Simply A Masterpiece

Excellent but underrated film

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

When I fell into this film on a TV-channel I actually never before had watched, I found myself mesmerized. There was something pulling me into the stoat, and when I understood what was going on, it became even more interesting. I just couldn't let it go. I think the average rating on this film might have to be because of some homosexual scenes. These are made very beautiful and artistically, and far from any close ups. There's nothing distasteful about any of this.I must say I really enjoyed this immensely. The story is compelling, the acting is superb, and the direction is excellent. What's even better is that this movie has a drive towards something you don't know what will come out of.I really find myself loving movies you really don't know what to expect next from. This story has both a very pleasant and understanding tone, as well as a lingering unease, on a travel you hope is not a ending up as catastrophe. I found myself twitching in the sofa, while the this threesome tried to figure each other out. You all the way know who's to blame, but the excitement lies in what this will bring.You start caring about them, and see how dangerous such a nasty game is. Really deceitful and devious. But sometimes you get more than you bargain for, and I certainly did here. A very strong and different tale about deceit, that is really underrated. If you want to see something a bit different, this might be it.

A charming but duplicitous film producer offers a gay writer a million dollars for a highly autobiographical script, providing he changes the gender of one of the characters. Struggling with the implication of this compromise, and still grieving for his recently deceased partner, the writer embarks on a friendship with the film producer and his wife. However, when the producer and the writer become sexually involved, a twisted psychological game begins.Based on Lucas's own play, The Dying Gaul is a deeply disturbing examination of the cause and effect of betrayal and desire, clouding the definitions of predator and victim - each character is guilty of manipulation, of deceit, even cruelty, and Lucas cleverly plays with the viewer's sympathies. That this creates a hugely compelling and extremely unsettling story is in part down to the performances of his three leads - Scott deftly coats Jeffrey's steely, uncompromising centre with snake-like charm and seductive banter, whilst Sarsgaard brilliantly captures the fragile determination and bewildered desperation of someone living with grief. Perhaps the most challenging character in the doomed triangle is Clarkson's Elaine, and a lesser actor would have missed all the subtle nuances and shades that help us see why Elaine follows her chosen path. We SHOULD feel sorry for the betrayed wife, but that would be too easy here. In Clarkson's hands, Elaine's actions and motivations are both ghastly and deeply moving. Why neither Clarkson nor Sarsgaard were acknowledged or recognised for their work here is a mystery.This is not a film for those who need to be bludgeoned with simple explanations of the why and wherefore, but those who enjoy challenging, thought-provoking and slightly obtuse explorations of the human condition will be greatly rewarded here.

Suppose you had intimate knowledge about someone, and that someone did not know that you knew. How would you use that knowledge? Or would you? This issue is the undercurrent that carries the film's plot, like a fast moving stream, over a cliff, to a swirling, uncontrollable emotional vortex that changes people's lives forever.Set in modern Los Angeles, a grieving gay screenwriter named Robert (Peter Sarsgaard) meets with Jeffrey (Campbell Scott), a wealthy film producer, to talk about Robert's script "The Dying Gaul", a tribute to his deceased lover and soul mate. Jeffrey invites Robert to his mansion by the ocean to meet his wife Elaine (Patricia Clarkson), who reads Robert's script and loves it. Over time, Robert and Elaine become friends, which sets up a triangular relationship that careens out of control when the anonymity of internet chat rooms provides cover for the discovery of secrets.Artsy in tone and philosophy, the film exudes New Age dialogue, with conversation about Buddhist Karma, "the middle way", enlightenment, and deadly plant roots. The film's production design is chic. And while the color cinematography is mostly conventional, sometimes it is beautifully stylistic. I really liked those stark human silhouettes against that orange screen. The film's score, which connotes New Age spiritualism, is terrific.Acting of the three leads is quite good. Patricia Clarkson is great as she sits in front of a computer monitor and, without speaking, displays myriad emotions through her facial expressions alone.The chat room scenes are creative and emotionally potent, amid magnified keyboard clicking sounds. The back and forth exchange here is unusual, and striking in that it is meaningless when taken out of context, but highly enlightening when considered in relation to the film's plot, as this sample shows: "Hello"; "I hear clicking"; "I'm still here"; "Are you still there?"; "Yes"; "You sound really distracted"; "Yeah today"; "When?" "I'm sorry"; "No, I'm all yours"; "Are mine what?"; "No"; "Yes"; "Meaning?"; "I'm all yours now".The film's screenplay does contain a rather obvious plot hole. And a couple of scenes involving Robert's son and former wife are too tangential to the story's trajectory. But these are minor issues."The Dying Gaul" may seem artistically or philosophically pretentious to some viewers. But I really liked it. Quite aside from the wonderful performances and the chic production values, the film's story has thematic depth, a quality lacking in most mainstream Hollywood films.

There are certain subjects that, I think, people feel should be treated with reverence, no matter how badly they're done. Homosexuality and AIDS are two such subjects, and the tolerance and understanding with which one is supposed to accept these facts of life has carried over to "The Dying Gaul", an appropriately snooty title for this pretentious waste of film stock.The first 40 minutes or so of this thing, the set-up, as it were, is quite engaging. A slick Hollywood executive (Campbell Scott) invites a young gay screenwriter (Peter Saarsgard) to his office to offer to buy his new screenplay "The Dying Gaul", but there's a catch. The gay element in the screenplay has to be eliminated for audience appeal or there's no deal. The price: one million dollars. The writer compromises and soon becomes a member of the Hollywood in-crowd. From there, it takes a peculiar turn. But what people are perceiving as unique and clever is just a reprise of the old messy love triangle let's-do-away-with-the-inconvenient-spouse thing that goes back to God knows when, Double Indemnity and probably before that, only updated to reflect changing social mores. It is, in fact, not terribly imaginative, and the writer-director Craig Lucas is fond of using splashy photographic effects, like sprawling sunsets and characters having conversations against a red screen to cover up the gaping holes in the plot. I didn't believe the executive's wife could be unaware of his bisexual tendencies after all their years of marriage, nor did I believe Saarsgard's character wouldn't have suspected the wife to be ArckAngel since she specifically asked him what chat rooms he frequented. Can these allegedly intelligent characters be that dumb? Does the screenwriter really think he's being contacted from beyond the grave? And what purpose does the writer's wife and child serve? It feels like an afterthought. It's also not clear how the wife got the dirt on the screenwriter that she got. And the whole chat room sequence is a dud. Every time the characters start typing, the movie grinds to a halt. Watching people display their secretarial skills on camera is not a very compelling motion picture device and I felt the same inertia here as I felt watching the lovers bang out messages in "Closer". Even more offensive, though, is a real nose-in-the-air attitude this movie struts about with. There's a bit of business in the opening scene that defines the haughtiness to a tee. When Scott, the executive, asks Saarsgard about the derivation of the title "The Dying Gaul", he goes into a long-winded spiel about culture and victimization that should have been played for a laugh. But Lucas treats it reverentially and Scott's character impatiently lets him finish. That's Lucas the screenwriter talking; he believes in the sincerity of such pompous, pretentious crap. This Gaul isn't dying, it's embalmed.