Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: THE END OF THE TOUR (James Ponsoldt 2015)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,889

    THE END OF THE TOUR (James Ponsoldt 2015)

    JAMES PONSOLDT: THE END OF THE TOUR (2015)


    JESSE EISENBERG AND JASON SEGAL IN THE END OF THE TOUR

    Was it wrong to make this movie?

    James Ponsoldt's The End of the Tour, adapted by Donald Margolies from David Lipsky's book Although of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself (2010), brings to life an intense short-term experience. It's the five-day "interview" Lipsky (played by Jesse Eisenberg) did with David Foster Wallace (played by Jason Segal) for Rolling Stone at the end of Wallace's book promotion tour for Infinite Jest, the long, complex novel just then out (in 1996) that made Wallace famous.

    Anthony Lane may get it right -- anyway what he says in his short New Yorker review made it easier to go and watch this film. He begins by saying you will not encounter "the formal dazzle" of the writer David Foster Wallace in The End of the Tour (that, one could say, is putting it mildly) but still, he says, the film "is worth exploring." And he hints at why: under its surface simplicity, there is some complexity. Eventually Segal and the film delve into the ambiguity of the man, or the man in the film, whoever he is, who may be "pleasantly unpleasant," and here, anyway, for the moment, for Lipsky, is unconvincingly playing the "regular guy" when he is (in Lane's words) "deeply irregular."

    But really the film's justification and interest are just how intimately and painfully it captures a few tiring winter days on the road in the American Midwest; the uncomfortable relationship in which the two writers seem to befriend each other while one is microscopically examining the other, under too much public scrutiny already, who is trying to fend him off. Dave, as we'll call him, is brilliant, nervous, insecure, hyper-conscious, embarrassed at his fame or at enjoying it. David, as we'll call him, with his own recently published novel that's already virtually forgotten, is eager, ambitious, attracted, excited, admiring, jealous. You can call this a dumbing-down, but surely films about author-on-author interviews aren't exactly cineplex popcorn-movie stuff. This is a character study, not a comedy, or, though it hints of it, a brom-com.

    There are many, many reservations one could express about this film -- and I will express some. I write as a serious fan of Wallace -- one for whom total immersion in his great opus Infinite Jest , along with some of his other books, especially the hilarious, brilliant essay collections A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again and Consider the Lobster, was the life-changing literary experience of the decade, along with equally intense first encounters with Proust's great roman fleuve and all the novels of Cormac McCarthy. Wallace's premature death was deeply saddening. It was hard not to cringe at the very idea of, well, any dramatization of Wallace, not to mention having an Apatow comic like Jason Segal suiting up in Wallace's granny glasses and bandana headband, however much this may be a surprise serious acting breakthrough for Segal.

    When this film was in post-production, the Wallace Literary Trust, which holds the copyrights to his works, declared that it did not support the venture. Add to this the obvious pain for Wallace's family and friends, who still remain freshly angry and wounded at the writer's suicide seven years ago at the age of forty-six. On top of that I have to admit it already feels callous of Lipsky, whose Rolling Stone interview piece according to a Rolling Stone review "was never filed or finished," to have "capitalized" on the publicity of Wallace's suicide to expand it into a book. The film is bookended with scenes of Lipsky before and after he wrote his book on Wallace, which try to explain why in the light of the writer's suicide, he felt his experience (and his cassette tapes) too interesting to keep secret. But "capitalized" is still the word. That feeling kept me from reading Lipsky's book.

    But it was reassuring to see a lot of movie critics had praised The End of the Tour. They could all be wrong, but they might not be. There probably was something there. And there is. The film did actually draw me in, for the reason I've already mentioned: you become involved in the interviewer's experience, which is very well dramatized by Ponsoldt, of Dave's cluttered Bloomington, Illinois house in the snow, his two big dogs (Jeeves and the Drone), the hotel rooms, the junk food binges, the two women friends who come to stand by, the smoking, the soda pop, the little tape recorder David always has in his hand. There's an initial visit to one of the classes Dave teaches before the tour trips. Dave apologizes for the class; David notes the students plainly love him (Wallace was reportedly a marvelous teacher, possibly most appreciated at Ponoma, where he was teaching when he died). Then, what's fascinating is the edgy almost-bromance. Dave insists David stay at his house; they even share a hotel room later; they ride to the airport in David's rented car. They share the cigarette, pop, and junk food orgies and partial TV binge including "Falcon Crest," "Magnum, P.I.," and "Charlie’s Angels"; the movie they go to on tour in Minneapolis with the two women friends is Broken Arrow. You don't get to see David Foster Wallace talking as much about books or being as calm and articulate as he was in other, sit-down interviews; but these circumstances, on the road, in winter, are different, exhausting -- and as Dave says, unreal.

