i didnt want this film to end and wanted to live in thelife of Van Gogh for ever. I loved to see him painting, i love to see him portrayed as a real, flawed human being with faults. I dont think his behaviour toawrds his brother was irrational , his brothers failure to believ in himm and to play it safe by not tkin a riskk on an unkown artist really destroyed him, perhaps if Van Gogh had managed to mke a living out of his art it would have created a peace that was missing in his life. His brother was gutless and wouldnt put his reputation on the line by promoting Van goghs work, this was because he didnt believe in the work enough. The film lacked drama, perhaps it was because the director didnt want to sensationalise Van goghs life and wanted to rnder a realistic interpretation. But I think there could have been more for more drama, Maybe the director and te writer tried to bring out some drama but it never came off, the arguments between Van gogh and his brother for example- Van Gogh at one point three a bowl of stew accross the room, but even this lacked tension, theos wife calmly took the brush and swept it u a if food flying arond her house was an everyday occurance. But that would be my only criticism, the lack of tension and drama, the film plodded along in a relaxed manner and the artist dies in a relaxed manner, no one even cries at his death and I am sure Theo would have been very upset. They used to correspond a lot and in their correspondance it can be seen how close they really are, they are like best friends telling each other heir innermost desires and fears and telling each other almost every detail of their lives- Theos failure to back Van Goghs art would have really hurt.
Time Out says
Mon May 14 2012This stunningly photographed and skilfully acted film uses an accretion of naturalistic detail to present an emotionally restrained but utterly compelling account of the last three months of Van Gogh's life. Living in Auvers-sur-Oise with his sensitive and knowledgeable patron Gachet (Sety), Van Gogh (Dutronc) works quietly and steadily, meanwhile flirting with Gachet's precocious daughter Marguerite (London). However, his ill health, a brief return to the debauchery of brothels and drink, and his irrational resentment of his brother Theo's failure to sell his work, provoke erratic swings from brooding introspection to frustrated anger. Since Pialat has no desire to canonise the artist, there is no attempt to trace the origins and development of his 'creative genius'; nor, avoiding the hazards of biopic cliché, does he seek to illuminate these dark corners of his subject's troubled soul. In the leading role, Dutronc has exactly the right quality of physical frailty and stooped sadness to complement Pialat's beautiful, poignant images.