The End of the Tour (2015) User Reviews (108)

Definitely for a very select audience but the acting sure was nice...

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 20 October 2015]

"The End of the Tour" is a hard-sell of a movie. While it features Jesse Eisenberg (whose career have been very hot) and Jason Segal and you'd think the film would have mass appeal, it clearly does not. This isn't a complaint--many of the films I really enjoy are really not the sorts of films that would entertain the most viewers. Instead, it's a film for a narrow audience and if you think you might be among those who would appreciate the movie, by all means watch it. After all, you will see some very nice acting and the story improves and gains momentum as the film progresses.

The story is about an odd sort of interview that took place when David Lipsky (Eisenberg) of Rolling Stone Magazine hung out with literary star David Foster Wallace (Segal) for several days back in the late 1990s. Cutting right to the chase, the film begins with the announcement that Wallace committed suicide and the film is a flashback as Lipsky remembers the strange and very lengthy meeting the two had back in 1996. As I said, this lasted days as the two just hung out together and talked...making it far different than a typical magazine interview.

As far as what they talk about and the themes of their meeting go, this really isn't something I can really explain very well in a review-- you just need to see it and experience it. Instead, I would rather try to convey the style of their time together on the film. It feels like you are a fly on the wall as two intellectuals talk and talk and talk....and talk. Wallace generally presents more as an 'Every Man' sort of guy while Lipsky seems, at times, as if he's trying to impress his new friend with his intellectual prowess. What all this means...well, that's really up to the viewer.

The bottom line is that if you really like action films, this film's is probably not for you. If you love 'literature' as opposed to just reading a book for enjoyment, this movie might be exactly what you'd love to see. As for me, I think I'm in the middle on this one. I can really respect the acting as well as the filmmakers' desire to make a quality picture as opposed to a mass-marketed film. But, on the other hand, the film is slow and very deliberate. It also took a while until I really stared to appreciated it...and I'm not if I ever exactly enjoyed it.

I Didn't Want The Conversations To End

[jaysanchu07 · 7/10 · 25 June 2022]

The End of the Tour is a revelation of two things: that Jason Segel is an immense actor, and that intellectual "roadtrip" films are a thing. This one in fact, boasts of a profound & moving story that listening to 2 hours worth of conversations, was a pleasure.

Jason Segel absolutely owned this film, with an eye opening & career-defining performance far from his usual comfortable roles in comedies. His portrayal of David Foster Wallace was so on point, that the complexities of the character naturally flourishes. Also, his expositions simply captivates. His robust & free flowing delivery leaves us, the audience, in the exact same position as Jesse Eisenberg's character - hanging onto his every detail, with a craving for more.

Apart from Segel's Oscar worthy delivery, the illuminating subject matters were just as mesmerizing. As our leads converse on love, loneliness, fame, career & social trends, the film then connects on a personal level, in more ways than one. It is a kind of film that invites self-reflection & embeds ideas on how to live life.

Overall, The End of the Tour is a film that imparts reverence for the character that is David Foster Wallace, by way of picking through the brains of the great writer. It does so through incredibly true and entertaining intellectual discussions that offers the film's inspiring moments. Brilliantly acted, thought provoking and profoundly moving, this independent film demands deeper appreciation, and I happily oblige.

"I'm not sure you want to be me"

[aciessi · 7/10 · 23 August 2015]

Welcome inside the mind of David Foster Wallace. He's a peculiar man. He thinks he's a regular man, when he knows that he's a genius. He hates being a genius, and he hates being a regular guy. His life is as meandering as his dialogs recorded by David Lipsky. The End of the Tour feels more like a documentary, than dramatized narrative feature. So in effect, this movie is as real as it gets about David Foster Wallace. It's all about the acting here, and it shines. Jason Segel was born to play DFW. He proves to us that he is more than a series of cheap shots at his naked body. Here, he doesn't strip himself of his clothes, he strips himself of his emotions. I hope award season treats him very kindly. It's so natural, and easygoing, and pays a respect to Richard Linklater in tone. It's a scatterbrained wonder, a good film to watch on a lazy day.

An inspiring, often funny account of Wallace's book tour, with a standout performance from Jason Segel.

[joey-ziemniak · 8 May 2015]

Prior to seeing this film, I had limited knowledge of David Foster Wallace and his works. After seeing the film, I wanted to learn more. The End of the Tour (dir. James Ponsoldt) is a very reflective film, highlighting author Wallace on the last stretch of his book tour for his novel Infinite Jest. Our entry point into this intriguing man is David Lipsky, a Rolling Stone reporter hired to do a piece on him in the late 1990s.

