Rating: 
Summary: This is a strange one...
Review: and I'm not talking about content. To be perfectly honest I was quite hesitant to see this, as it seemed - based on the trailer - just another "Time To Kill" type movie, where you've got the good guy and a bad guy and a court case and polotics, blah blah blah. In short, another typical hollywood "court drama" revolving around left wing polotics (not that I claim any particular agenda - I just don't like movies that do.) In anycase, the thing which sets this film apart from others like it (and it is very much like many other films for the first hour and a half) is the last 3 minutes. Those three minutes are some of the best I've seen since the ending to Se7en. Some of you may have the movie figured out in your head already, some may not. But even if you've got it decided that D.G. did or did not do it - the way of revealing the magnificent ending will still manage to shock you. This is highly reccomended to people who don't like their answer's served for them on a silver platter - good movie to generate discussions as you can probably tell by the plethora of 1 and 5 star reviews.
Rating: 
Summary: Not worth it
Review: This movie was far too contrived and unoriginal to make it even a midly interesting viewing. Kevin Spacey was not in his top form in this movie, and combined with the horrible plotting and pacing the movie is a near-catastrophe. Unless you are a hardcore Spacey or Winslet fan, I would avoid viewing this film.
Rating: 
Summary: Must Be Watched from Beginning to End!
Review: Great movie from the opening sequence to the very last shot! Worth seeing again to see what you missed the first time. This movie is the type where the director and editor did not put any "filler" into. Every scene is important.Keving Spacey is great and Kate Winslett convincingly drops her British accent in a tale of an anti-death penalty advocate who is awaiting execution for the murder of one of his fellow advocates. Winslett's character (Bitsy) is a reporter who has the assignment of getting Gale's story before he dies and proving his innocence. As the Gale's story unfolds one scene early on is very important. That is where Gale is in a televised debate with the governer of Texas over the merits of the death penalty. The debate turns into a shouting match with Gale cornering the governer into stating that if Gale could name one "innocent" person who received the death penalty, that he would sign an order to abolish the penalty in Texas. As the movie winds towards a climatic ending we begin to realize that it is more important that Bitsy can prove Gale's innocence, than save him from leathal injunction. The movie is full of plot-twists and incredible suspense with a few scenes that will startle you.
Rating: 
Summary: Mildly Watchable But Essentially a Dog's Breakfast
Review: Kevin Spacey is David Gale, genius hotshot young philosophy professor who, it soon transpires, is most certainly guilty of an extremely inadvisable drunken coupling with a somewhat unstable graduate student. She files a false rape charge that doesn't stick but enough mud does to wreck his academic career. And he is certainly guilty of then allowing himself to sink into a hopeless state of alcoholism and self-pity. But is he guilty of the rape and murder that has put him on death row? That's what journalist Bitsey Bloom (Winslet) sets out to investigate as a byproduct of a series of interviews with him in which it becomes clear there is more to the case than met the original jury's eye. Spacey and Winslett are both A-list movie stars who really seem to have got where they are not by being fetching eye-candy but by being seriously good at acting. And Alan Parker is an old pro film director who has made some not uninteresting movies in his day. So this seemed maybe worth investigating when I spotted it in he video rental shop one rainy Friday evening. Sad to say however, it's not very good. Parker's direction is serviceable enough much of the time and Winslett and Spacey turn in indecent enough performances. Mostly I blame the writer (a certain Charles Randolph II). The first big mistake is a byproduct of making Gale a supposedly brilliant young philosopher. Given this, Randolph couldn't resist having him spout philosophy in various scenes and what he spouts, I'm sorry to say, is rather feeble, straight-B sophomore stuff. Not only that but the pull of intellectual aspiration left over from some half-remembered philosophy classroom is strong enough for him to supply other characters with such occasional truly silly lines as "There is no truth, only perspectives" and other such cliched nonsense that even straight-B sophomores have usually had time to outgrow. All this would be better just omitted and Parker must share some blame for not leaving it on the cutting room floor where it belongs. The film has no very urgent reason to say anything deep or interesting about Lacan or Socrates or any of the other subjects Gale is allowed to sound off about. But it does seem to have the clear and urgent aim of saying something halfway interesting about capital punishment, its ostensible theme. However if you're looking for hard-hitting, intelligent movie with thought-provoking stuff to say about the death penalty don't bother with this. It is no such thing and not the least reason for this is the thoroughly unsatisfying, indeed downright dumb, denoument when we find out what has really been going on. Not only is this hugely implausible but it serves, in its sheer silliness, only to trivialize and undermine any serious intention to engage intelligently with the capital punishment issue. But the film nonetheless tries just hard enough to work on this level to be fatally distracted from the subsidiary goal of working as a thriller and ends up not working at all. Other things grate. One is the pretentious and pointless way the action is intercut with supposedly dramatic shots of bits of paper on which are writtern VERY SIGNIFICANT WORDS, like 'murder', 'rape', 'innocent', 'guilty', 'condemned'. It's hard to be quite sure what this is all about: presumably just to remind us all that we are dealing here with LARGE THEMES. Another is the horribly stupid scene near the end when, racing against the clock to save a life, Winslett finally finds the key piece of evidence that might do the trick. Rather than grabbing it and running as soon as it's clear she has what she needs, she pauses for a good old cry at how affecting all this is. And that is stupid. When seconds count to save a life, even quite stupid people are smart enough to shift butt and save the emoting till later. Finally there is the character of Constance Harraway (Laura Linney), the victim of Gale's supposed crime. Late in the film, in a love scene between her and Gale, it becomes immensely apparent that, if the film is to even begin to work, she and her relationship with Gale must be right at its emotional centre. But she's nowhere near - lacklustre and underdeveloped. The film that results is mildly watchable but eminently forgettable, rather feeble stuff.
Rating:
Summary: The $500,000 Ripoff
Review: The DVD is a good transfer with decent sound. The "extras" are worth watching. That said, I generally agree with most of the other comments posted here. The story-line doesn't work. There is a plot "device" right in the beginning: Winslet's rental car breaks down. This "device" is then used at the end when her rental car breaks down just when David Gale is being strapped down and the needle installed. Winslet has to run about two miles and arrives too late to save Gale. Hokey, but it works, sort-of. But a plot device all the same, and audiences are far too smart not to recognize them. I do agree with one reviewer that the final scene just doesn't justify everything that has gone before. When we see Gale step before the camera and look down at the dead woman, and then look into the camera with a dull expression, we are asked to believe that this brilliant college professor is really nothing more than a drunk and a dullard. All of his dialog in the prison telling his tale shows us a man of extraordinary mental accumen. The central performances are ok, but I always enjoy the acting of the supporting players, such as the prison warden who shows Kate Winslet into the prison. He gave a touch of reality that the main players often had trouble recreating. I'm not sure I get the point of this story. At this point, I'm tempted to quote Rhett Butler: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn."
Rating:
Summary: A powerfully moving drama that will keep you guessing!
Review: Anyone who gives this movie less than 4 stars must have watched a different movie than I did. I found this movie to be incredibly powerful. I feel for David Gale from the very beginning when a manipulative student accuses him of rape and gets him fired. He is a death penalty abolitionist (DPA) who feels extremely devoted to his cause. Through a twist of scary coincidences his DPA partner ends up raped and killed in a horrible way, and he ends up the accused. Put on deathrow, he will not talk to anyone in the press about it until 5 days before his execution. Bitsy Bloom is then allowed the priviledged interview and led on a wild race against time to find out what really happened and prevent the execution. If you feel things deeply this movie will make you cry. WATCH THIS INCREDIBLE MOVIE!
Rating:
Summary: Move over, David Lynch
Review: I am appalled at the negative reactions to this film. The reviewers have expressed distaste for its politics, for the graphic (but brief) nudity and sex. But the film is far more about loss than it is about any of these things. And there are subtle and not-so-subtle ironies throughout. It starts with the reverse-rape: who really loses their innocence in that bathroom scene? The girl who would do anything? Who is really at the heart of the "crime" that is the focal point of the movie? A woman who would do anything? And who loses and who gains because of this? I found the film moving, philosphical and thought-provoking. It is tragic (alchoholism, cancer), with portrayals of self-sacrifice worthy of more recognition than it has received. The performances weren't stellar, but the unfolding of the several plot and emotional resolutions (endings) was brilliant. To me, it had the right touch of downplayed performances and quirkiness, with a haunting emotional theme throughout, that is characteristic of David Lynch's better work.
Rating:
Summary: Underrated
Review: Those concerned that this is propaganda for the anti-death penalty cause are missing the point. The politics of this movie aren't very important. It's really just a thriller, a decent one. The ending isn't that much of a surprise, but guessing the ending is half the fun of seeing something like this. Some complain about the acting and writing. It may not be the best work of anyone involved; but I was able to enjoy it and even believe that people might be willing literally to sacrifice themselves for something they believe in strongly. The implausibility of it all didn't bother me. In short, this is an underrated film that's worth seeing if you're not in a nitpicky mood.
Rating:
Summary: The movie HAS no interesting
Review: I still can't see what "the point" was that the movie supposedly makes in "a compelling and interesting way". Was its point supposed to be that innocent people can be and sometimes are put to death under US law? If so, then its point is silly, because most of us already acknowledge this fact (however we stand on the issue of the death penalty). There is nothing profound or enlightening, or even interesting, about the point at all, if that is what it is supposed to be. Or is the movie's point supposed to be that extremists sometimes go to great lengths to prove things that everyone already acknowledges? Maybe that's true. But the Life of David Gale not only has a "slim" possibility of transpiring in "real life", but actually is impossible to take seriously WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE STORY ITSELF, because David Gale is supposed to be not just an extremist but also a very intelligent person. Why would SUCH A PERSON go to *any* lengths to prove something already so obvious as the fact that innocents can and are sometimes put to death under US law?
Rating:
Summary: SO glad I didn't read these reviews first!!
Review: Had I read the reviews here, I would NEVER have picked up this movie. I am SO very glad I didn't check the reviews first! Yes, the possibility of this story actually happening in "real" life is somewhat slim however, the concept and the ultimate point made was dead on (no pun intended). Can an innocent man be executed? You bet. Can an extremist go to these lengths to prove it? Probably. The movie made the point in a compelling and interesting way without "preaching". I would definitely recommend it, and already have.
| 
