I get what _At Eternity's Gate_ was going for, visually. But that thing was not a thing i enjoyed. The framing made me rather uncomfortable, which, again, kind of the point, but not for me. Massive props to Dafoe of course, his Oscar nomination for best actor is not uncalled for, and special extra props to Mads Mikkelsen, the sequence between the two of them was far and away my absolute favourite part of _At Eternity's Gate_. But so much of the rest of the thing is just nature shots accompanied by violently jarring piano, and I cannot call myself a fan. _Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._

Okay, I will freely admit up front that I rolled my eyes around about the third or fourth time we were given a top-down angle view of Van Gogh walking, walking, walking. And some of the shots went a bit too long, though I suspect there was a point being made. I do not mind being challenged by a movie's content or style, as long as it doesn't insult my intelligence. I found this movie to be interesting enough to stick with it, though we watched it at home and didn't swallow it in one sitting. Rather we watched a half-hour and then went back to it later that day. I didn't notice the shaky camera work that others have commented on, and even though in my own novels I take pride in creating realistic dialogue, I had no problem with the dialogue here that bugged still others. Except maybe for the episodes of repeated dialogue they use to try to highlight Van Gogh's slippery state of mind at these times. It didn't seem very effective to me, so perhaps a bit more subtlety might have been less of a distraction to the viewer. This movie is based on a newer biography that offers an alternate description of the painter's last few years. There is probably no way to be sure if this new theory is correct, but it at least gives one pause for thought. And thought isn't a bad thing to be inflicted with, is it?