What little there is of plot is made up for in excellent characterization. The film is really all about existentialism, and thankfully it never leans towards pretentiousness. Rather there is an air of optimism about making your time on earth worthwhile. Wallace and Lipsky in a way represent two extremes of existentialism. Wallace is very relaxed, and takes his newfound celebrity with a grain of salt, while Lipsky is very Type-A, yet never brash or irritating. Lipsky has been trying to get his foot in the door as an author for a while now, while Wallace almost became famous overnight, and the film plays with the concept of "fame" in fun and unique ways. Through the film, Ponsoldt is able to explore these two extremes and find common ground between them, all while touching on the idea of fame and what it means to different people.

The script is outstanding, and hits all the right notes I touched on above. The dialogue between Lipsky and Wallace feels natural, nothing is forced. I wonder how much improvisation was done for the film, because the two seem like good friends from the moment they meet. There is a natural chemistry that draws these two characters together, and it's outstanding to watch on-screen. It's difficult to adapt a book like Lipsky's, which is mostly interviews and recording, as the book was published after Wallace's death in 2008. But screenwriter Donald Marguiles makes it work, and the result is an insightful, often hilarious film.

All this talk about chemistry would be a waste if it weren't for Jason Segel and Jesse Eisenberg as Wallace and Lipsky, respectively. Segel is a marvel as Wallace; it's a performance that doesn't demand much, yet Segel taps into all of Wallace's nuances and quirks. His delivery, cadence, and warmth almost makes it feel like you're talking to an old friend. It's a subtle performance that I hope is remembered come awards season. Eisenberg, too, is great. His reporter-type isn't very developed until the middle-end of the film, and he might come across as annoying for some. But he makes Lipsky tick as the curious interviewer wanting to learn more. He's driven by his desire to success, his want to make a successful piece for Rolling Stone, yet he ends up with a lot more.

The End of the Tour is a huge success. It isn't a very showy film, without much in the way of technical prowess, yet it's a talker. The realistic dialogue and blasé tone make the film feel like a 140 minute hang out with two good friends. Ponsoldt keeps a tight grip on the film's themes, never letting one overpower the film's true intentions. It's a wonderful ode to Wallace, and a funny one at that.

interesting conversation

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 14 August 2016]

David Foster Wallace (Jason Segel) has died in an apparent suicide. David Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg) retrieves tapes of his interview with the writer. Twelve years earlier in 1996, Lipsky has written a book of limited success. His girlfriend Sarah (Anna Chlumsky) tells him about Wallace and his ground breaking book "Infinite Jest". He convinces his Rolling Stones editor (Ron Livingston) to assign him to join Wallace on his book tour. The juiciest question is Wallace's rumored heroine use. Lipsky becomes friends with Wallace and is unwilling to bring up the subject. In Minnesota, they are joined by Wallace fan Julie (Mamie Gummer) and Wallace's ex Betsy (Mickey Sumner). Wallace accuses Lipsky of flirting with Betsy and they dive into the tougher issues.

The first half of the movie isn't that compelling to me. The two characters are intriguing but there is no drama in their friendly dialog. Lipsky isn't pushing the conversation hard enough but that's also the point of the editor's call. Mostly I'm wondering where this movie is going with this and waiting for a turn. The phone call to Sarah starts the turn and Wallace's accusation completes it. The second half is very intriguing. It's an interesting study of these characters.

A Conversation that Makes You Glad to be the Fly-on-the-Wall

[vsks · 9/10 · 31 August 2015]

In 1996 David Foster Wallace's 1079-page novel Infinite Jest hit the literary scene like a rocket. The publisher's marketing efforts meant the book was everywhere, but the man himself—shy, full of self-doubt, not wanting to be trapped into any literary poseur moments and seeing them as inevitable—was difficult to read. This movie uses a tyro journalist's eye to probe Wallace during an intense five days of interviewing toward the end of the Infinite Jest book tour. As a tryout writer for Rolling Stone, reporter David Lipsky had begged for the assignment to write a profile of Wallace, which ultimately the magazine never published. But the tapes survived, and after Wallace's suicide in 2008 they became the basis for Lipsky's 2010 book, Although of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself, which fed David Margulies screenplay. The plot of the movie is minimal; instead, it's a deep exploration of character. It may just be two guys talking, but I found it tectonic. Director James Ponsoldt has brought nuanced, intelligent performances from his two main actors—Jason Segel as Wallace and Jesse Eisenberg as reporter David Lipsky. Lipsky is a novelist himself, with a so-so book to his credit. Wallace has reached the heights, and what would it take for Lipsky to scramble up there too? Jealousy and admiration are at war within him and, confronted with Wallace's occasional oddness, one manifestation of which is the attempt to be Super-Regular Guy—owning dogs, eating junk food, obsessively watching television—he isn't sure what to feel. You see it on his face. Is Lipsky friend or foe? He's not above snooping around Wallace's house or chatting up his friends to nail his story. Lipsky rightly makes Wallace nervous, the tape recorder makes him nervous; he amuses, he evades, he delivers a punch of a line, he feints. When the going gets too rough, Lipsky falls back on saying, "You agreed to the interview," and Wallace climbs back in the saddle, as if saying to himself, just finish this awful ride, then back to the peace and solitude necessary actually to write. In the meantime, he is, as A. O. Scott said in his New York Times review, "playing the role of a writer in someone else's fantasy." The movie's opening scene delivers the fact of the suicide, which by design looms over all that follows, in the long flashback to a dozen years earlier and the failed interview. You can't help but interpret every statement of Wallace's through that lens. The depression is clear. He's been treated for it and for alcoholism, from which he seems to have recovered. The two Davids walk on the snow-covered farm fields of Wallace's Illinois home and talk about how beautiful it is, but it is bleak, and even in as jam-packed an environment as the Mall of America Wallace's conversation focuses on the emptiness at the heart of life. Yet his gentle humor infuses almost every exchange, and Lipsky can be wickedly funny too. Wallace can't help but feel great ambivalence toward Lipsky; he recognizes Lipsky's envy and his hero-worship, and both are troubling. He felt a truth inside himself, but he finds it almost impossible to capture and isn't sure he has, saying, "The more people think you're really great, the bigger your fear of being a fraud is." Infinite Jest was a widely praised literary success, but not to Wallace himself.

A Wannabe Linklater Film

[ThomasDrufke · 6/10 · 15 December 2015]

The End of the Tour is directed by James Ponsoldt and based on the memoirs of David Lipsky during his week long interview with famous author David Foster Wallace. Ponsoldt directed one of my favorite films of all time, The Spectacular Now, and is also directing an upcoming Tom Hanks film, so I was looking forward to seeing him take on The End of the Tour. I'll say right off the bat, this isn't a film for everyone. It's for all intents and purposes a 'talkie' that really asks its viewers to pay attention for the entire length of the film or else you'll miss it.

With that said, I liked the movie, but I didn't love it the way I thought I would. Jesse Eisenberg and Jason Segel star alongside each other as the two Davids, and have great on screen chemistry. But it's always hard watching an Eisenberg film. For the most part, he never really escapes his own personality, which is the reason why he was a brilliant choice for Mark Zuckerberg, but I digress. He does fairly well with the emotional weight his character carries at the book- ends of the film, but his performance and character for that matter is pretty dull. The worst part is that he has an incredibly annoying laugh throughout the film, which I hope wasn't intentional.

Jason Segel on the other hand really impressed me. At the surface, his character is also pretty dull, but when the film goes on it begins to make sense as to why he's playing Wallace like that. It's then you realize just how brilliantly guarded and reserved he is as David Foster Wallace. Being subtle as an actor is often one of the most difficult things an actor can do. But the film then tries to spray conflicts on the two lead characters that don't feel natural. The small romance part of this film falls completely flat on its face.

Unfortunately, I found the story built around these two guys to be uninteresting and surprisingly dry. It also is almost mimicking a Richard Linklater film, and fell short in a lot of ways in doing so. I really like Ponsoldt, but I just don't know that he was the man for the job. His ability to pull off the human drama that floods the latter half of the movie is impressive, but it doesn't really save what came before it.

+Segel's understated performance

+Does have some things to say about life

-Feels too much like a Linklater film

-Dull characters, dry story

6.4/10

Superb Writing, Superb Interpretation

[warevjensen · 9/10 · 31 January 2015]

Saw this film last weekend at its world premiere at Sundance. First of all, Donald Margulies' script was fantastic. I am slightly partial to good writing in film, so perhaps that's just what stood out to me, but the dialogue is incredibly well-written and natural and at least generally captures David Foster Wallace's fascinating way of talking. In essence (and in the best of ways), nothing really happens in this movie. There isn't a lot of high stakes drama, but that's exactly what makes it so compelling. It's like we as the audience get a glimpse into two men struggling with the same ideas about life, art, expression, addiction, culture, and depression.

Jason Segel and Jesse Eisenberg live up to the task of interpreting the script, helped along the way by director James Ponsoldt. The direction is simple, and the camera work is relatively basic throughout, giving the actors plenty of room to work with natural rhythm. Segel definitely impressed me, as this was the first dramatic role I've seen him in. While he didn't exactly capture some of Wallace's real-life mannerisms, I'm not sure if that was exactly the point of the film. He interpreted the script in a powerful way, and I think that that ended up working out quite well for the overall tone of the film. Eisenberg played his usual somewhat neurotic, slightly asshole- ish character very well, and I thought it fit the reporter role perfectly.

Overall, I would strongly recommend the film. 9/10

Not impress

[thenekassyni · 6/10 · 28 October 2015]

Watched it because of the favorable reviews but it did not do anything for me. There isn't anything that sticks out. The acting is OK for both of the leads, the script was just bland, the interaction between them above average, the cinematography is nil, and so on.

It tries to be a "smart" type of movie but it really isn't. Big words are thrown every now and then between the two leads but this is more to lead the audience to believe there's some intelligence going on. As Jessie stated on the way back from the tour, it is some patronizing thing that the characters tries to put on the audience. It doesn't feel natural at all but then neither does it feel overly forced.

The music used in the movie is pretty simple, nothing extraordinary.

In the end there are better drama movies than this. Buddy films such as Pineapple express and even Zombieland have more emotion, attachment and realism than this movie.

Could very well remain my favorite film of the year

[jjustinjaeger · 10/10 · 18 August 2015]

Rarely am I enlightened by a film in the way I was by this one. Not that I was lectured or taught something, but that I had a visceral response to what I had experienced on screen that I wouldn't be able to explain but to ask you to recall a song or a book or a show that invited you to pour your soul into it and in return reminded you of what it was like to have one. I was reminded that films can do this.

I don't expect everyone to like it to the degree that I did because I can only base my strong inclination towards this movie on the connection I personally made with it which was emotional rather than intellectual, although the film is rich and lingering in its intellect as well, and of course; I recognize what makes this film profound, which I'll try to explain.

This is a talky film from director James Ponsoldt, who I'd now have to rank as one of my favorite contemporary directors after this and another I've seen and loved, The Spectacular Now. This director isn't one you'd normally find on a list ranking among the greatest working today because he's not about style and doesn't appeal to the ego as much as other contemporaries such as Wes Anderson and David Fincher do (in addition to many others, not to single them out). No, Ponsoldt is subtle and reserves his ego. He is unimposing on the lives of his characters and candid about what his films are trying to do and say, not hiding beneath film rhetoric or allegory or the impression of a representational work. And what's great about this is how his films point out that you don't need intricate sets or perfectly symmetrical shots to create beauty. This film has some of the most beautiful shots I've seen (the shot of them walking in the snow, the shot of the normally- withdrawn Wallace dancing), all the more so because of their subtlety, giving the feeling that the beauty was discovered and not created by the director.

But the beauty is often created by the actors. Ponsoldt trusts his actors and puts his efforts towards making the characters come alive before our eyes. I was under the fantastic impression that I was witnessing a completely real human soul with Segel's performance. He felt so real, so three dimensional. I understand him, even though I am not him. This is more magical to me than sweeping camera movements or extravagant art direction.

I didn't realize when watching the film that the dialogue is all based on, if not directly taken from, the tapes journalist (and protagonist) David Lipsky (Eisenberg) recorded of his interviewee, universally acclaimed novelist David Foster Wallace (Segel). The dialogue is rich with insight into the character's thought processes and their observations on life (but mostly those of Wallace). I was riveted at every moment the two were talking, feeling as though being revealed before me were the truths of life. The thrill of being a fly on the wall. And it's not just the words containing the wisdom of the thoughtful and complicated Wallace, but the delivery via the actors and the way in which the many hours of tape are edited to allow Wallace's ideas and observations to resonate. Even beyond Wallace's ideas, the film cuts to the core and observes Wallace as a human being, not different for his brilliance but the same for his humanness.

The film is about so many things it would be overwhelming to attempt list all of them. Its ideas, however many, are all-encompassing of what it means to exist, which is, beyond the desire for fame and ego-boosts, to want to be understood. The film observes how the inner-worlds of all people are so uniquely complicated and pays tribute to that wonder. I'll be relating my experiences to this film in time to come.

A fabulous human being, an ok movie

[elisavbizau · 6/10 · 1 December 2023]

I loved the movie because I love David Foster Wallace. I cried at the end, I felt empathy for what he said. I found Jesse's character sooooo annoying (great acting on Jesse's part - I believe he must've played the other David quite well).

The movie I believe does a good job at what it's trying to achieve, and that's about it.

Should you watch it? Yep, if you like Biopics.

Can't give it more than a 6 though.

Since I still have not reached the minimum required char. , here's my favourite part of the movie: at the end, right after the credits, when he talks with the tape recorder.

Also, I recommend watching "This is water" on youtube by him.

