The Motion Picture of Dorian Gray
Posted by madaardvark on July 30, 2009
I believe now that the war is lost. The film Dorian Gray that is due in theaters September 9th is perhaps the most offensive thing I’ve ever been accosted with. Note the title of the film, and watch this trailer:
Did anyone notice something missing? In the title and in the trailer? That’s right. WHERE IS THE PICTURE? Oscar Wilde’s novel was about the relationship between art, artist, critic, subject, and how the population is affected by artistic movements, particularly the decadent/aesthetic movement of his time. What happens when you remove or downplay the art aspect of that story? I can’t tell if the portrait of Dorian Gray is in the movie, but it’s certainly ignored in the trailer in favor of Gray’s personal decadence.
Removing the role of the picture, if not the picture itself, and replacing it with mirror images makes the story focus on the personal, post-modern, self-interpretive, self-subjective, self-interested, selfish trend in art and general media that we’ve seen building for years. I doubt this is intended as a criticism or social commentary. Most likely it is a Hollywood response to ‘people don’t want to hear about that art stuff. Let’s focus on the decadence and the individual.’ In the end, this movie can say, is that there is no real art, or that it doesn’t matter. Critic and artist are one in the same (with the merging of Basil and Lord Henry into one character, it seems), and their opinion shouldn’t matter to you because they are manipulating you into belief rather than allowing you, the individual, to make decisions on your own.
I have never heard before, in my life, that Dorian Gray’s problems were all because of ‘what Lord Henry did.’ His curse extended from a pledge that he made himself, based on the unpracticed philosophy of Lord Henry and a painting created by Basil Hallward, followed by the choices that Gray made after being linked to the painting as he was. We’ll see how that all plays out with this new movie, and maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
What I expect, though, is another confused ‘message’ being sent out by Hollywood. They produce a sensationalist movie that gives warning about individuals (the audience) indulging in decadent behavior, all the while giving the audience a means of experiencing that behavior vicariously through the characters in the movie. And that’s it. From what I saw in the trailer, if there is a portrait of Gray, it was created by Lord Henry almost in secret, and he’s using it against Gray, or some stupid thing like that. The entire point of the story is pissed on and thrown right out the window, while at the same time, the movie stands as an unintentional metaphor for the state of Fine Art in the world – all gone, replaced by selfish individualism at the cost of understanding anything outside one’s limited personal experiences.
The Mad Aardvark 
Ace fitton said
Why would you say this? What would be the use of making a movie about Dorian Gray if they don’t use the picture? Without it Dorian Gray would have sinned all he wanted to and went to hell like anyone else who did bad things. Let me call to mind somethings about the preview that you probably were too busy to notice. An old and bearded Basil Hallward runs his hand down the front of a painted canvas, right after the words “FOEVER YOUNG come onto the screen, and even says “what are you.” towhich Dorian replys “I am what you made me!” This a direct quote from Oscar Wilde’s novel. Pthe second point i want to focus on is that after the words FOREVER CURSED a rather disturbing, but clearly oil paint, figure comes on to the screen. THe man is clearly over eighty, wearing a terrible frown and is unmoving and unblinking. This is a painting, not a mirror. In any case all you have written is rubbish anyway, because the novel is all about the soul and the afflictions we plague it with as we indulge in the comfortable life of sin. The Portrait does’nt represent arts changing throughout time or any of the crap you put on this website, it represent a perfect conscience and a warning. Lord Henry doesn’t even know about the picture and i don’t see how you got that he is somehow threatning Dorian with it, because Henry is only in the first part and the trailer shows him to be exactly what he was in the novel…the bad influence that made Dorian want to stay young and in a way, a tempter and as he was in the book, a pleasure seeking hedonist. So now i leave you with a question, writter of this article. HAVE YOU EVER READ THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY BY OSCAR WILDE!!! Because it sounds to me like all you’ve ever read is the wikipedia plot summary.
madaardvark said
Listen, “Ace,” I did my graduate work on the novel. Even the most oblivious reader (present company – you – excluded) will have to notice that the novel is prefaced by a long-winded statement about art and its role in society. The book is an answer to artists and critics who believed in those insipid cliches ‘art for art’s sake’ and ‘art imitates life, life imitates art.’ The entire book is about that relationship and how artists (Basil) and critics (Henry) perpetuate the myths about art that, from what I understand from your post, you and Dorian Gray have both been stupid enough to fall for. You have probably not read the novel, but you are most definitely no scholar of literary work. Go back to Harry Potter.
