I find this movie beautiful, intriguing, touching and somewhat disturbing. Pretty much artistic, yet appealing to different types of audience. However, most likely it won't be enjoyable for everyone, because of explicit content and perhaps disturbing images.Director Lawrence Dunmore did an amazing job and created something that could easily be considered as a masterpiece. Johnny Depp gave a standout performance (one of the best in his career; he should have won Oscar for it), as well as Samantha Morton, John Malkovich and Rosamund Pike.I've heard many people complaining how "dark" the movie is, as if it was filmed in shadows. But that's what XVII century was like - shady, dark and dirty.One of the best aspects of the movie is both physical and psychological metamorphosis of the main character. In the first part of the movie we see a man who has everything, but values nothing. Most people around him like him only because he's well known, gorgeous looking and influential person. Those who do really know him, such as his wife and mother, truly love him the way he is, but he doesn't seem to care much about them As the movie proceeds he finds true love, that, as he said, teaches him "how to love life", but he becomes ill and everyone begins to avoid him. Ironically, the only people who are there for him at that point are the ones whose love he had never appreciated.One could possibly say it's a shame that it hadn't been a major Hollywood project, because more people would have heard of it, but I think it's better this way, since it has avoided some of the boring Hollywood clichés.

I both loved this movie and found it SO FRUSTRATING. The best scenes in the movie in my perspective all came in the first forty-five minutes, and the movie--like Johnny Depp's character's life--went downhill from there. I wanted to know more about this character, what made him tick and why he had gotten to be the way he had, before launching into his downward spiral. He was already half-dead from consumption and half-crazy from trying to keep alive conflicting ideas at the same time in his head when we met him during the movie. He was a boor, well-played by Johnny Depp without a doubt but frankly predictable in his self-hating, life-hating, world-despising sort of worldview. He takes an actress under his wing in order to feel as though he has made some contribution to the world, like an agent representing a musician who he secretly wishes he himself could become. He is every frustrated artist unwilling to fight for his work. This in itself is entertaining, for sure, but satisfying? No.It is difficult to feel satisfied with a character whose life ends in obscurity and the kind of strange decisions that suggest he is trying to repent and make amends before his life and last chance are over.How difficult would it have been to show Johnny Depp and 'Elizabeth' playing out the abduction scene only discussed in the beginning of the film? How difficult would it have been to introduce some more FUN into this dark, depressing take on England during a time period where there theoretically should have been enough art, culture, life and sex to distract from the skepticism and awfulness of it. Shakespeare in Love was amazing because it was so much FUN to experience. This movie could easily have shown that movie up, all the elements were there--Depp, the incredible female leads, the fun of an incredibly inappropriate play, the gorgeousness of the costuming and detail involved in all of this. Clearly everyone involved was passionate about the project. So--why not insert a degree of LIFE into it?

Most historical dramas follow a deadly-dull formula, based on pretty costumes, convention and romance. But 'The Libertine' is a wholly refreshing film, showing that it's possible to make an original period drama that shuns the formulae that mar many others. The film is boosted by terrific performances from the entire cast, and a poetic dialogue that has the feel of that of a 17th century play, but subtly infused with a naturalistic and contemporary flavour. The story is based on a real life libertine, and the court of Charles II was known for its debauchery, but I doubt the real figure was quite as extraordinary or publicly obscene as the character played here by Johnny Depp; but the world depicted here makes perfect sense in its own terms. And the creation of this world is really the film's entire point, as the plot is fairly linear and limited. But this is a movie of unusual flair and verve.

It has never ceased to amaze me that this film has almost bypassed most of the viewing public. Depp's performance is Oscar-worthy. The film has humour, pathos, intense drama at times, and the ending is heart-wrenching. I defy anyone to watch this film and not find it one of the most memorable, even if it can't be said to be 'enjoyable'. What surprises me the most is that the younger members of our household (over 18, but usually more into slash and gore films like the Saw series) have found this film compelling enough to watch it several times. They don't just watch the raunchy scenes either - they find the entire film spell-binding. Depp's final physical appearance is difficult to witness. His performance is utterly stunning. This film is an absolute must-see.