ReelBob: ‘The Happy Prince’ ★★

By Bob Bloom

Playwright Oscar Wilde led a notorious life — one that defied all the social precepts of Victorian England.

Yet, you would never know so by watching “The Happy Prince,” a stodgy look at the last years of Wilde’s life.

The movie, written, directed by and starring Rupert Everett, is nothing more than a series of confrontations, orgies and memories as it flashes back and forth through Wilde’s profligate life.

Wilde, who wrote “The Picture of Dorian Gray” and such plays as “Salome” and “The Importance of Being Earnest,” was a flamboyant individual, which Everett taps into in the movie.

Overall, though, the Wilde he projects is an unpleasant individual — self-absorbed, a moocher and a bore wracked with self-pity.

We see only flashes of what made him a literary giant. The movie lacks insight and context about Wilde’s life and behavior.

You can learn more about him by reading his Wikipedia page than watching “The Happy Prince.”

The movie is a haunting and sober look at an individual who was the toast of Victorian London, but, in time, discarded because of his defiance of convention — specifically, his homosexuality, which landed him a two-year prison sentence.

One of the movie’s problems is that Everett shows us Wilde’s fall, without offering details of his rise.

Everett’s performance is splendid, portraying an artist who lived his life unapologetically and suffering the consequences for it.

Yet, the movie is frustrating because it seems to only skim the surface about Wilde — and, as you watch, you wish Everett would have gone deeper.

Instead, his Wilde is more symbol than fleshed-out protagonist.

Everett can be commended for knowing how he wanted to present Wilde in his final years, even if — at times — his approach is heavy-handed and plodding.

Where “The Happy Prince” excels is at showing the underground milieus of homosexuals that dotted the European continent at the turn of the 20th century.

Specific clubs, bars and hotels catered to gays who — because of social intolerance — could not be their true selves in public life.

Wilde, it seems, was the only one to break that unwritten taboo — and it cost him dearly.

Wilde, who was married and had two sons, is conflicted at times about his choices. He regrets hurting his wife, Constance — a wasted Emily Watson — and yearns to return to his family.

The pull, though, of the life he has adopted — and his love for Lord Alfred Bosie Douglas (a snobbish and snippy Colin Morgan) — has too strong a hold on him.

What Everett is trying to say in “The Happy Prince” is what truly confounds. Is he trying to make comparisons about society’s tolerance of homosexuality then and now? Is the movie a lesson about the dangers and costs of individualism?

I would have been happier and would have been more taken with “The Happy Prince,” if Everett had made motivations for making the film clearer and more precise.

Instead of a vibrant examination of Wilde, we see a feature that — like its dying subject — is feeble and worn out.

I am a member of the Indiana Film Journalists Association. My reviews appear at ReelBob (reelbob.com) and Rottentomatoes (www.rottentomatoes.com). I also review Blu-rays and DVDs. I can be reached by email at bobbloomjc@gmail.com or on Twitter @ReelBobBloom. Links to my reviews can be found on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and LinkedIn.

THE HAPPY PRINCE
2 stars out of 4
(R), sexual content, nudity, language, drug use