…and, more importantly, you missed the point, both mine and the film’s, as people usually do. The picture has been most definitely downplayed because the average John Q. Public doesn’t give a shit about art, only their self-indulgence. I saw the painting in the film when “Basil” runs his hands along it. I think what you see is Henry, as they have merged the two characters together. In the novel Henry knew all about the portrait – he was there when it was created and gave Dorian all of his ideas. The critic, here, expounding philosophically while making no direct action of his own, leaving the public to suffer from bad ideas that he remains blissfully immune to. Henry doesn’t know about the picture? Clearly a change made in the film to emphasis that he’s a dick, manipulating Dorian.
Did they not push the mirror idea? Did you not see the same trailer? It is a response to today’s selfish audience. Why would someone be tortured by a painting that sits in a room locked away? No, he has to be CONFRONTED with it constantly. His own peace of mind is not good enough of a motivation. The image you’re talking about is just shit computer graphics and looks nothing like an oil painting.
I don’t have to watch the clip and hear one sound byte that you have already alerted me to (although your powers of observation are certainly questionable). It doesn’t matter if there is a painting in the movie. They have moved it to the side as being unimportant and moved reflections to the central metaphor position. I can’t believe how easily people disregard the PAINTING. It was there for a reason! Peaople act as though Wilde chose a painting because there were no mirrors in his time…
Ace fitton said
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+picture+of+dorian+gray&docid=1089701151293&FORM=VIRE5
P.S. Try watching this clip and listen to the director say, “Do you want to see that portrait.” It might help convince you I am right.
Ace fitton said
I am very sorry. you weren’t very clear in your original post, so i didn’t understand what mean’t by mirrors. I know now of course that you were speaking of Dorian’s reflection in the tray and in the mirror facing his piano. I completely agree with your statement that “art imitating life.” I have read the book, it’s my favorite, but i read it purely from a religious point of view. Not an artistic view. I felt like you ignored that the painting not only mirrored all you said, but also the dicease of sin we plague our self with that knawls away at the soul. I am sorry i was so rude, but i felt you had cut the portrait short, speaking only of the art it expressed and not of conscience it represented. I see from your last post that you fully appreciate it, and I do feel as though I was being stupid. I should have thought about it more but on this I must disagree with you, they have not fused Lord Henry and Basil Hallward together as one character. IMDB movies, say that Ben Chaplin is to play Basil, Colin Firth to play Harry. Also I didn’t disregard the painting as unimportant, (and my powers of oberservation is good but my spelling is not as good) I have seen th preface. Also I know that Henry knew all about it but he did not know it was aging or recording sins. This was all i meant by the statement I made. Before i made any more accusations i would like you to explain what you meant by “He’s manipulating Dorian with the picture” because I don’t get how you think the film preview shows that he is blackmailing or manipulating Dorian with when he’s only in about twenty seconds of the trailer. I am not passing judgement because I misunderstood a lot of what you said to begin with! So explain in more detail, please, so i will understand. I agree that the painting seems not to be enough for the self indulgent audience. I hope that my thoughts will help you open your mind, as your posts have helped me open mine. This is a point I want to ask your oppinion on…Have you thought that maybe Dorian only sees his soul in the mirror as a sort of “notification” that the portrait has channged?
I am not trying to be a smart, are anything. I just want to apologize for my jumping to conclusions. Please forgive me and post back with your opinion when you can. I should be happy to read them. I was having a very bad day and i thought of you as you must now think of me. But that is no excuse for acting the way i did. I hope you know that I see your point of view now and accept that we were both right about part of the book. Me in my belief that sin brings about ultimate destruction and you were right that art and the relationship it holds were the main theme of the book. I was, however wrong to say that what you wrote was wrong. Once again i do apologize for my behavior.
madaardvark said
Yes, I’ve thought of that reflection as a representation of the portrait changing, but using that trick in the film still reinforces that concept of personal that is lacking in the book, and in the entire point of the concept.
