I'm middle of the road on this. I didn't hate it, but I had little emotional reaction to the film. I think the best part was the opening monologue where Depp speaks directly to the viewer. That worked and had depth of power. It set up in my mind that I'd be seeing him as this brutal-self indulgent, who's also an intellectual genius and artist. I've seen other movies based on 17th & 18th century poets & writers who did live large, drank, whored and behaved all together badly, whilst writing some of histories greatest literature and poetry. But that's not who the Earl of Rochester (Johnny Depp) was...I think I understand the message of the film? Which I believe was:
That he wasted his life, deluding himself that he was 'living life to the fullest' with his decadence, when in fact he was hiding from living...and when given the chance to do something great by writing a play worthy of his intellect, he chose instead to write a play that was bawdy lampooning. In the end he pays for his ways by catching syphilis and becoming a near invalid. Thus showing how hiding from life behind a mask brings nothing but an empty chalice. Though he does realize this at the end, when he rises to the occasion and saves the King's position in Parliament.
I wasn't a fan of the director's choice of look for the film. The graininess and the greenish cast with low color saturation made it look like a BBC TV broadcast from an old Masterpiece Theater. It would have been nice to have more period piece sets, and less close-ups. But the lack of sets and choice of close ups is probably a budget thing, so not a deal breaker.
My favorite scenes were with Samantha Morton. It was interesting how he coached her to find her inner truth and thus transformed her into London's greatest actress.
Last edited by Citizen Rules; 10-21-18 at 03:18 PM.