A thought provoking and emotional movie

[nickweninger · 9/10 · 21 August 2015]

The End of The Tour was a beautifully done movie that will not be widely seen or even heard of. This movie doesn't have explosions, or side splitting humor, or sex, or anything that sells in Hollywood these days. What this movie does have is a well written plot with fantastic dialogue, a great story, wonderful performances, and thought provoking themes that make you ponder what is really important. The End of The Tour is about the five day interview between Rolling Stone reporter David Lipsky, and acclaimed novelist David Foster Wallace (played by Jesse Eisenberg and Jason Segel). This five day interview took place right after the 1996 publication of Wallace's epic 1,000 page novel called Infinite Jest. An interview that would later turn out to be never published and not really heard about until Wallace's 2008 suicide. During this interview, we get to see inside what it is like between the two men. Like I said earlier, this movie asks a lot of deeper questions that will leave you thinking. Questions like what is really important? If I am unhappy right now, will having what someone has change that? That even being famous and looked upon by the public doesn't really make you truly happy. We have seen this time and time again with famous celebrities that everyone thinks has it all together, give it all away because of depression and loneliness. This movie does an excellent job of portraying that. My only critique about this movie is that you never really get to know the character David who was doing the interview. They allude to deeper issues within him but never dive into them and expose them. Average Man Score: 8/10

Interesting dialogue about how a celebrated writer is basically normal

[stickbugg-2 · 7/10 · 26 November 2022]

This movie had enjoyable dialogue, which for a movie that is mostly about conversation, is something I don't often say. Eisenberg and Segel are new names for me, but I expect this movie will advance their opportunities as actors because they did a great job inhabiting their characters. I have not read any David Foster Wallace, but somehow even the greatness of Segel's character didn't quite strike me as convincing. This is not a problem I saw with Segels acting, but with the writing. I don't think the film really portrays the fact that Wallace was often perceived to be the very type of person he was critized of being. This film tries to answer the question by saying he was truly a normal guy -- but that I find unlikely. I guess I don't care who he wasn't, but who WAS he? We don't need a whole film to convince us that someone was just a normal person.

I couldn't sit through until the end of the tour

[max-850 · 4/10 · 16 August 2015]

I couldn't sit through all of this movie. Just had to leave. We lasted somewhere into the middle of this boring dialogue posing as a movie. Maybe it gets better in the last half. The idea is not that bad. It's just that when the actual interview starts, it's so dull and goes on and on and on. With questions and a script that might have worked in a high school play. The acting is good. I just don't understand how this is a movie. It was a novel. Maybe the adaptation was the problem. It never seems to get off the ground. Just talk, talk, talk, talk in a sort of monotony. All very affable and unengaging. No dramatic tension. I don't understand all of these reviews on here that rave about this. What's the big deal? I think I missed the point. But I wasn't going to sit through another 45 minutes of that.

One of the best biodramas in history.

[JohnDeSando · 20 August 2015]

"Fiction's about what it is to be a human being." David Foster Wallace

In 1996 David Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg) interviewed acclaimed author David Foster Wallace (Jason Segel) over the course of several days in Minneapolis for a book tour about his 1000 page epic novel, Infinite Jest. Essentially a two hander in the spirit of the recent True Story, about the interview with alleged murderer Christian Longo (James Franco), The End of the Tour is one of the most accessible biopics about smart people in recent memory.

What sets The End off from True Story and other stories about gifted, troubled authors is its easy manner that doesn't play up intellectual snobbery but rather tries to understand the isolation and diffidence of geniuses. While Lipsky is not the genius writer that Wallace is, he is still a published novelist and a writer for Rolling Stone—the boy has the chops that allow him to get inside Wallace, as much as that is possible with writers slightly less private than, say, JD Salinger.

Wallace reveals himself, albeit obliquely, as a talented working class author bedeviled by addictions that seem to feed his insecurities: Obsessed by TV, he decides not to have one because he'd watch it; having overdosed on booze, he decides not to drink; whether or not he became addicted to heroin is uncertain.

What is certain is that as individualistic as Wallace is, and his densely verbose prose would confirm that, he is still one of us just trying to figure out his existential place in a chaotic world. His immersion in pop culture makes the brainy prose readable and enjoyable because he is tuned in and while heavily analytical, in touch with our daily experience.

Such is the spirit of The End of the Tour: it frequently relies on the mundane (e.g., pop tarts for breakfast, McDonald's for dinner, old TV shows for entertainment) to allow the more challenging—why he wears a bandanna—to reveal his soul (he worries that Lipsky's question about the affectation of the bandanna now makes himself conscious about wearing it, as if he were trying for an impression when he actually wasn't). His prose can be downright entertaining: "Because here's something else that's weird but true: in the day-to day trenches of adult life, there is actually no such thing as atheism. There is no such thing as not worshiping. Everybody worships. The only choice we get is what to worship."

Segel is a revelation as an actor. From mediocre romcoms to perfectly embodying a conflicted writer, Segel remains in low-key character throughout. Here's what Wallace says about the loneliness that was his constant companion before he committed suicide:

"Fiction is one of the few experiences where loneliness can be both confronted and relieved. Drugs, movies where stuff blows up, loud parties — all these chase away loneliness by making me forget my name's Dave and I live in a one-by-one box of bone no other party can penetrate or know. Fiction, poetry, music, really deep serious sex, and, in various ways, religion — these are the places (for me) where loneliness is countenanced, stared down, transfigured, treated." (The Pale King, 2011)

Introduce yourself to this verbal magician by seeing one of the best films of the year: The End of the Tour.

Takes a look into the real life addiction of fame and fortune and the wanting/needing of something else that never comes until THE END.

[ryangilmer007 · 7/10 · 19 May 2015]

"The End of the Tour" is a unique, bizarrely intriguing, strangely satisfying , road movie about fame and fortune and the price people pay to achieve it whether or not it's wanted.

It is a movie that really should not work, yet it does.

----------------------------------------------------------------

(I guess ... spoiler..., but it is by a loose definition, as a plot summary is given in the next few sentences. Also, the framing device of the film is discussed. Additionally, the film is based off of a true story, so the ending shouldn't be shocking. However, that is part of the unique framing device.)

----------------------------------------------------------------

For 106 minutes we are treated to

"2 guys talking about stuff" and although that title sums up the movie, ''The End of the Tour" also shows that the movie is about "The End".

David Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg)

and

David Foster Wallace (Jason Segal)

Are perfectly cast as two real life writers whom are on the final leg of "David Foster Wallace"'s book tour for his over 1000 page tome. "David Lipsky" is the "Rolling Stone" reporter assigned the task of finishing an article on Wallace and the rumors of his heroine addiction.

Over the five day course of the interview both Davids become friends, buds, and enemies.

At times you don't know if they are lying or being too smart for their own good.

That is what makes the story work.

While Lipsky never finishes his article; he eventually turns the notes and tapes into his own book and this memoir ends up as a tour back where the friendship began.

The movie shows this beginning just as it shows the end.

For 106 minutes the two guys are the story. Sure Mamie Gummer. Shows up as an old Wallace friend/groupie, Joan Cusack is in the film to shuttle them to the airport and Mall of America, Anna Chlumsky is the school friend Wallace has, even Mary Tyler Moore has a brief cameo, but otherwise everyone else is an extra and the 2 guys run the show and talk about stuff.

Scenes are even framed to show as much of the two of them as possible. Most of the extraneous "stuff" is edited out of frame.

Extraneous activities like "underwater world" are cut from the film entirely and the depth of frame makes additional skyway scenes almost irrelevant.

All the while instead of guys having fun in the Mall, they do and talk about Stuff that Wallace at times doesn't want to discuss.

They talk about anything from "dog excrement" to "the meaning of a book passage". Each of these conversations has double meanings.

Is Wallace full of "it" or is he the real deal?

Is his book about a heroine trip or additions?

Is Wallace leading a double life?

Is he the normal guy he says he is?

Or is he a "Broken Arrow"?

Would Wallace even want this movie made????

Some of these questions are answered, more are not.

I would offer the answer that Wallace would be passive aggressive and say that he wants the movie "Not to be made", but in his heart actually want it to be made. However, that is just an opinion based off of how he is portrayed in this movie. Which, ironically, conveys exactly what kind of a conundrum he was in real life and unfortunately real.... "THE END".

In the end we get a simple movie about a complex friendship and a man with addictions who was famous, but didn't really want to be and who knows in 3 years that this may not be the case.

The reasons why are known only to him/ Wallace, but this movie is a unique experience and look into the real life addiction of fame and fortune and yet wanting something else.

Alanis Morissette would be proud.

showed as part of ‪#‎mspiff‬ Picked up smartly for distribution by ‪#‎A24‬ whom is on quite a role recently with quality film releases.

Releases July 31, 2015

Also With Amber Danger Johnson, Barbara Berosik, Jake Hinkley, and many others in the Mall of America scenes. A lot of people were cut out due to the depth of frame and perhaps pacing issues with walking around the Mall of America. Although if some of the other extras, like Erica Wyman, Karen Voels, Russell Johnson, myself, and more made the cut, we are only shown in a tiny blimp, or as a small blurry segment and the movie with its focus of 2 characters painting the bigger picture is better for it.

A near-perfect movie

[Ddailidonis · 10/10 · 27 July 2015]

To me, this was the best film at Sundance Film Festival with a perfect blend of comedy, drama, and life lessons. Both Jesse Eisenberg and Jason Segel had towering performances in this film. And James Ponsoldt (Director of Spectacular Now and Smashed) presented the two main characters' relationship perfectly. The cinematography was also simply amazing! You can tell that the cinematography for this film was done so passionately as well as the music in this film. Of course who could expect anything less from 4-time Oscar nominee Danny Elfman for his amazing composing skills. To me this is a must see for audiences who are young adults (although it can be viewed by any age) mainly because of its view on how life should be lived. Right after the film was over there was a Q&A and one of the members of the audience stated, "Mr. Segel if you don't receive an academy award or nomination for your performance I would be very surprised." I just hope this film doesn't become another gem that goes unnoticed because of all the huge studio releases this year.

