Many people who did not like this movie don't seem to realize this is an allegory. They are only focused on the narcissistic man who drains his partners of all their love and spits them out for the next, younger model. "You don't love me. You just love that I love you," says mother. With the millions of dogs we discard each year in America, this behavior of eating up another being's effection without giving it back should be familiar to many. But the true story here is life on earth, represented as the house before, during, and after mankind's presence. Mother nature's husband is the creator, God. The Genesis story of man plays out from mother nature's perspective. In this house you will see Eden, the Apple, Adam, Eve, Cain and Able, the great flood, and other biblical events that are all symbols of human strife, human nature, and our values that tend to miss the forest for the trees at times. It is a warning of where we are going if we don't stop and pay attention to this house that provides us everything. This is what happens if we don't give love back.
"Dallas Buyers Club" presents some fundamental questions concerning the purpose of law and the practice of medicine, though it paints with the limited colors offered by our libertarian protagonist. You wouldn't know it from the movie, but the FDA worked compassionately with the HIV community in the first decade, bending the rules by allowing buyers clubs to exist and giving otherwise terminally ill people a chance to fight nearly however they wanted (there were no government raids that the movie depicts) while the health industry worked to figure out a treatment with proper science. The movie also doesn't reveal that the Dallas club was considered too experimental by some of the other eight clubs; any whiff from around the world of a chemical with a possible positive effect and it would be made accessible by Ron Woodroof, who offered 130 different drugs unapproved by the FDA. Sadly, the film places ill motivations on behalf of the government and healthcare community in regards to the lack of treatment options. But rather than malice, we were dealing with ignorance. This was a brand new disease with about a 100% death rate, and both the FDA and doctors were rushing to treat the infected with any potential treatments they responsibly could. The problem for all involved boils down to a lack of data and the wide variations of analysis of what little data there was.
The premise is right up there with any Charlie Kaufman film (Being John Malkovich, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Scynecdoche New York), containing so much juicy potential for interpersonal revelations, but the entire set up is thrown away in the third act for a "thriller" movie that came out of nowhere and does nothing but add a period in the middle of the sentence. I wonder what th.