    Passive-aggressive Dave opens up, then shuts out. His reserve is natural for an intensely private, sensitive genius who's suddenly become a literary rock star, but when he tells David contacting his parents is off limits, there's no smile. Then when David asks the woman who dated Dave in graduate school for her email address to ask her about that time, Dave pounces and becomes angry and jealous. Compare to this David's anger at his wife for talking to Dave 25 minutes on the phone (he clocks her).

    Obviously depression, dysfunction, and addiction are topics hovering around The End of the Tour all the time. Ponsoldt's first three films were clearly spurred by an interest in alcoholism. But at least at this time, Wallace was very cagey (also not mentioning the key factor of his long term reliance on MAOI antidepressants); he insisted his primary addiction was television, but he was hiding his substance problems, perhaps wanting partly to protect the status of the rich and hilarious 12-step meeting sequences in Infinite Jest as fiction. He insisted he'd never used heroin, a question Lipsky's editor considered of prime interest. Nonetheless every sequence of Dave-and-David is a display of addictive behavior. And Wallace's masterpiece, Infinite Jest is, above all, a brilliant book about addiction, as well as the larger related topic of the pursuit of pleasure's power to destroy the soul.

    If you want to enjoy it, you probably don't want to read the angry remarks of Glenn Kenny, who knew Wallace, about this film (which he reports seeing twice); or those of other aggrieved friends or disapproving persons. Right before or after seeing The End of the Tour you probably don't want to watch interviews by Charlie Rose, or for German TV, with Wallace, because they will make Segal's performance feel like a caricature. It is easy to see this movie as harmful or wrong. Too easy. It's destined to be a fraught topic. But for all its issues, The End of the Tour might turn out to be one of the best American films of the year, as the critics are saying it is.

    The End of the Tour, 106 mins., debuted at Sundance January 2015; over a dozen other festivals, mostly US. Limited US theatrical release began 31 July 2015; Landmark Embarcadero and Sundance Kabuki San Francisco 7 August. Its Metacritic rating of 85% puts it currently in the top 20 movies of 2015.
    Last edited by Chris Knipp; 08-29-2015 at 10:21 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,889
    The real David Foster Wallace.


    LONG INTERVIEW, GERMAN TV (2003, 7 YEARS AFTER THE TIME OF THE END OF THE TOUR)

    What you should really do is just read his books. Wallace is brilliant and post-modern, but he is also sincere, personal, real, touching, keenly observant, hilarious, caring, and alive like no other contemporary American writer I've encountered. And you best encounter him in his writing, not anywhere else. But some questions about the real Wallace that Ponsoldt's movie may arouse are answered through links to his biographer and live interviews where you can see him or at least hear his own actual speaking voice. He didn't always have long shaggy hair and didn't always have a big bandana tied over his head, so I've included a short-haired bandana-less photo above.

    1. Addiction. Wallace liked to make up stories about about his life from when he was young, and he was lying and covering up about his lifelong depression and his addiction problems all the time, including during the time Lipsky was with him. After the publication (two years after Wallace's 2008 death) of Lipsky's Although of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself (2010), D.T. Max's biography of Wallace, Every Story Is a Love Story: A Life of David Foster Wallace (2012) appeared. Max's bio details the facts Wallace always concealed from the public: his late-twenties period after Amherst College, of crippling depression and serious marijuana and alcohol abuse and his treatment for depression and addiction at Harvard's McLean psychiatric hospital followed by a mandatory stint in a grim, largely working class, not to say criminal class, outer Boston area (Brighton) halfway house. While in the halfway house, Wallace was required to commute to a low-level job, eventually two of them (which he does mention to Lipsky, but without giving the context) and he was transported nightly to many A.A. meetings. Therefore Wallace's telling Lipsky that all the info about Boston A.A. and the halfway house in Infinite Jest was not from personal experience but just evidence the novel was "extensively researched" was a cover-up of the truth. The chapter from D.T. Max's bio about this period, the writer's serious addiction and treatment, was published in The New Yorker as "David Foster Wallace in Recovery: An Excerpt from the New Biography".

    2 Suicide. Elsewhere, D.T. Max explains why Wallace committed suicide, despite being been happily married for four years and having a great teaching post, what he called a "lottery-prize-type gig," as Disney professor of writing at Pomona. This was published as a longer excerpt in The New Yorker as "The Unfinished." Simple version: for 20 years, since his stint in McClean hospital, Wallace's severe depression was treated with an older (late-Fifties) type of antidepressant, Nardil, a monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI). A year or more before his death he became concerned about Nardil's physical side effects, and equally worried that it was muting his creative abilities along with his emotions. He followed professional advice in discontinuing Nardil and trying newer antidepressants. None of these worked. Nor, this time, did the last resort of electroshock therapy, which had helped him in his twenties. Then Wallace, in desperation, went back to Nardil, only to find that now it no longer worked. He was depressed; he was also troubled by his inability to make progress with his big new novel, which became the posthumously-assembled The Pale King. Wakllace's mental suffering was so great he took his own life by hanging himself in their enclosed patio at a time when his wife, the artist Karen Green, who had been keeping close watch, happened to be out. She came back and found him dead.

    P.s. I've watched some pretty long interviews with Wallace and conference/discussions of him and his work on YouTube, but so far I have not myself chosen to read either Lipsky's or Max's books in their entirety, because I haven't wanted to dwell on his death, and I've felt amply satisfied with what I've gained from his own writing (plus the interviews, seminars, and articles available online). When he first died, I read Lipsky's posthumous Rolling Stone piece, which explains and is a nice tribute with a little more unexpected personal detail. It's called "The Lost Years and Last Days of David Foster Wallace."

    ________________________
    Live interviews with Wallace.

    There are a good many in print only. David Foster Wallace seems to have been pretty generous in granting interviews. But it's the live ones that may interest viewers of The End of the Tour, to compare the "real" with the movie Wallace, even though I don't recommend doing so until you're digested and hopefully enjoyed the movie for itself. Below is just a selection.

    In the interviews on "Charlie Rose" Wallace is prickly but very quick. Charlie Rose 1997interview with David Foster Wallace. 1997. (There is a 1996 Charlie Rose modern lit group interview on demand from Amazon; some of his pithy parts of this are here.)

    Radio interview for "To the Best of Our Knowledge" with DFW in 2004, when he was 42. And "The Soul Is Not a Smithy," the story he reads from at length in the interview. Many love the book-reviewer live interviews; I find the interviewer a bit too nerdy and dry for my taste.

    German TV unedited 85-minute interview with Wallace (with visual) (11/2003) shows his great patience when he feels comfortable with an interviewer.

    DFW fan resource website since 1997 "The Howling Fantods". There you will find links to (to use his phrase) "everything and more," including Wallace's Kenyan College commencement address that goes by the title "This Is Water," which has become the simplified feel-good needlepoint sampler touchstone of the writer's later thinking. It does relate to his notion of embracing boredom as a kind of transcendence, which fed into his Oblivion story collection and his posthumous novel The Pale King.

    Here are some excerpts from Lipsky's actual tapes of Wallace partly used in the film The End of the Tour.. For some reason the "shit's" and "fuck's" are bleeped out. This is from a fan's big collection of MP3 audio files.

    Here's a little find: A 2008 NY Times article by James Ryerson, "Consider the Philosopher," about DFW's Amherst philosophy thesis, "Richard Taylor's 'Fatalism' and the Semantics of Physical Modality." It's since been published. "'I knew him as a philosopher with a fiction hobby,' Jay Garfield, an adviser on Wallace’s [philosophy] thesis and now a professor at Smith College, told me recently. 'I didn’t realize he was one of the great fiction writers of his generation with a philosophy hobby.'" Considering the abstruse material, Ryerson wrote a lucid, informative article.
    Last edited by Chris Knipp; 08-19-2015 at 07:49 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    15,889
    Above I referred to a fan page called THE DAVID FOSTER WALLACE AUDIO PROJECT. I'm impressed there by an early and prescient interview rebroadcast by Boston PBS personality Christopher Lydon, in which he has David Wallace read from page. 350 of INFINITE JEST a passage about Boston AA, one of a series of classic statements about the 12 Step Recovery process. Example of some lines in one of these rock-bottom AA-recovery-wisdom sections that I particularly like:
    They neglect to tell you that after the urge to get high magically vanishes and you’ve been Substanceless for maybe six or eight months, you’ll begin to start to ‘Get in Touch’ with why it was that you used Substances in the first place. You’ll start to feel why it was you got dependent on what was, when you get right down to it, an anaesthetic. ‘Getting In Touch With Your Feelings’ is another quilted-sampler-type cliché that ends up masking something ghastly deep and real, it turns out.​ It starts to turn out that the vapider the AA cliché, the sharper the canines of the real truth it covers.
    Last edited by Chris Knipp; 08-21-2015 at 02:28 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •