Dorian Gray


Action / Drama / Fantasy / Thriller

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 43%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 39%
IMDb Rating 6.3 10 55653


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 73,401 times
September 23, 2012 at 02:47 PM



Rebecca Hall as Emily Wotton
Colin Firth as Lord Henry Wotton
Ben Barnes as Dorian Gray
Rachel Hurd-Wood as Sibyl Vane
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
750.10 MB
24.000 fps
1hr 52 min
P/S 6 / 55
1.50 GB
24.000 fps
1hr 52 min
P/S 1 / 13

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Michael Ledo 8 / 10

Don't worry. He's a doctor.

Dorian Gray arrives in London, young and beautiful, the desire of all the ladies. Young and innocent, he is taken under the wing of atheist Henry Wotton, who spares young Dorian no vice. A portrait becomes the embodiment of his body and soul aging, while he stays forever young.

This is about the one zillionth remake of the Oscar Wilde story. I have found this one more enjoyable than most, but not as dark and sinister. I thought Ben Barnes did good in the title role.

Guide: sex and nudity.

Reviewed by Paul Magne Haakonsen 4 / 10

A visually great presentation of a hollow story...

Being somewhat familiar with the essence and the story of Dorian Gray from literature, but not having actually read the book, then I must admit that I had some expectations for a movie such as this 2009 rendering of the story by director Oliver Parker. However, it is not before late in 2017 that I actually got around to find the time to sit down and watch the movie, despite having owned the DVD for years.

I found the storytelling in the movie to be slow paced, actually too much so for my liking, and it was taking a serious toll on the enjoyment of the movie for me. It rambled on and on and took forever to go almost nowhere. And I ended up feeling rather bored and finding the storyline itself to be rather pointless.

What made "Dorian Gray" bearable for me to watch was because they had gotten together a group of talented actors and actresses to perform in the movie. I am not familiar with the work of Ben Barnes, but he carried the movie quite well and was well cast for the lead role of Dorian Gray. But of course with names such as Ben Chaplin and Colin Firth as well, then the movie was secured some pretty solid acting performances.

While the storyline was rather boring and slow paced, then the special effects department really put together some really nice visuals for the movie, and it was a real treat to watch that on the screen. I must admit that I was impressed with the CGI that they had in this movie, and that alone does count for a great deal in terms of making the movie somewhat watchable.

I was disappointed with the overall result of this 2009 rendering of the Dorian Gray tale, but I stuck with the movie to the very end. I can't claim to have much of any interest in ever watching this movie again, then I am more inclined to pick up a physical copy of Oscar Wilde's classic and give that a read.

Reviewed by redanhemma 4 / 10

Decent movie, HORRIBLE adaptation!

As a movie in and of itself this is not too bad, in fact I might even have really liked it if I hadn't read the book. However, as an adaptation, this was a disaster. Like many other reviewers I get the feeling that they didn't even read the book! So many things are just way off, it's awful...

They took way too many "creative liberties" and it certainly didn't add anything of value, it just made it look like a poor attempt of being unique (if you want to make an adaptation, you should follow the original, otherwise you should make your own story).

Henry suddenly had a daughter (???) who would serve as the romantic interest and I get the impression that she was meant to "save" Dorian from his lifestyle or something. The painting was practically alive, it could move and make noise and seemed to be physically decaying - the first sign of corruption, if memory serves, was a maggot or something eating its way through the canvas. Why? Hell, I don't know. Basil's death was unnecessarily violent and he was chopped up into pieces and dumped in a river, presumably so that he could be found later in the movie and cause drama. These are just some examples of the weird things that were changed, because screw the original, right?

Most of the characters were really off, and some plot points were changed for no apparent reason, it served no purpose whatsoever and they should have been kept the way they were. They also did a lousy job at subtlety, either they didn't know how to do it or they thought the audience would be too stupid to pick up on it.

Again, as a movie on its own it's kind of alright, but it's quite frankly a disgrace when compared to the original. I had really high hopes for it too, I think they really could have done a much better job if only they had bothered reading the book.

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment