Gimly

Feb 19, 2019

4.0

I get what _At Eternity's Gate_ was going for, visually. But that thing was not a thing i enjoyed. The framing made me rather uncomfortable, which, again, kind of the point, but not for me. Massive props to Dafoe of course, his Oscar nomination for best actor is not uncalled for, and special extra props to Mads Mikkelsen, the sequence between the two of them was far and away my absolute favourite part of _At Eternity's Gate_. But so much of the rest of the thing is just nature shots accompanied by violently jarring piano, and I cannot call myself a fan. _Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._

Peter McGinn

Apr 5, 2020

7.0

Okay, I will freely admit up front that I rolled my eyes around about the third or fourth time we were given a top-down angle view of Van Gogh walking, walking, walking. And some of the shots went a bit too long, though I suspect there was a point being made. I do not mind being challenged by a movie's content or style, as long as it doesn't insult my intelligence. I found this movie to be interesting enough to stick with it, though we watched it at home and didn't swallow it in one sitting. Rather we watched a half-hour and then went back to it later that day. I didn't notice the shaky camera work that others have commented on, and even though in my own novels I take pride in creating realistic dialogue, I had no problem with the dialogue here that bugged still others. Except maybe for the episodes of repeated dialogue they use to try to highlight Van Gogh's slippery state of mind at these times. It didn't seem very effective to me, so perhaps a bit more subtlety might have been less of a distraction to the viewer. This movie is based on a newer biography that offers an alternate description of the painter's last few years. There is probably no way to be sure if this new theory is correct, but it at least gives one pause for thought. And thought isn't a bad thing to be inflicted with, is it?

r96sk

Oct 20, 2023

6.0

Not one for me. I will say that Willem Dafoe is terrific, undoubtedly. His performance in 'At Eternity's Gate' was honestly the only part of this 2018 release that kept my interest piqued. The support cast don't do anything wrong but don't really illuminate the film for me either. It has its heart in the right place, but as a film I didn't enjoy it. The main thing that bothered me was the camera work all around, just absolutely needless shaky cam that adds zero to what's going on onscreen - it even distracts from the main event, for me at least. It is noted that, away from that, visibly the film does look neat. I am admittedly not into art ('twas my least favourite subject at school, in fact), though even so I expected more from this. I am happy for Dafoe that this was positively received as his showing merits high praise, but it won't be one I'll be revisiting any time soon personally.

CinemaSerf

May 29, 2024

7.0

This is a great little biopic looking at the latter stages of the life of an hugely creative but flawed human being. Willem Dafoe really does offer up a convincing performance as Vincent van Gogh - he encapsulates both the creative and temperamental madness of this genius artist wonderfully; and there is even a passing resemblance. Rupert Friend also delivers well as his increasingly stretched benefactor brother Theo and Oscar Isaac is likewise strong as Paul Gauguin, with whom van Gogh has what can only be described as a turbulent and competitive relationship. Julian Schnabel has something to be proud of here with an intimate and emotional depiction that's prudent with the dialogue and the cinematography is first rate too.