Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

whpratt1 The story in this film was simply different and I am sure reached many tender hearts who could share in the feelings of a triangle love which is beyond words. Jeffrey Tishop, (Campbell Scott) is a very powerful successful movie film executive who is married to Elaine Tishop, (Patricia Clarkson) and they have lovely children. There is a young writer who has written a screen play called "The Dying Gaul" and Jeffrey wants to buy the script so he can change the characters in the story. The young man needs the money so he accepts the one million dollars and becomes good friends with Elaine & Jeffrey. From this point on in the picture all the characters in the story become very much deeply involved with each other, almost in a spiritual way. This is a very warm and well produced picture.

robertconnor 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.

pekinman Watching 'The Dying Gaul' reminded me of watching 'The New Age' (Michael Tolkin, 1994). Both share the same facility for 'false grip' that keeps the viewer attending to the action while at the same time mentally numbing one into a false sense that there is any meaning to the whole thing. Perhaps that is the key, referring to the root of the poisonous plant found in the chic ultra-fab Malibu seaside manse's garden which, in the long run (spoilers begin here) acts as a deus ex machina at the end the movie. When the end does arrive I thought, of course, it had to be, what else could possibly have happened to bring this lolloping turkey to a conclusion. The script is a mish-mash of Buddha/Werner Erhard philosophical self-help and becomes a bit eye-rolling at times.Having said all that, I enjoyed many aspects of 'The Dying Gaul', not least of which were the performances of Patricia Clarkson and Peter Sarsgaard. But, like Judy Davis and Peter Weller in 'The New Age', all their great gifts of reaction to the words cannot mitigate the nebulous quality of the entire project. What IS the point? Is it another Gay Rage film, taking dark-humored revenge on the closeted bi-sexual married couples that abound across the landscape, or is Robert Sandrich (the screenwriter) just another serial killer....? Who knows. It is this mysteriousness that several of my friends were intrigued by and spent many hours discussing and reaching no conclusions. One of my film buff chums went way out on a wine-driven limb about how it was about the Reality of Cyberspace and all kinds of flapdoodle about melding karmas in chat rooms or some such stuff that is posited by the Sarsgaard character early in the film. Then the conversation veered off into other theories as to what this movie was about. When THAT happens in a conversation about a film I become immediately suspicious of its basic integrity. In other words, it is pretty much a pile of cow pats. Only a really great director can pull off such cinematic enigmas; I'm thinking of Peter Weir's masterpiece 'Picnic of Hanging Rock'.There is thinking and there is Thinking. 'The Dying Gaul' calls up the lesser of the two, amounting in the end to cinematic wool-gathering, rather like this comment is becoming, so I won't continue much longer.Basically I think this movie is a woman's revenge movie that backfires dreadfully. But as all the main characters are fairly reprehensible it had no emotional impact at all, it sort of went "phut" at the end when I think I was supposed to be devasted or something. Or perhaps this was part of the black humor bit that I didn't get. But I don't see much funniness in the deaths of children. If 'The Dying Gaul' is someone's idea of 'Black Humor' then I have definitely lived too long. This is a bitter, cruel, nasty movie that provokes puzzlement but little follow-up interest, at least for me. But worth viewing for Clarkson and Sargaard's performances and Steve Reich's interesting score.

harvey1005 I found this movie to be indulgent, pretentious and full of plot holes. While I appreciate the protagonist's problems, the entire beginning seems to be set up solely so that Jeffrey (Campbell Scott) -- who is supposedly a heterosexual family man and movie producer -- can shock the audience by propositioning aspiring screenwriter, Robert (Peter Sarsgaard) without the knowledge of Jeffrey's wife Elaine (Patricia Clarkson), who also seems entranced by Robert. I have some experience of writing and pitching spec screenplays and this whole incident was unconvincingly contrived. Again, even though the acting was excellent, the movie sagged because of hole in the plot large enough for a Buick to pass through. There is a point when Elaine (after discovering that Robert and her husband are lovers), poses as a man on a gay chat site and lures Robert into revealing things about himself. Then -- as punishment for her husband's transgressions -- she pretends to be the spirit of Robert's ex-lover and reveals secrets to Robert of how he "assisted" in the death of his lover and intimate details of his love-making with her husband. Normally, this would be chilling and an inspired turn of events, but it is spoiled by the fact that there is no set-up for where Elaine gathers the evidence. We never see her break into Robert's therapist's home nor do we see her bug Robert's apartment. Basically it is lazy film-making, which I find offensive.It's ironic that a story of compromise, betrayal and revenge is itself compromised and betrayed by lack of attention and pretension.