I consider this film to be one of the undiscovered gems of the 90's, and I'd rank it among Hartley's 3 best works (along with "Trust" and his masterpiece: "Henry Fool"). The short running time shouldn't detract from its stature. (It's too long to be a "short", too short to be a "feature"...think of it as a novella on celluloid.) The dialogue is Hartley at his most deft and agile, the chemistry between the leads is magnificent, and the film is inventive and original at every turn, taking us into brilliant culdesacs and then returning us to the narrative with an easy grace. Quite simply, it's one of my all-time favorites, and I watch it at least once or twice a year on an old VHS copy, which I've nearly worn out. I love this movie.

Spoilers herein.I'm a recent convert to Hartley's World. And I think he may be only a tentative convert himself.Superficially, he focuses our attention on abstract reductionism in storytelling. Not unsurprisingly, that focuses our attention on the story. This allows him to add more and more explicit metatext which is similarly clarified. The relationship and integration of this stuff is more simply and directly integrated in the story as well: representation and reality; naming and meaning; reflex and deliberation.The effectiveness of this is breathtaking. If he actually had something to SAY, this could be a lifealtering experience. I call this the "Fight Club" effect. Like Jimi Hendrix, he distracts us, opens a pipe deep into our soul, and then pours in the same vacuous truths he reacts and preaches against.Fortunately, he grew sufficiently to satisfy me by ?One True Thing.? He might turn out to be important. Certainly his cinematic intuitions are very sharp. Watch this for a deep understanding of rhythm, and not just the ordinary rhythm of pacing, but in the integrated visual poetry of punctuated attitude.Ted's Evaluation: 3 of 4: Worth watching.

For me this one stands out of other work I have seen from Hal Hartley to date (5 films including Trust but not including Unbelievable Truth). This one left a much warmer feeling inside me than his other films. It had less black humour in it, but the characters were more open, warmer, became closer somehow.Its actually surprising that I liked this film that much as after finding Hal for myself, I have watched 5 cassettes worth of his films in a few weeks timeframe (one of them contains 3 of his short films including this one). I was actually afraid that I might get bored of his style, his means of presenting a story and characters, as the means, style change only a little from film to film. He has so many "trademarks" about his filmmaking.I needn't have been afraid. I can feel this one.

Surviving desire was made for American Television and is only about an hour long. Despite the limited running time, Hal Hartley has produced in this film his best work. Using his trademark non-naturalistic dialogue and intellectualism, Hartley builds odd, but very believable characters. This is a touching film, expertly made and contains Martin Donovan's finest performance as the frustrated Jude. Matt Malloy is also fantastic as Henry. The mixture of high art, the emotional, the bizarre and the mundane make this often ignored opus a must see for anyone interested in cinema. An understated and ever-fresh film full of brilliance. Not the best film ever made, but absolutely one of my favourites.