Crappy film

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

I initially rented The Trials of Oscar Wilde because it was James Mason's time as Star of the Week. Somehow, in the 1960s, he got second billing in a bunch of movies but was only in them for fifteen minutes. Long before James even showed up, I realized this was a very high quality movie, one that was going to be enjoyed instead of just being useful.Peter Finch played Oscar Wilde, and he gave an incredible, fantastic, multi-layered performance that, of course, was completely ignored by the academy. Thankfully at the BAFTAs, he won Best Actor, and the film was nominated for picture, screenplay, and supporting actor. Back in 1960, it was a big risk to play a homosexual, and Peter treated the role with dignity and much more motivation than plain flamboyance. This is an internal performance, one that shows years of pain underneath the famous quips. If you like to laugh at Oscar Wilde's barbs, or if you like over-the-top parodies of gay characters, rent the remake Wilde. For a more realistic interpretation of the emotional turmoil of a gay man in the 1890s, rent this one.The story is pretty upsetting to watch, mostly because it's not possible to slough off afterwards and tell yourself it's only fiction. This is a true story and shows the horror and hatred of human nature. Don't pop this in for a fun-filled movie night; watch it when you're in the mood for a very heavy drama.

Beautifully Filmed in Technicolor with a Script that Incorporates Many of Wilde's Famous Witticisms. Peter Finch is Not Physically what One Conjures when an Image of the Successful Playwright and Author Comes in the Mind, but He is Playing the Gay Martyr as the Man in His Forties and Not the Flamboyant Peacock of His Early Manhood.It is a Daring Film for its Time and was Predictably Shunned by Some Theatres and had No Air Time on American TV for Decades. But it is All Done with a Subtlety and Sensitivity that is Palatable for Any Audience and is a Heartfelt and Sad Rendition of what led to Oscar Wilde's Imprisonment for Two Years for the Crime of Practicing Homosexuality.The Acting is Superb All Around with Lionel Jeffries as Lord Queensberry (yes, of boxing rules fame) as a Villain Worth Hating and by All Accounts Fairly Accurate. The Movie Moves Along at a Steady Pace and is Informative and Entertaining but Ultimately Downbeat. It is Only a Small Portion of the Life of Oscar Wilde and is this Slice that was Decidedly Devastating. Not Only for His Hard Labor Prison Term but the Insensitivity of His Wife that Forbade Oscar from Ever Seeing His Children Again. He Never Recovered and Died Penniless. The Film Ends as He is Released from Incarceration and Never goes into the Post Traumatic Downfall. The Trials both Personally and Judicially were Enough Sadness in an Otherwise "Gay" Life (happy and carefree) and Lifestyle (Bisexual) of the Most Quoted Man of His Era.

One should always consider the possibility that had Oscar Fingal O'Flaherty Wills Wilde not fallen inconveniently in love with Lord Alfred Douglas he might now be remembered only as a relatively minor Irish playwright with a propensity for presenting other people's bon mots as his own.His ascent to his unassailable position as the Theatre's great gay martyr is at least to some extent the result of his treatment at the hands of the British judicial system. As unpleasing as it may be to sophisticated 21st century thought,the "homosexual act" -as gay love was referred to in Victorian law books - was considered a crime and the "abominable crime of buggery" was punishable by Life Imprisonment.Queen Victoria refused to endorse laws proscribing Lesbianism because she not only had never heard of it but she refused to believe its existence.Aware of all those facts Oscar Wilde chose to sue his lover's father for libel after the Marquess of Queensberry referred to him as a "somdomite" (sic).It says much for his chutzpah if not his intelligence. Mr P.Finch is a fine,sensitive if rather louche Oscar,clearly besotted with the pretty but insubstantial John Fraser.Mr L. Jeffries pushes the boat out a bit as the Marquess of Queensberry,very much an aristocrat of his time with a zealot's hatred of homosexuality as only an old public school man can have.Mr J.Mason is suitably ruthless as his barrister,cold of heart,tongue and eye. This is a handsome film,a typical superior British product of its era, requiring its audience to stay awake and keep off their mobile phones. If you require an instant fix it isn't for you. Wilde may ultimately have been a victim of his own ego,but the Marquess of Quennsberry must be spinning in his grave over his own contribution to his old enemy's immortality.

Ken Hughes film 'The Trials of Oscar Wilde' may at first appear to be one of those cheesy Technicolor costume dramas when in fact it is a gripping and finely acted account of the appalling treatment Oscar Wilde received at the hands of the English justice system at the end of the 19th century.Peter Finch is superb as the eponymous hero and is totally committed to the role and turns in one of his best performances on screen. The supporting cast is also quite good if more generalized in their characterizations, more a fault of the screenplay than the performers. There is one especially fine supporting performance from Lionel Jeffries as the maniacal Lord Queensbury. Jeffries plays Queensbury as a crazed brute, a type of man we can no longer countenance in these days, though I suspect they are still out there waiting for their chance to pounce on those who they fear and do not understand.Sonia Dresdel is Lady Wilde, Oscar's dotty mother at the end of her life. It's a small part but is quietly powerful. Other people in Wilde's life, Constance, his wife, and Ada Leverson, his stalwart friend and life-long supporter, are tantalizingly glimpsed but little is revealed of their inner workings. But this isn't a film about them but about the actual trials and much of the film is spent in courtrooms. This might sound boring but it isn't.James Mason appears in the first trial as the defending witness, for Lord Queensbury, and a more vicious, narrow-minded lawyer could hardly be found, even these days.The technical credits are competent if nothing special; the music, melodramatic in a soap-opera-ish way, the sets plush and too clean. But somehow the power and tragedy of Wilde's story comes through all the gilding of the script, peppered with some of Wilde's wiser quotes, well-placed, naturally, in the text. There is nothing preachy or moralistic which is a relief, compared to the highly politicized scripts being written since this film was made.It is interesting to note Nicholas Roeg as the camera operator. He wasn't the cinematographer but I detected a few Roeg-ish touches in a couple of the more meditative scenes.This is not a film to be sluffed off as old-fashioned simply because there are no sex scenes or vulgar language or violence. The psychic violence suffered by Oscar Wilde was quite sufficient enough and this is a memorable film, worth having in the collection.