Synopsis
Trailers
Reviews (61)
-
A
-
U
What’s wrong with the color? why is it so dull and dirty?! . 1 star only for Rosamund Pike! Ranking of Johnny Depp films
46 -
D
Johnny Depp stars as John Wilmot, the Earl of Rochester, a 17th century poet who was more famous for his drunken debauchery and philandering than his prose. The film opens with Depp addressing the camera (and by extension, the audience), letting them know he’s not to be trusted, will fuck anything which halfway piques his interest — male or female — and he LOVES to get fucked up. This leads me to the two major problems I had while watching Laurence Dunmore’s first and (to date) last film: 1. This movie is unbearably dull. The Libertine’s script likes to talk about sex and all manner of lurid acts, but all the action happens off screen, leaving the audience to suffer…
101 3 -
B
-
A
-
V
Aesthetically pleasing, emotionally dull. This film feels like trying to force something too big into a space that clearly can’t hold it. The story they’re trying to tell would have worked much better as a series. Even with its runtime, everything feels rushed you barely get time to process anything, and some subplots don’t land even when they’re literally spelled out. The relationships and character development mostly happen off-screen. And even calling it “development” feels debatable. Nothing more than a waste of time. But at least it taught me one thing: don’t trust random edits you see on social media.
142 -
C
Johnny Depp “verzaubert” in diesem eigenwilligen Film von Laurence Dunmore zunächst als charmanter Verführer, selbst in der Darstellung eines moralisch verkommenen Säufers, mit einer Vorliebe für Exzesse und erotische Fantasien der progressiven Art. Schauplatz ist London des 17. Jahrhunderts. John Wilmot (Johnny Depp) , Earl von Rochester, schreibt ein skandalöses Theaterstück, welches seinen damaligen Finanzier König Charles II (John Malkovich) verhöhnt. Wilmot führt nebenbei ein gerühmtes jedoch auch mit Skandalen übersähtes Leben, wobei er eine Affäre mit der jungen Schauspielerin Elizabeth Barry (Samantha Morton) führt, die er zu einer aussergewöhnlichen Darstellerin ausbilden möchte. Doch König Charles II ist verärgert über den selbstherrlichen Earl, doch besonders über das anmassende Theaterstück anlässlich des hohen französischen Besuchs und leitet somit Wilmots Vertreibung und…
29 3 -
A
The BAFTA Fellowship is a lifetime achievement award presented by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts in recognition of “outstanding achievement in the art forms of the moving image.” It was first awarded in 1971, with the recipient of the award a certain Alfred Hitchcock, truly a fitting candidate for his work across six decades, where he earned his status as one of the greats. In the 53 years since, the Academy has bestowed their highest honour to over 100 different individuals, several organisations, and even Games Developers Rockstar Games. There are some famous names to go alongside Hitchcock, a veritable who’s who within the industry, and although the majority of them are British, you couldn’t argue with…
34 4 -
🕵
-
A
Johnny Depp has played many parts in a career littered with memorable characters. From Captain Jack Sparrow to Willy Wonka, everyone has their personal favorite. He does kooky better than most and although “The Libertine” isn’t particularly well known, it should be. Depp gives the performance of his career as John Wilmot the 2nd Earl Of Rochester, a man “you will not like”. The film is set during the reign of Charles II and Depp’s portrayal of the notorious poet and shagger is a thing of beauty. It’s the only thing of beauty though in a film that’s as crude,vulgar and downright dirty in it’s language as it conveys the utter disregard that John Wilmot has for the constraints of…
39 2 -
V
Fuck it I think this one’s sick
-
K
first of all how in the world could anyone cheat on rosamund pike???? secondly the actresses hair looked like a rats nest thirdly the only good acting moment from johnny (that wasnt too pretencious) was when he pissed himself
-
J
A master class of cunt serving and NASTY one liners + remarkable romantic and grim vibes! Very type o negative Feels like being looked into the eyes of Satan at the end
3 -
I
I think I’ve wanted to watch this film ever since it came out — more than twenty years, at this point! However, I’m not upset that I’m coming to it relatively late, bc the distance makes me appreciate it in a particular way. This is a period drama, an adaptation of a stage play and from the dialogue you can tell immediately. There are some who dislike stagey dialogue, for myself I enjoy it very much. As for Johnny Depp,…
2 -
𝓜
HOW have I not heard of this masterpiece???! BLEEDS TYPE O NEGATIVE 🫀
-
C
His play is an absurd but who can resist Johnny’s charm even if he’s wearing a wig
-
L
The first 5 minutes of the movie i tought i was seein something revolutonary…. Not the case
-
F
Visually very pretty. Substance is dull. It feels like they wanted to make a niche take film, but it just came off as dollar general Marquis De Sade played by Johnny Depp and a bunch of other Hollywood names. Visually very pretty.
-
G
Cranky man dies of crotch rot
-
K
Did my boi Wilmot so dirty.
-
M
It thinks it’s smarter then it is.
-
E
i really wish mr depp were as good a human being as he is an actor
-
F
And no oscars for him??
-
P
What the fuck is going on with the prosthetics in this film
-
R
Stopped within 2 minutes because it was going somewhere I didn’t want to go dirty film dirty camera
-
S
‼️‼️‼️‼️
-
D
Solo la vi por Johnny pero muy zzz
-
S
I can appreciate what it was trying to do I guess but it would have been so much better if everything wasn’t tinted green
-
O
-
L
oop i got ur nose 👃🏻
-
L
I fucking hate how they treated women back then
-
J
Liked this more than I was expecting to – a biography of the Earl of Rochester, poet and dilettante, who was tasked with embodying the new hedonism of the Stuart Restoration and took to it with enthusiasm. Depp, coming to the end of the period when he was a very good actor, leans into the conspicuous insanity of the world and its confines, his life a pursuit of sexual freedom and beauty at catastrophic cost to his health. Pike is…
2 -
Z
Thoroughly enjoyed
-
S
it could have been so much better but the plot is chopped and cut in a manner which makes you wonder where you missed the essential parts, as if you closed your eyes for a second but zoned out for an additional hour. the atmosphere is pleasing, the aesthetics is truly great, the cast is good but the storyline focuses on less important scenes and cuts away from more important. i have no idea if its only theatrical version, i have no idea if there are other versions, but i do believe you can do so much better when the movie is 1h50mins long
-
C
Johnny was an emo shit and I didn’t like him
-
Ꭴ
-
M
não entendi nada
-
M
I adore this film and I really don’t know why
-
G
I am obsessed with movies revolving around poetry and art, this one is such a fine discovery when i first watched it, didn’t take me a second thought before I make it one of the movies I rewatch twice a year. In love.
-
الحمدلله على نعمة جات الي كدر يشرحلي قصة الفلم
-
L
this movie, much like the king’s speech, had a lot that happened within it but did not capture my attention. i think the most interesting parts were john’s teaching moments with lizzie but other than that nothing held me for a long time. it is interesting as i do love history and stories like these would have no problem capturing my attention if i were listening to a podcast. i have no clue what they did to this movie to make the plentiful content boring as hell.
-
H
if potc happened 100 years earlier, but instead of pirates, they were noblemen. the film had a great cast AND was set during charles ii’s (my favourite british monarch’s) rule. if only i actually cared for the plot.
5 -
B
one extra just for samantha morton
-
ㅤㅤ 7 月 3, 2026
monologues are very inspiring but should horny more
-
C
never thought I would get off on Johnny Depp in 1680s attire but here we are ig
-
K
This is a period piece about John Wilmer, the Earl of Winchester, a poet and playwright played by Johnny Depp. What I did like about this was the cast and their performances which also included John Malkovich and Samantha Morton. Most period pieces are not my favourite kind of movies unless the story is very riveting and hooks me into that world. This one didn’t really do it for me. It’s filmed quite well and acted superbly but I was insufferably bored by it. Just my opinion.
5 -
M
Watched because of Johnny Depp and the cast was quite good as well. But the story? Too long and too boring to tell.
1 -
S
I liked how everything wasn’t glorified and true in mens nature
-
S
um weird
-
M
why was he kinda sexy when he was dying of syphilis
-
O
-
O
this is unironically one of the only films i would recommend to everyone and i think that everyone should watch it at some point in their life. i first watched this when i was 7 with my mom, and then rewatched it 3 times between the ages of 11 – 14. it’s not hard to understand the message the film provided and it’s also based on true events which always makes me remember that when i visited London i was…
-
R
-
Y
I get why ppl didnt like It that much but i really vibed with it
-
⛥
i was not expecting to see so many familiar actors—especially tom hollander or kelly relilly— “vanishing spark…why did you let me bet on a horse called vanishing spark..?” AND I WAS NOT EXPECTING THIS TO HAVE ANY FUNNY MOMENTS IN IT AT ALL. don’t get me wrong, the ending was tragic, and the last 30 minutes were especially devastating. i was expecting the WHOLE movie to be like that, but it wasn’t! aaaaand i can’t decide if rochester is just…
4 -
T
-
Y
Тут зійшлося багато речей які я не люблю – біографічна основа, герой “творець-борець-нігіліст-бунтар-просто-тому-що”, нерівномірне зображення (зерно, темрява, іноді гладко і гарно, іноді жахливо, монтаж теж наче робили в останній момент), безліч діалогів, сюжет передбачуваний. В окремі моменти було цікаво спостерігати за акторською грою, але це мабуть все. Не треш, якась спроба у мистецтво тут точно є, але невдала.
-
L
Never heard of this crazy bastard! I was locked in. Probably laughed at the wrong things
-
K
I enjoyed this far more than I thought on the second watch. I feel like it has aged more to my taste now and just enjoyed the monologues of Johnny throughout.
-
R
This shit is freaky, in a weird way.
-
L
No diré nada 😮💨🤫🤫🤫🤫
- Synopsis
- The story of John Wilmot, a.k.a. the Earl of Rochester, a 17th century poet who famously drank and debauched his way to an early grave, only to earn posthumous critical acclaim for his life's work.
- Director
- Laurence Dunmore
- Writer
- Stephen Jeffreys
- Studio
- First Choice Films, Isle of Man Film, Mr. Mudd
- Country
- UK, USA
- Language
- English
- Year
- 2004
- Runtime
- 114 mins
- Canada16 Sep 2004
- USA16 Sep 2004
- France25 Jan 2006
- Portugal26 Jan 2006
- Italy10 Feb 2006
- UK30 Mar 2006
- South Korea02 Aug 2007
- Germany14 Nov 2008
Write a Review