Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Don't listen to the negative reviews

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Like the greatest, most professional poet, Spalding Gray tells him stories at a swift, rhythmic pace that is exciting and brilliant all at once. With his pitch perfect timing and comedic wit, he weaves together here a masterpiece of the monologue as he recounts his bizarre, eye opening (yes, pun intended) adventure after he discovered he had an eye problem. Rather than simply accepting a surgery (he really doesn't like it when the doctors refer to their work as "scraping"), he attempts to work out alternative methods, which range from an all raw vegetable diet to traveling to the Philippians to visit a so called "psychic surgeon". As a master of the monologue, Gray tells this story miraculously well. He writes with a beautiful and distinct quality. Through his storytelling, he expresses himself in a truly unique and entertaining way, packing this one man show with laughs and personality.I must also praise the director, the famous Steven Soderbergh, who morphs this monologue into a visually stunning art film. Using music, sound, sets, props, camera movement, shadows, and plenty of other fascinating, experimental techniques, he turns Gray's witty writings into a much more cinematic and epic adventure that truly captures Gray's quirky and strange view of life.

There are some spoilers******When Spalding discusses how most surgeons that see a problem want to operate, it reminds me of the saying that to a hammer everything looks like a nail. They see a problem and they want to perform corrective surgery, that's their job, they are specialists. The difference between scraping and peeling was also interesting and made me think of how efficacy of an operation can be evaluated by language as well. And it was interesting for me, since most people in developed countries see something as efficacious if the disease agent has been removed, illness cured with a drug, or not efficacious if the treatment involved none of the modern medical procedures like 'macula scraping'. Despite the scary words and surgery, I find that his decision to go to an Indian Sweating ceremony is interesting. It makes me think of how the mere shock factor, the mere novelty, and quick reward/reaction that the body receives from such activity already give the impression of working! Which is why I suppose many people engage in it. When one does surgery, it's so impersonal and includes long wait times, and you are anesthetized and you don't really 'feel' it. I heard there is research going on about placebo cures, there was a case in 2002 where some doctors in the US had done "placebo" (fake) knee surgery for some older patients and within months their chronic knee pain had gone! The surgery looked like real surgery, the doctor had a scalpel in his hands but he didn't do the standard surgery. The ethics are definitely shady but the idea is placebo can be a cure in itself. Here is a link to the article.http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/07/020712075415.htmLastly, I like what the nutritionist recommends (the fish issue and vanadium), but like all people, the diet and wait time and working yourself for a slower and less risky path sounds less appealing! One wants the magic bullet cure. To drink, eat, and smoke everything that can make him blind is a great relief and is the best wording to describe what modern medicine has taught us to do, to rely on it and only it and not ourselves as much. I can;t be the one to judge whether that is good or not. I found Spalding's performance very engaging and very lively.

The trick here is to make a monologue a filmic experience. Gray's stories are fascinating. He's interesting to watch, but an hour and a half looking at his face is a little much to ask an audience. Soderbergh tries to mix it up a little, varying the backgrounds and moving the camera around, but doesn't go far enough. The short sequences of eye trauma interviews filmed in black and white are like islands of relief in a sea of Spalding and I wish there were more of that sort of thing in the film.

Like several of Spalding Gray's stage monologues "Gray's Anatomy" has been given the full feature film treatment, this time by "Sex Lies & Video" helmer Steven Soderberg. Gray's discovery of a visual malady leads him to medical and homeopathic treatment and serious consideration of the query "What is it you don't want to see?"This 90 minute monodrama is not opened-up in the traditional sense. Rather it is supplemented by monochrome interviews with Joe and Jane Q. Publics about their particular eye problems. Within the monologue itself, Soderberg employs a variety of lighting and camera trickery to keep the action from stagnating. Mostly, it is a successful endeavor. Though, oddly, the film lacks the overall impact of Gray's "Swimming To Cambodia" or even the lesser (but simpler done) "Monster in a Box". A fine addition to the Gray library.