A Poet in New York

Dylan lived a life of booze, sex and ill health. He died young and in that time wrote great poetry and did a lot of readings which Thomas is also known for.

This film concentrates on his American tours in the last part of his life. New York seduces him with fame and booze but the stories I heard about his time in New York, some by people still alive who knew him in that period are more interesting than this biopic.

There was some good use of period footage used in this film and Tom Hollander channelled the essence of Dylan Thomas but it was also a by the numbers biopic with love, drink, lust, betrayal and poetry.

The film would have been better with some actual American actors playing Americans although Ewen Bremner was good the accent seemed to wobble here and there.

The poetry recitals were good and the flashbacks to his earlier in Wales were intriguing but this was a wasted opportunity.

Talented without a doubt but what makes this film difficult to enjoy is that Thomas wasn't the best of human beings. Relationships weren't his strong point. He can't help himself of course so it's like watching a train wreck, waiting for the inevitable crash. That sometimes makes for uninspired viewing. Performances are good though as is the poetry itself, naturally.

Having said that, I liked him more when I didn't know this much about him. As a writer who's struggled with depression and alcohol, it doesn't surprise me and I completely empathize, but it doesn't necessarily make for a good movie. No disrespect. Is this film the way he'd like to be remembered? Read his work instead. You'll get a lot more out of it.

This film tells the story of a talented British poet, whose life is ridden with alcoholism and poor health. His womanising ways does not help with guys marriage either, causing every bit of his life to fall apart.

"A Poet in New York" may look good on paper, but the end result is quite ridiculous. I can't imagine a man bursting into poems every time he speaks. The poems are not even relevant to the questions or contexts at times, hence the social exchanges are very weird. The film does not capture me in any way, unfortunately. I found it very boring and unconvincing.

An absolutely superb film dealing with a subject which reeks with creative pitfalls. Tom Hollander's bravura uncompromising performance was matched by a supporting cast - Phoebe Fox and Ewen Bremner were fabulous in particular - that allowed the director (Aisling Walsh) to paint a picture of this great poet's desperately sad life without whimsy, and without clichés. Beautifully photographed and realised, this was the best biopic I have seen for a long time.The script written by Andrew Davies used the poetry to great effect and balanced Thomas's brilliant language with some effective and poignant dialogue - no mean feat. The integration of period footage of New York in 1952 was seamless - presumably colorised Black and White, but the cinematography, costume design and art direction added a modern atmosphere to the film instead of the often used lazy cod stylised attempts at period visual approximation which make the imagery seem so unrealistic and unbelievable. For reasons that seem baffling, it wasn't given much promotion by the BBC. No doubt the schedulers were too busy pushing the other ridiculous rubbish TV executives pepper their schedules with these days. This was great television drama. On a philosophical note: I know about that desperation and pressures Walsh/Davies so cleverly delineated, and I know how seductive New York can be from its seedy dives, its cocktails, its somewhat superficial parties, and its artistic magnetism. Tragic that all these attractions have the power to destroy so much talent, and in Dylan Thomas's case, at such a tragically young age.

It is surely difficult to encompass the life of anyone in little more than an hour. This bio-drama concentrates on the last days of Dylan Thomas, with flashbacks to his youth and happier days. The result is a successful arc of the man's life, ultimately disappointing as it was.

Thomas was an intemperate boor haunted by past failures and as unhealthy fear of an unpromising future as this dramatization tells it. Certainly most of it is true.

So many literary luminaries are self-destructive and personally disappointing. That one more does not stand as an icon to strength of character is no revelation, but it does give an alternate view of Thomas' works. Long after "Fern Hill", he goes to America not to anoint the masses, but to escape the prison of his marriage. And "Do Not Go Gently into that Good Night" becomes less a passionately strong urging to remain steadfast and more a pitiful pleading to not be abandoned. But meaning, like beauty, is in the eye or ear of the beholder.

Tom Hollander gives a strong performance as the poet and he is surrounded by a corps of captivating actors. New York City in 1953 comes alive and provides an appropriate backdrop for the poets downfall. What started as a green and golden existence dies among the figurative gray ash heaps of Eliot's 20th century, perhaps too innocent and too frail to survive in a world of ragged claws.