-polar. The camera work, the music, it's all mirrors of his moods. Because he's brilliant he does thing purely because he can. When the actress finally sees he for who ge All the reviews have missed the salient point. Wilmot is bi-polar. The camera work, the music, it's all mirrors of his moods. Because he's brilliant he does thing purely because he can. When the actress finally sees he for who ge really is, her scenes on camera are transformed. When Wilmot addresses Lords, it's because he can -- and he knows James' faye as king will be. It's bi-polar all the way. Gripping.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
TimothyP.Aug 1, 2006
Absolutely the most boring worthless movie I've seen in a long time!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MayaB.Aug 22, 2006
What a great surprise. I expected a big production movie full of moral lessons and naked wenches, but what I saw was a tale about the darkness of the human soul, and the impulse of self destruction in the face of hypocrisy and boredom.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
VivWFeb 18, 2007
This is where you need a minus section, just a long drawn out ramblings out of all context,vwaste of money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
P.MFoxNov 20, 2005
Beautifully directed and costumed, but tedious. Depp plays a petulant teenager in a grown man's body spectacularly - sadly the plot, and indeed characters, do not do justice to the rich species of acting talent cast.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AlistairD.Dec 11, 2005
I don't think its the greatest movie of all time but it is a great movie and it offers something original as well. Funny, bizarre and sad in places, Depp is brillent throughout.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SamJ.Dec 5, 2005
A decadent, satirical and devishly entertaining confection with a superior performance by Depp and the greatest score in Michael Nyman's career. Stunning monologues. Those who call it trash are not bright enough to negotiate it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DawnB.Mar 21, 2006
Superb! This is Johnny Depp at his best, stunning and compelling to watch. This movie is based on a play, so do not expect swashbuckling action (although there is a very short sword fight scene). If you love to see great actors performing Superb! This is Johnny Depp at his best, stunning and compelling to watch. This movie is based on a play, so do not expect swashbuckling action (although there is a very short sword fight scene). If you love to see great actors performing you will love this movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RyanC.Sep 29, 2006
If I could vote -50 I would...this movie is that bad!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
ChetR.Jan 24, 2007
Fascinating for the first hour, especially the direct confrontation of the audience by the Earl, but then it gets confused and drops into incoherence. But the excellence of its premise, its quest of what life and love and art is, the Fascinating for the first hour, especially the direct confrontation of the audience by the Earl, but then it gets confused and drops into incoherence. But the excellence of its premise, its quest of what life and love and art is, the uniformly interesting performances and mis-en-scene, makes me wish they could have pulled it off.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AndrewS.Nov 19, 2005
Nearly every performance in this film is a showstopper. I am completely unsure where to even begin--Depp is masterful, but even his performance is overshadowed by the willowy earnestness of Rosamund Pike, the sheer brilliance of John Nearly every performance in this film is a showstopper. I am completely unsure where to even begin--Depp is masterful, but even his performance is overshadowed by the willowy earnestness of Rosamund Pike, the sheer brilliance of John Malkovich, or, perhaps most of all, the fierce determination and brio of Samantha Morton. Period pieces that play up the squalor of 17th century London are becoming the norm, but this film has an authentic vulgarity that is absent nearly all other films so set. The plot itself is gripping, taut as a bowstring. And it works so well for the virtuosity of the cast to find themselves in its development that it becomes absolutely seamless, a perfect narrative acted by performers at the very peak of their powers.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
PrudenceK.Nov 24, 2005
Trash. This film was trash. Awful. Depp gives one of the worst performances I have ever seen! It is beyond awful. Anyone who thought he could get an Oscar nod for this awful performance should seriously be tortured.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnnyStephensAug 30, 2013
A masterpiece!!! I really loved that movie. Johnny Depp has a gift and that's why is the best actor in the world. Do not miss it!!! That's the true story of the second Earl of Rochester!
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
meenaApr 27, 2014
Absolute 10. One of my favorite movies. Great story, wonderful performances by all actors involved. Very Shakespearean feel, dark and moody, and also extremely sensual. I don't know why this movie wasn't given an Oscar. I guess moviesAbsolute 10. One of my favorite movies. Great story, wonderful performances by all actors involved. Very Shakespearean feel, dark and moody, and also extremely sensual. I don't know why this movie wasn't given an Oscar. I guess movies about little known poets don't provide for a wide enough viewership. See it repeatedly. It will stay with you forever.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
FilipeNetoFeb 13, 2022
After a period of social and moral puritanism, inspired by the consolidation of the Church of England and a more austere political regime - the English Republic - the first decades of the return to the monarchy saw a reversal of thisAfter a period of social and moral puritanism, inspired by the consolidation of the Church of England and a more austere political regime - the English Republic - the first decades of the return to the monarchy saw a reversal of this scenario, with society allowing itself to do more mundane customs and habits, especially in court life. It is in this context that appears John Wilmott, 2nd Earl of Rochester, whose father was a crucial figure in supporting the House of Stuart and to whom King Charles II himself owed gratitude.

This film approaches, in very generic lines and with a dose of fiction, the life of this controversial playwright and poet and his relationship, fluctuating and unstable, with his royal benefactor. Rochester married Elizabeth Mallet after kidnapping her, but it was not a happy marriage in the long run. As the film shows, he lived a dissolute existence, squandering his family fortune among the most infamous theaters, taverns and brothels in London and tarnishing his reputation with various scandals: in addition to the numerous mistresses, actresses and prostitutes with whom he involved, will have had dishonorable conduct in a situation that ended in the murder of one of his friends, in addition to being accused of quackery and illegal practice of medicine. Although the film prefers not to talk about it, Rochester got to know several European countries, where he left a good intellectual reputation, and was also notable for his bravery in the naval combats of the Anglo-Dutch War. After a life of sexual and alcoholic excesses, the poet ended up paying the bill at a young age, dying at 33, profoundly weakened by syphilis. For posterity would be his last words, in which he renounced atheism, and a work of poetry and erotic and satirical dramaturgy deeply caustic for the time and which is still considered quite adult and provocative today.

The film is quite good, and I think it just didn't receive more recognition and visibility due to the provocative and controversial nature of the character it focuses on. It is not, at all, a suitable movie to watch with grandparents or the parish priest. Laurence Dunmore directed with skill and talent, beautifully combining historical realism with the creative need that a film demands. The casting choice was smart, and Johnny Depp is the most suitable option to bring the libertine to life. The actor has a penchant for bizarre characters, and Rochester fits him like a glove. John Malkovich also did an excellent job, giving Charles II a good dose of realism, without exaggerated pomp. Samantha Morton also lived up to her character, an actress who wants to approach her career professionally and not just be an occasional hooker for wealthy patrons. Finally, a word of appreciation for the work of Rosamund Pike and Richard Coyle.

The film exudes realism in the way it exposes the environments of the restored court. Far from the luxury of European monarchies, the English court appears here in dark and almost violent tones, with an omnipresent humidity. London looks like a muddy and dirty sewer rather than a big capital. Nevertheless, the costumes and sets betray the luxury and sumptuousness of the environments and mansions of the aristocracy. I especially liked Rochester's clothes and the long wigs that pontificated in men's fashion at the time. The cinematography makes good use of these shadows and existing light to nuance the look, making the film as dark as its main character's personality. Finally, I cannot end without praising the skill and elegance of Michael Nyman's score.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
More From This Movie

44 Critic Reviews

7.0 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 81 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple
2 77 Project Hail Mary
3 75 Send Help
4 73 Hoppers
5 72 The Sheep Detectives
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL