An absolute treat. Great performance by Dafoe. Should have won the Oscar for this performance that year.

A film that had been on my list for a while. I saw it by chance, and I don't regret it! We follow the life of the painter in a version that adapts a number of rumors about his life (his illness, his troubled vision, his death). The film left me with a strange impression: William Dafoe is very accurate in his role, and the direction is interesting, even if the formal moments are better mastered than those evoking his visions. The feeling I got from this vision of Van Gogh's life was: my God, what a terrible life! Unloved in the Impressionist circle, apart from Gauguin, with whom relations were rather stormy. Rejected by southerners, children, schoolteachers... the famous southern welcome? Only finds relative peace when he paints. I liked the way his vital need to paint is conveyed, and how he opposes Gauguin, who tells him to think about his composition, to take his time, that he puts so much paint on that it looks more like sculpture. A film that makes you want to find out more about the painter's life, once you realize that he leans towards certain theories that are a little far-fetched.

Almost unwatchable because of the jerky, meaningless handheld camera movement, which philistines mistake for “art.” The “music” is a depressing cacophony of noise, leaving one with an impression of hopeless misery, with not a speck of the artist’s joyful eruption of creativity. Dafoe’s performance is wasted in this misfire by a self-indulgent and inept director.

This was a brilliant movie. Willem Dafoe's acting was excellent. I really felt it ,really experienced it. It was quite heart breaking but so interesting. The way it was filmed was very expressive and intense. A perfect portrayal of Van Gogh and his life and art. I love this movie.

An impressionist portrait of the final years of Vincent Van Gogh in Arles, France. Dafoe is a fine wine actor as his performances later in his career just get better and better. The film is an attempt to allow the audience to see the world as Vincent did and I think it succeeds.

The acting, script, and costuming were all excellent, but the filming techniques were super annoying. The overly shaky, hand-held camera thing was way over done. In addition, whenever the audience is meant to sense Van Gogh's unease & unraveling, the bottom half of the screen is blurred. This occurs way too often & seems both lazy & contrived. I'm a big Willem Dafoe fan though & he was great as per usual.

Now, I think I know what you tried to say to me How you suffered for your sanity How you tried to set them free They would not listen, they're not listening still Perhaps they never will

Love this guy very much. Deeply touching and visually perfect.

I don't think some viewers understand the purpose of this film. It doesn't have a plot in the traditional sense, and it's not meant to have one. It is a biographical experience through Van Gogh's eyes, through his love of nature, through his fear of being left alone with his hauntings, through his illness, and through the pain and beauty that was his mind. It's a gorgeously melancholic, artistic, vibrant journey of a troubled genius that is to be experienced, not a story with a point other than the vividness and tragedy of his life. His affliction is part of what make him and his painting so meaningful and prolific. I thought the film was excellent at portraying Vincent, not necessarily a biopic.

There aren't any new revelations about Van Gogh here, but Schnabel's attempts to take us inside the man's mind do yield some beautiful sequences. And despite being way too old for the part, Dafoe is great.

Not one for me. I will say that Willem Dafoe is terrific, undoubtedly. His performance in 'At Eternity's Gate' was honestly the only part of this 2018 release that kept my interest piqued. The support cast don't do anything wrong but don't really illuminate the film for me either. It has its heart in the right place, but as a film I didn't enjoy it. The main thing that bothered me was the camera work all around, just absolutely needless shaky cam that adds zero to what's going on onscreen - it even distracts from the main event, for me at least. It is noted that, away from that, visibly the film does look neat. I am admittedly not into art ('twas my least favourite subject at school, in fact), though even so I expected more from this. I am happy for Dafoe that this was positively received as his showing merits high praise, but it won't be one I'll be revisiting any time soon personally.

A great companion to ‘Loving Vincent' and virtually on par with it (although Loving Vincent would have to be the winner for me with it's dazzling painted animation). William Dafoe is fantastic as the fragile broken soul we know as Van Gogh. He looks the part as well although it's more Dafoe's performance that pulls it off than a resemblance as the actor is a lot older than Van Gogh would have been. I'd recommend to fans of Van Gogh who haven't seen either film to watch both back to back.

I was looking forward to seeing what Julian Schnabel did since I hadn't followed him since Basquiat. I wanted to love it, but I only liked it. Some effects work brilliantly. The story-line was nothing new because it's been the standard accepted story for ages. But how about the possibilities of what really happened during that time in Van Gogh's life since the advent of the net? Here's an example " Vincent van Gogh cut off his left ear when tempers flared with Paul Gauguin, the artist with whom he had been working for a while in Arles. Van Gogh's illness began to reveal itself." That's a theory that was possibly touched upon in the flick. Another one goes Paul accidentally cut off Vincent's ear so it wasn't self inflicted. I think Schnabel could have shown 2 or 3 alternate possibilities for the truth in separate scenes. If only for the sake of the gift to the prostitute. Was she even a prostitute? There's more to the story but the film doesn't explore this enough. As a revolutionary, mind expanding, possibility opening masterpiece, it's not a very subversive approach. Very PG-13.

Benoît Delhomme is the worst cinematographer in film history

Dressed up with an editing and cinematography that put us into Van Gogh's shoes. Wonderful scenery, music, and acting.

Why do so many Van Gogh paintings hang on so many walls throughout the world? Aside from prestigious art galleries, you'll find the Dutch master's work in blue chip company boardrooms, stately homes, hospitals, retirement homes, doctors waiting rooms, schools, universities, public buildings, charity shops - and of course in the lounge rooms of countless homes – from million dollar mansions to one bedroom units. In his native land, Holland, there is a Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, and n the 1980's he even made it big into the pop music hit parade with American singer Don McLean's ballad ‘Vincent'. I believe that Julian Schnabel's classic production ‘At Eternity's Gate' offers some very significant explanations for the ongoing popularity of Van Gogh. In a haunting sequence during his incarceration in the Saint Remy Asylum, a fellow inmate asks Vincent what he paints – to which he replies ‘Sunlight'. It is a quality which so much of his work exudes – and which is more than apparent in any collections of his work. ‘At Eternity's Gate' shows a lot of such collections, all of them containing some of his most popular works such as ‘Starry Night', ‘The Night Cafe','Sunflowers' and ‘Yellow Cornfield'. Another reason for Van Gogh's enormous popularity is that he painted ordinary people and objects which millions could relate to. Vincent painted farm girls, fishing boats, a chair, a postman, a pair of boots, peasants eating potatoes, night cafes, labourers, coal miners...the list is endless . ‘At Eternity's Gate' shows him at work on many of the ones he painted after moving to Arles, in the south of France. Van Gogh's paintings are presented alongside beautiful footage of the ruggedly beautiful countryside around Arles in the state of Provence – where Vincent went in search of the sun in 1888. The movie follows his journey from Paris to Arles, which Vincent himself describes. It is followed by some of his artistic philosophies as he begins his prolific output in the sunshine – cornfields, harvests, blossom, cypress trees, orchards, all of them a joyous mix of colour. His ongoing narrations vividly shows the pressure which painting can entail – his anxiety, his insecurity, his doubts about his skills and creativity, and the abuse, jeers and ridicule he endured from the local people in Arles as well as critics in the art world. He maintained great art was the outcome of working very fast – a technique which his friend Gauguin – who came to live with him in Arles – totally disagreed. Gauguin also criticised Van Gogh's heavy impasto which he claimed made his paintings look like‘Sculptures.' William Dafoe is brilliant in his portrayal of Van Gogh – with whom he also bears a striking physical resemblance – and Oscar Isaac is a convincing Gauguin. One of the most powerful and disturbing scenes is based on his decision to end his relationship with Van Gogh in Arles. Vincent's unhinged bid to kill his friend and subsequently to cut off his own ear inspires another great performance from Dafoe. On a nicer note, Rupert Friend is wonderful as Vincent's brother Theo, who looks after his dysfunctional brother with consummate love and dedication. An art dealer, he recognises his brother's genius and is devastated when he hears of his death in 1890 at the early age of 37. ‘At Eternity's Gate' offers a sensitive and in depth examination of Van Gogh's life and work. Was his brilliance the outcome of his tortured mind and disturbed mental health? We will never know– probably Vincent himself didn't know, and he says as much in one of the last scenes when he is in the care of an art loving general practitioner, Dr Gachet, during his last days. Absorbing and thought provoking throughout ‘At Eternity's Gate is clearly very well researched. The screen play is superb and it's beautifully presented throughout. I have only two reservations: the sub titles are sometimes hard to read and the music soundtrack is rather stiff and lifeless. Bearing in mind it features a man who saw so much beauty in life, I think a lush melodic orchestral background would have been nicer.

The most evocative and insightful movie on van Gogh I have seen. Willem Dafoe is van Gogh incarnate. One must simply sit in silence for a while after watching.

Willem Dafoe gives a performance so good that once in a while you forget that van Gogh was 25 years younger than him when he died. At Eternity's Gate is an interesting film, but it's mostly the vehicle for Dafoe to give yet another critically lauded leading man performance than it is to dive into the psyche of an infamously tortured artist. Long takes, uncomfortably close angles, and overlaid, repetitive dialogue routinely give a sense of van Gogh's mental instability, but in a surprisingly monotonous way and without much clarity as to the nature of his suffering. It's odd that the film doesn't take the leap into speculative thoughts that the artist might have had, choosing instead for often surface-level misunderstandings or somewhat hamfisted religious allegories, particularly when it plays relatively fast and loose with historical reality by indulging in the popular theory that van Gogh was accidentally shot and using the lost sketchbook as an indication of his lack of appreciation (when in reality, the authenticity of that sketchbook has been cast into serious doubt). Despite what you might call a strange choice of narrative direction, there's no doubt that Dafoe himself gives a particularly good performance here, with all the strange mannerisms and passion that you might expect, well deserving of the Academy nod. Visually on point but not very thematically daring, the film still gets by with a suite of well-known actors and one magnetic central performance. (3/5)

Personally, the plot is definitely someone who conceives a background of Van Gogh's life and this movie reinforces the basic knowledge about Van Gogh, the performances are very fluid and full of feelings that produce the ending, I like it but I feel that they could extend more

At Eternity's Gate takes care to show perspective and beauty. The film is calm, thoughtful, and serene, and so much more than a biography of an artist.