Basically, transporting it to a modern day setting should be enough to do the trick. Christ on a stick, this was a lamentable film. It will never be the worst film ever, nor is it so badly made it sucks hairy balls. But given the fact this was based on Oscar Wilde's "The Picture of Dorian Gray", they sure turned it into an atrocity.The easiest thing to do, was to set the story in the world of models & fashion photography (eternal youth & beauty, right?). Yawn, how original. Furthermore, this film suffers that hard from looking "so nineties", that it hurts. A lot. Ridiculous and worn-out fashion concepts, the photo-shoots are so clichéd (and you should see the result - no artistic value whatsoever), a lot of uninspired pop/rock songs for no reason on the soundtrack, lots of cheap but oh-so-hip at the time editing effects, glossy & shallow sensuality, polished soft sex scenes, art-farty 'beau monde' parties, an artificial fragrance of decadence,... Should I go on?I've seen decadence in the world of fashion portrayed with more flair in a grotesque B-flick like "Night Angel" (1990). I've seen art, photography, evil & mirrors handled better in horror sequel romp like "Amityville: A New Generation" (1993). You think those are great movies? That should say enough about how good a job this "Dorian" did on a classic story. I've also seen great Edgar Allan Poe stories all mangled up and poured into some 'sorority girls' slasher-format in "Buried Alive" (1990), not exactly the most faithful of adaptations. But I'm sure if they'd turned this "Dorian" into a slasher, it would have been a better stupid movie.You can tell Malcolm McDowell had some fun playing his part, as Dorian's (evil) mentor, but it's far less fun seeing him play it. The whole film pretty much bores you along, and so does McDowell after a while.Have the Hughes Brothers make a new "Dorian Gray" movie with a Victorian London setting and give us decent adaptation. It would be for more pleasing looking forward to such a project than suffering through the umpteenth unimaginative Hollywood re-make of any given horror film these days. Or maybe I could check out that 2009 version with Colin Firth. It surely should have more appeal than this trite.

A mediocre re-telling of Oscar Wilde's classic Dorian Gray tale, the only thing about it worth watching is Malcolm McDowell.In his typical baddie role, McDowell is gleefully diabolical and makes even the most ridiculous plot turns almost believable.The rest of the action, while pretty enough to look at, is flawed and boring at best. I rented this on the dollar shelf, and I rented it for McDowell. I got what I paid for.Interestingly, IMDb doesn't allow me to post less than 10 lines of text, so I'm not going to have enough to say about its cheesy acting, rehashed-into-pulp mush of a very thin plot, bad dialogue, wooden character interactions, and all-around TV-movie feel. It's the kind of movie you watch when there's absolutely nothing else to do.My advice? Vacuum instead.

This was shown on cable under the title "Pact with the Devil". I thought it would be an obscure John Carradine flick...but it was this.This is a modernized version of "The Picture of Dorian Grey". Henry (Malcolm McDowell) a very rich man who runs a photographic service becomes enamored with Louis (Ethan Erickson) a young, hunky man. He sees him as the perfect male model and gets him started. He tells Louis about the story of Dorian Grey--a man who makes a deal with the devil--he'll stay young-looking always while his portrait ages. Louis is intrigued and does exactly that. Henry changes Louis' name to Dorian, Dorian becomes a HUGE male model and Henry will do ANYTHING to keep Dorian...including murder.PLOT SPOILER AHEAD!! You've probably guessed that McDowell is the devil and it all ends as the original did. PLOT SPOILER END!! This is no great movie but not bad on its own terms. It's beautifully shot in some absolutely gorgeous settings. The music soundtrack is good and there are some nice directorial touches. The story itself is OK--it follows the original pretty closely. There was one glaring lapse--it takes place over 20 years. Everybody notices how young Dorian stays--but don't notice it with McDowell or another character! McDowell is (quite obviously) having a whale of a time with this and he's just great. Erickson is so-so. Sometimes he's pretty good--other times he's pretty bad. But he is incredibly handsome with a nice body. The surprising thing about this is there's no nudity--the closest they get is when Erickson ALMOST bares his butt.So--for a direct to DVD movie--this isn't too bad. And Erickson IS incredibly good-looking. I give it a 7.

The title of the movie, as shown by Showtime, the other night, was "A Pact with the Devil". It didn't ring a bell as anything seen locally in recent years. The idea of seeing a film with Malcolm McDowell in it, and nothing else worth watching in the other channels, played a trick on us. We witnessed in horror, a remake of the Oscar Wilde's novel "The Picture of Dorian Gray" that has nothing to do with the classic, and much better film, of 1945.Under the direction of Allan A. Goldstein, we are taken, where else, to the world of the super models, where beauty is only skin deep. Henry, who stands as the Devil, tempts Louis into giving his soul in exchange of keeping his good looks forever, duh! Incredibly, we watch as the picture of Louis, now renamed Dorian, ages in ways that are not realistic, at all. I mean, a few wrinkles, we could understand, but making the image in the photograph, taken by Henry, a monster, is pushing reality a bit too far.Malcom McDowell, who is an otherwise excellent actor, lends himself to this misguided attempt to retell something that was better done before and should have been left alone by the people behind this travesty.Watch it at your own risk.