The End of the Tour is not a film about David Foster Wallace, so much as it is a carefully crafted love note to him and his complication. And to that end, it openly professes its loyalty to the disenfranchised, over-educated members of the audience. At a Cruz in the film we hear Wallace offer his opinions on depression and addiction, but these are no doubt Lipskys own feelings, and given to Wallace in screen to give them more credibility. Wallace is portrayed as a man looming large with first-world-problems, and Jason Segel's Wallace remains affably antisocial throughout the affair. Still, whatever is compelling about the film exists within the writing, but not necessarily the actual story.
The film is not, in fact, based so much Wallace but on Rolling Stones interviewer David Lipskys memoirs recounting of his five days with Wallace. Our plot is set up simply, with Lipskys credentials established as a newly published author, skeptical and jealous of Wallaces universal acclaim and the sole voice of inquiring literary minds at Rolling Stone magazine. After demanding of his editors to grant him the freedom of an interview (in a scene that included, I s*** you not, the Perry White via Lois lane line delivery of "There better be a Story!"), Lipsky then embarks on cinemas least funny buddy comedy, complete with planes, trains and automobiles.
The screenwriter, Donald Margulies, is an accomplished playwright, a profession suited best to find drama in what is essentially a lot of talking. To this end, he does an adequate job of making us interested, but the character development feels too compressed at times. There are moments even, when the story starts to feel like it wished it was the intellectualized parallel to Cameron Crowes Almost Famous, but never has the decency to be a clearly fictionalized. Wallace is written as the more complex character, but it's clear this is Lipsky's story and he's riding Wallaces back. Eisenberg is unintentional in lacking the dimension to convey this, while Segel's portrayal continually rings true.
As Wallace loosens to Lipsky throughout the movie, he reaches our climax in three notes. First, while our duo is in a moment of confrontation, Wallace spouts the values of remaining grounded against his ever growing fame. The second is his diatribes on addictions and the romance associated with them, and lastly, a confessional late night summery of his neurosis. It's a brilliant inclusion by the screenwriter and director to allow room for melodic musing, broadening the appeal of any given insights.
The Director, James Ponsoldt, does a fine job of framing the travels of the two, creating an intimacy that most likely never existed. The reality is that Ponsoldt doesn't have much to work with that isn't dramatized by Margulies, as those five days produced nothing of interest for Rolling Stone (The intended article was never published) nor did Lipsky feel compelled to expand upon it until Wallaces death 12 years later. I'm sure there's there's some clićhe to spout about why Lipsky sat so long on this story, but it feels ever the notion of timing, and good fortune on Lipskys part.
The film is not, in fact, based so much Wallace but on Rolling Stones interviewer David Lipskys memoirs recounting of his five days with Wallace. Our plot is set up simply, with Lipskys credentials established as a newly published author, skeptical and jealous of Wallaces universal acclaim and the sole voice of inquiring literary minds at Rolling Stone magazine. After demanding of his editors to grant him the freedom of an interview (in a scene that included, I s*** you not, the Perry White via Lois lane line delivery of "There better be a Story!"), Lipsky then embarks on cinemas least funny buddy comedy, complete with planes, trains and automobiles.
The screenwriter, Donald Margulies, is an accomplished playwright, a profession suited best to find drama in what is essentially a lot of talking. To this end, he does an adequate job of making us interested, but the character development feels too compressed at times. There are moments even, when the story starts to feel like it wished it was the intellectualized parallel to Cameron Crowes Almost Famous, but never has the decency to be a clearly fictionalized. Wallace is written as the more complex character, but it's clear this is Lipsky's story and he's riding Wallaces back. Eisenberg is unintentional in lacking the dimension to convey this, while Segel's portrayal continually rings true.
As Wallace loosens to Lipsky throughout the movie, he reaches our climax in three notes. First, while our duo is in a moment of confrontation, Wallace spouts the values of remaining grounded against his ever growing fame. The second is his diatribes on addictions and the romance associated with them, and lastly, a confessional late night summery of his neurosis. It's a brilliant inclusion by the screenwriter and director to allow room for melodic musing, broadening the appeal of any given insights.
The Director, James Ponsoldt, does a fine job of framing the travels of the two, creating an intimacy that most likely never existed. The reality is that Ponsoldt doesn't have much to work with that isn't dramatized by Margulies, as those five days produced nothing of interest for Rolling Stone (The intended article was never published) nor did Lipsky feel compelled to expand upon it until Wallaces death 12 years later. I'm sure there's there's some clićhe to spout about why Lipsky sat so long on this story, but it feels ever the notion of timing, and good fortune on Lipskys part.