I was not a David Foster Wallace disciple before walking into James Ponsoldt‘s The End of the Tour. In fact, I hadn’t read a word he’d written and was only aware of his status as an acclaimed writer and his tragic suicide in 2008. Perhaps this is the best way to approach this film, without any measure of preconception or idea as to the icon at its core, or questioning whether Jason Segel is worthy of portraying him, considering he’s largely known for his comically goofy roles in the likes of Forgetting Sarah Marshall and The Muppets.
Even further, I didn’t know until after seeing the film that Foster Wallace’s estate, family and publisher all disavowed the film sight unseen. While I can’t speak to the veracity of the story being told (though it’s only obvious liberties were taken, this is a movie after all), or whether it’s an accurate portrayal of DFW, I can say those condemning and refusing to see it are missing a pretty great film.
Taking place in 1996, the story begins at the tail end of DFW’s book tour as he’s traveling the country in support of “Infinite Jest“, a novel considered by many to be a masterpiece and almost overnight he’s seen his profile rise to unfathomable (and uncomfortable) levels. Already immortalizing him is “Rolling Stone” reporter David Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg) who pitches a feature story on DFW to which the author agrees to a five-day interview. Thus beginning a relationship that is just as much professional as it is friendly, though not at all without shades of jealousy and ego.
Following the five-day interview Lipsky actually never went on to publish the interview, which would only later see the light of day in Lipsky’s book “Although Of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself” from which Donald Margulies adapted the film’s screenplay. Again, I haven’t read Lipsky’s book either, but Segel and the production had access to not only DFW’s books, but Lipsky’s book and audio tapes as well. Could this possibly provide enough material for them to capture the essence of DFW? Could any of us be captured within such limited parameters?
I only ask these questions with relation to this film because I believe they matter in this instance whereas in other films I don’t think it’s that important. DFW fans will argue whether the film should have been made at all, whether Segel is the right actor to portray him and whether DFW would have even agreed to the film being made given his disdain for popular media (though his obsession with television does paint a different picture). I can only speak for myself when I say The End of the Tour not only expands your way of thinking, opening a window into the life of DFW, it offers enough to make you want to break down the entire door.
To ask if Segel is up to the task, what so many forget about great comedians is there is no great comedy without great drama. An actor can’t successfully deliver a comedic performance if they don’t endear themselves to the audience first. Segel has never exclusively been the “running into walls” kind of comedic actor. He’s something of an everyman, and here he taps into a character almost impossible to describe, though his words and affectations tell us all we need to know.
DFW’s words not only offer a glimpse into who he is, but seem to examine the whole of humanity at the same time, and it’s up to Segel and Ponsoldt to bring that to life in an honest way and as much as I’d say the achieved that goal, there are, admittedly, moments it doesn’t always work. As the film attempts to create a measure of dramatic tension between Eisenberg’s Lipsky and Wallace while visiting with a couple of girls (Mamie Gummer and Mickey Sumner), real or not, the moment didn’t feel honest and, in the end, unnecessary. Lipsky looks at this literary icon before him with equal measures of awe and jealousy only to hear him say things like, “You don’t want to be me.” This is more than enough to create a conflicting dynamic in both the relationship and Lipsky’s way of thinking. Nothing else is needed.
Eisenberg’s twitchy performance, however, is a perfect counterpart to Segel’s hulking, larger than life, yet slobbish, appearance. From a character perspective, you get the impression Lipsky is trying while DFW is doing, and the film’s conceit alone speaks to the nature of the two based on the mere fact Lipsky didn’t initially publish the interview and instead opted to publish it as a book. In my head there’s something egotistical and desperate about that. It raises an eyebrow, but much of this movie does that. To that extent DFW is really the supporting character as we’re caught watching most of this film from Lipsky’s adoring perspective and it’s a perspective many can relate to as we all have, at one moment or another, looked on at others and wondered (and wished to know) what it would be like to live in their shoes.
The biggest question that permeates the entire feature is to ask, “Why did he agree to this interview in the first place?” It’s a question I can’t really answer other than to say, “I don’t know, but he did,.” For me that’s reason enough and to delve any further into the question is to presume we know what someone is thinking, a mistake I think DFW’s estate is making when it comes to their thoughts on the film itself.
The End of the Tour is introspective and thought-provoking. I immediately went home and began reading Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster” (sorry, I wasn’t tackling “Infinite Jest” right out of the gate) in search of more. Segel and Eisenberg provide a solid one-two punch, ultimately delivering a film that’s just as much, if not more, about the audience that’s watching than it is the characters on the screen.