I will disagree with a religious reading of the book for a couple of reasons. First, Wilde was not only a flaming homosexual, but he was also very interested in hedonism as a means of achieving knowledge. Secondly, he did this partially as a means of living up to the life imitating art idea that others could not. Finally, the book was more of a tongue-in-cheek (or penis, or whatever Wilde had in there) response to contemporary critics of his work.
I hear what you’re saying about the short clip, and I agree. I will refrain from further interpretations (what I’ve said so far is more than enough) until I see that horrible film.
Iùbel said
Actually, I believe the reason why the picture isn’t mentioned in the title is merely a copyright issue. As for the trailer, I agree with a majority of the comments before. However, movie trailers have been known to pass over certain aspects of a movie that would discourage audiences from wanting to see it (I have the trailer of Tim Burton’s Sweeney Todd in mind, among others) Which doesn’t contradict what you said, of course, but perhaps the art aspect of the book is more present in the film than one would think. And finally, one must admit that most people, alas, haven’t got such an extensive knowledge of the book as you seem to have, having written a paper on it. So, it is only natural that those designing the trailer emphasized on those aspects that were more likely to be known, or appeal, to the average Joe.
madaardvark said
These are valid and excellent points. Actually, my point isn’t that the movie is going to be a colossal failure, or be completely worthless, based on these things I noticed. It was more of an observation about what these changes suggest in a postmodern reinterpretation of the novel, which only reflects the poor state of affairs that art and literature have fallen to in recent years. Most contemporary art and literature focus on personal experiences that are wholly unapproachable by anyone who does not share those experiences. The movie, then, supports this by shifting the focus from the painting (general art for the masses) to mirror reflections that only Gray can see (specific art for the individual). Regardless if the painting is there or not, that shift in focus is definitely there. I am curious to see the movie, despite my reservations, because that could be totally intentional on the part of the film makers – but I kind of doubt it. Or – and this is another doubt – I could be completely misunderstanding what I see based on movie trailers designed to bring in mass audiences (not the first time this happened – I thought Jerry Maguire was going to be a movie about football based on the trailers I saw).
secretiveagent said
Hi, MadAardvark. Just wondered if you’ve seen the film yet? I’d be interested to know what you thought. I must confess that I came to the film from a position of ignorance, having not read the book, but I think that the trailer did not do the film justice. Certainly the picture itself did play a very important role in the film, and there was no doubt in my mind that Gray sealed his own fate.
I was transfixed by the story, however, and will certainly be reading the novel very soon!
madaardvark said
I have not seen the movie yet. We’re still waiting for an American theater release. As soon as I have the opportunity, I will see this film, though.
Wrayth said
I’ve read the book (a while ago now) and have just recently watched the film.
1. Basil and Lord Henry are TWO characters. No merging. And the role of Basil is more like the first edition of Oscars Book (1890 version)…..ummm you’ll have to see the film, i dont want to spoil it now.
2. The Painting features a major part in the film. The mirror reflection thing was just **SPOILER** near the end of the film, more his re-emerging conscience acting up.
3. “His curse extended from a pledge that he made himself, based on the unpracticed philosophy of Lord Henry and a painting created by Basil Hallward, followed by the choices that Gray made after being linked to the painting as he was.” is more how the movie plays out, although Lord Henry is slightly blamed. The onus is on Dorian though. He made the choice. At least thats how I saw it.
A warning though, the end deviates slightly from the book. As a film it was very enjoyable, and i hope you have fun watching it, and dont take it too seriously. I look forward to hearing your views once you have seen it! 🙂
All the Best,
Reid Domianus said
Hey, just thought I’d let you know that your blog isn’t displaying right on explorer 4. Anyways, keep up the good work!!!
madaardvark said
People still use Explorer 4?
Still, thanks for the encouragement.