I want to be David Foster Wallace's best friend.

[theologygeek · 7/10 · 15 August 2015]

I first saw the trailer for The End of the Tour over a month ago and I was stoked. This was something that I needed to see. I needed to hear this man's thoughts and I became impatient and bought the audio book of, "Although Of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself" which is the book that this film is based on. I listened to it on a long drive for North Caroline to Southern Illinois and back and got exactly what I was longing for; a little intimate bromance between Wallace and Lipsky and a lot of literature, philosophy, and pop culture c.a. 1996 which is a year that I remember well.

Last night I saw the film in Durham, NC and it is not the book. The book would make a horribly long and uninteresting movie except for the most ardent fans. The movie is re-edited to tell a story about a young author and a young journalist. The book, I believe, is a true story. The movie is based on a true story. Drama is added where there was none. It's a movie, not a textbook. It aims to tell the best story that it can in 1:38 and I don't hate it, but I do question the parts of the book that were added and the parts that weren't; thus the 7/10 review.

The movie is worth watching and I would suggest to anyone to see it. It's a quiet humble film without a lot of pretense and if you love it, read the book and then take the time to read Infinite Jest.

How do these 'kids' channel men of another era so well?

[socrates99 · 9/10 · 16 April 2015]

We're currently attending a film festival and this is one of the featured films. My first indication that this might be more than I expected was the line of young people, including many young women, who were interested in getting what amounts to stand by tickets for the showing that featured an after movie panel discussion with Jason Segel and the director, James Ponsoldt. Now, I only know of Segel's work and haven't seen much of it. He isn't a particular attraction for me, but after seeing this movie, I'm quite sold on his ability especially when nurtured by the sensibilities of Mr Ponsoldt. The director read Mr Wallace's greatest work 'Infinite Jest' back when it first came out to huge success and makes sure you get a glimpse of the man's ability and charm.

Probably the only unfortunate part of all this is that this movie is not going to have wide appeal. It is almost exclusively about the real life meeting between a Rolling Stone journalist and newly minted super-author David Foster Wallace, back in the 90s. As such it is almost all dialog meant to convey a sense of Mr Wallace's breadth of knowledge about popular culture and his imagination.

There's little drama or action here in the usual sense. Still Mr Segel is most effective in breathing life into the man such that you would love to have known him. Even his co-star, Jesse Eisenberg, who I don't usually warm up to, is quite up to the task at hand, i.e., sparring with the great author to get the real man down on paper.

I loved the film, but I must make special mention that, for a film filled with dialog, for once, I caught every word. There was no asking my wife, what did he say? Why can't every film be as carefully constructed?

Great artsy film about an author's surprisingly common life

[Seraphion · 7/10 · 28 October 2015]

The story is something that would interest few of the common people indeed. Even I must admit that I got interested into watching this movie after seeing it being recommended in a cinephile discussion, and also after knowing that it's Jesse Eisenberg playing and getting curious about how Jason Segel will do in a non-comedy. All in all, the movie went very much flat, with only one thing to call a conflict; and even that gets resolved nicely. Yet the dialogue is so deep and rich; I can even recommend people to just close their eyes and instead listen to the dialogue. It's because that the movie's visual doesn't really offer much, whereas the whole essence of the movie is on the eye-opening dialogue. The acting overall is surprisingly good. Jesse Eisenberg didn't have any difficulty to again invoke his usual role character of a fast-talking and sometimes stuttering super curious man who sometimes get out of line. Jason Segel did a remarkable job in stepping away from his usual comedy roles and delve deep into the character of the author David Wallace.

The Most Genuinely Realistic and Full of Life Film I've ever seen

[DirectorTrev · 9/10 · 2 February 2023]

I hope people will take this review seriously. This film means a whole lot to me, and rewatching it reminds me of how fantastic it is. I don't get emotional during many movies, but this one does get me choked up-Especially with that ending and knowing the sad truths of what happened to DFW.

I saw this film years ago when I was in high school, alone, in my bedroom. Today I decided to revisit it, as I remember loving it back when I first watched it. Now here I am, in college, alone in my bedroom. It feels very related to the story in the film. I see relations to my own narrative.

For starters, in my opinion, this film is the most realistic interpretation of life itself. No movie I've ever seen has been able to replicate this. It bases itself on the simple, yet true story, of two dudes, just having simple conversations about life. There's nothing really else to it. And that's the beauty of it. The writers don't glorify anything or "Hollywoodize" any moments in the film. They keep in the awkward moments and show to the viewers the stages of getting to know someone. This really helps solidify the feeling of a fly on the wall watching these two characters go about their lives. There are also just beautiful moments in the film that just feel so real. David Foster Wallace is seen from the street, just living in the moment as he talks to his dog. This shot alone speaks volumes to me. It feels so rich and full of life. And the moments of David Lipsky's first interactions with DFW. It's so pleasurable to watch, which is ironic due to what DFW preaches in his book and what's represented in this film.

The film follows Jason Segel as the famous novel writer David Foster Wallace, and a rolling stones journalist David Lipsky played by Jesse Eisenberg. Both do an absolutely incredible job, but Segel really steals the show. This is an oscar worthy performance and I dread that this was overlooked.

I can understand that this film is slow-moving, and not much really happens. But if you open up your mind and see how beautiful it is it becomes so worth the watch. I recommend this film to anyone.

Jason Segel Is Heartbreaking

[robsta23 · 7/10 · 4 September 2015]

Biopics or movies based on true events are not of great interest to me usually, although this year I really enjoyed Straight Outta Compton. This flick, which was based on true events, was extremely well-acted like many biopics such as Ray, Crazy Heart, or The Theory of Everything. I wouldn't go as far as calling this movie a biopic though as it only accounts for about one week in the life of David Foster Wallace (and David Lipsky for that matter). Rather than being about David Foster Wallace specifically, this film is mainly about Lipsky's experience with Wallace and his reaction to that experience.

The main plot of the film is a little uninteresting in my opinion - neither of the two are sure whether they'll be friends as Lipsky begins to interview Wallace, they become friends, they have a falling out but quickly become friends again before Lipsky leaves. What is more interesting about this film is the subtext - is Lipsky being genuine to Wallace or is he just playing Wallace to get the right story out of him?

Jesse Eisenberg seems to be his quirky self, and then his character becomes unlikable as in his role as Mark Zuckerberg when we see him going through Wallace's personal space trying to find something, but we don't quite know what it is. Later in the film we come to understand Lipsky's boss wants him to press Wallace about a rumored heroine addiction, but Wallace is such a likable guy that Lipsky continues to wait to delve into this rumor as to not make Wallace uncomfortable.

The best scene in the film - a scene which will probably get Jason Segel an Oscar nomination - consists of Wallace revealing the truth about the heroine addiction to Lipsky and commenting on the worst parts of his life, which is absolutely heartbreaking since the film begins 12 years past the interview with Lipsky getting a call that Wallace has committed suicide. I wasn't sure whether this film would have a clear climax, but I'm glad it did and that Segel's monologues he gives at the climax were very well written with great attention to thought and thematic content.

I read somewhere this film was supposed to be humorous, and it was, but very occasionally. When there was humor though, it was actually very funny. A decent film based on true events, but you should experience Segel's performance as David Foster Wallace.

3.0/4.0

A bittersweet candy after finishing Infinite Jest

[Dretix · 8/10 · 20 March 2022]

"The End of the Tour" is a movie about David Lipsky interviewing David Foster Wallace, author of "Infinite Jest" , right about the end of the book launch tour. While book references are scarce, it paid off to have read the book before watching it. The whole experience feels like a long and sentimental talk. Would recommend even to those who didn't persuade the 1079 page behemoth, or those who had no idea who David Foster Wallace is.

There's a limit for everything, and after that, the same people look differently.

[Reno-Rangan · 7/10 · 4 October 2016]

This is an unexpected biographical drama. I don't know who are those two guys, I mean not the actors, but the real life characters. I never read their books or heard their names, though the film sounded great, so I decided to watch it. The entire film was an interview between a newly famed writer and a journalist who dreaming to become like him one day. So basically the young journalist desperately makes himself an opportunity to meet the writer and they take a road trip, discussing various topics.

It's hard to say who was best, both Jesse Eisenberg and Jason Segel were excellent. I think it was the best casting, they will be the reason if you want to watch it, not the story. Yep, the story was simple, just talking life, present and future of humankind, other celebrities and finally differences between them. That's the part I loved. I mean famed people or genius, whoever they're, they are just like us when it comes to interacting with others. They argue too, it's not like the worst thing to happen, but a normal thing as a human being. Just like animals locking their horns over land or females and sometimes for a no reason.

It was directed by 'The Spectacular Now' filmmaker, based on the bestselling memoir by David Lipsky, the character that played by Jesse Eisenberg. It takes place in the late 90s, but present in the film as a recall after a certain event. If you like 'Before Sunrise' kind of films, you will enjoy it, but if you hate slow pace narration, then you should better skip than giving a bad review and rating badly to wreck it up.

7/10

Not a service to fans of Wallace, but of David Lipskys

[cfcurrie · 4/10 · 10 September 2015]

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.