Foxcatcher

Foxcatcher is a long movie but it never gets boring and that's something. As a Belgian I never heard of this story so for me it was all a surprise. I like movies based on a true story, certainly one like this one. The make-up crew should also get credits because what they did to Steve Carrell and Channing Tatum was very well done. It's because Steve Carrell as a specific voice that I recognized him immediately but with his changed physics I could have been fooled. He plays a really annoying character, one of those rich guys that thinks you can buy anybody or anything. But he did a very good job playing that arrogant prick. Channing Tatum looks like he came out straight of a cavern. He also did a good job, like all the rest of the cast. The story is interesting to watch and the end was surprising to me. I'm not a big fan of the wrestling sport but for this story it doesn't matter if you like it or not. Certainly worth a watch.

Foxcatcher (2014)

Based on fact, a movie about Olympic wrestlers training at the estate of tycoon family du Pont near Valley Forge. Even though it's about sport and sports at the highest level, this is the opposite of an action movie. The central figure is mean to be one of two actual Olympic level brothers who wrestled in the 1980s, but in a way the tone of the movie is dictated by the patron, wealthy heir to the du Pont fortune, John du Pont. He's played with impeccable, disturbed restraint by Steve Carell.

The brothers are of course important, and slightly different in their makeup. Mark (played by Channing Tatum) is seemingly simple, almost slow, and he gets sucked into du Pont's plans rather easily. Dave (played by Mark Ruffalo) is more savvy, an older and more experienced wrestler.. And easy going, a family man who everyone likes. Except John du Pont.

Don't let the patience fool you. Carell is uncanny—his performance seems to be a non- performance, but it never flags. Tatum is right on with his feeling for an athlete devoted to his ability above all, but missing the larger picture. Ruffalo, though in a small role, ends up the most sympathetic character, and by the end, if you agree, you'll be in tears.

You sometimes wonder about how Olympic athletes get their support and what the price is to them personally. Though a long way from Communist bloc versions of control and abuse (and obsession), this is a perfectly horrifying and insidious American counterpart. Not to be missed if you like sports, sports movies, or the Olympics on any level.

Before watching and writing about Foxcatcher I did a bit of research about John DuPont and it confirmed what I saw in this film. Before any of the action of this film takes place, DuPont already had been accused of making improper advances by one man. He was also ever so briefly married, just like Rock Hudson.

Steve Carrell plays the uptight and repressed gay man John DuPont with a minimum of dialog and emotion, but with facial and body language that tell more than 20 pages of script could. He well deserved to be nominated for Best Actor.

John DuPont is from one of America's richest families and he's a man with a lot of money and a lot of time on his hands. He's developed an interest in wrestling and not the kind that Vince McMahon gives us three night a week. He decides to develop and finance a team of wrestlers that will win all championships including Olympic gold. Carrell is like George Steinbrenner with an open checkbook in the free agency market.

Two of his wants are the brothers Schultz. Mark is played by Channing Tatum and he is dazzled by the world that Carrell wants to invite him into. Carrell is crushing out on Channing Tatum big time which is understandable. David the older and more successful brother is played by Mark Ruffalo who got a Best Supporting Actor nomination is harder to get, but he does succumb. It leads to one unspeakable tragedy.

Foxcatcher also got nominations for Best Director, Best Makeup, and Best Original Screenplay. It didn't come away with any statues though.

I should also mention Vanessa Redgrave as Carrell's grand dame of society mother who is as uptight as her son. She too with minimal dialog conveys this branch of the large DuPont family is one uptight limb of the family tree.

Foxcatcher is a deeply disturbing, but very good film to see.

I'm usually on the same page as movie critics and fans when it comes to awards season flicks. But, I just don't get the massive acclaim for "Foxcatcher", Bennett Miller's based-on-a-true-story drama about the fractured relationships between two Olympic wrestling brothers, Mark and Dave Schultz (Channing Tatum and Mark Ruffalo), and their mentally disturbed benefactor, John du Pont (Steve Carell). Do I think it's a terrible film? I won't go that far. But, nothing about it emotionally moved me or made me think too much. I think it's just one of those movies that come off as so "serious" that the knee-jerk reaction is praise.

Here's my main problem: the storytelling and characters are so hollow. I don't know if this was Miller's point but there's a way to depict emptiness and hollowness without the film feeling empty and hollow itself. Many people describe this as a "slow burn" that requires patience and concentration from a viewer. I have plenty of both and tend to usually enjoy slower films. But, it's not the slowness that some people are reacting to. It's the deadness at the center.

We get no deep insight into any of the characters, except for John in rare moments, besides what they say superficially. What was it that really ruined the relationship between Mark and John? Jealousy, insecurity, betrayal, suppressed homoeroticism? What did Dave really think of John? And why exactly did Mark spiral so dramatically?

Now, I do appreciate ambiguity in characters and film very much. Not everything has to be obvious, cut-and-dry. But, if you're going to make the characters an enigma, at least give us more to work with to be able to figure them out. Instead, "Foxcatcher" disappointingly stays on the surface, making us guess way too much instead of diving deep into these people, who, given the fact that they're real, leave plenty of room to explore.

Because of this, the tragic ending left me pretty cold. John is such an empty shell throughout that we're never fully let into his inner world. We never get to completely understand his insanity. We're always on the outside of this character, looking in. As a result, his actions just feel disconnected and unexplainable. And the fact that the film ends so abruptly, without making us fully feel the impact of this horrible event, makes it even odder to digest.

Luckily, the performances of Carell and Ruffalo save the show and made it somewhat watchable. Carell joins the lengthy list of hilarious comedians capable of moving dramatic work. Known to audiences as a lovable, heart-warming goofball, he totally transforms and channels a still, unsettling intensity. I squirmed watching some of his scenes, as he was so palpably awkward and in pain, while making the aloof way the character was written work. Ruffalo is a great character actor yet always brings his own brand of sweetness and groundedness to every role. He has a way of making his characters seem totally real and recognizable. Here, he stands out as the most relatable, appealing member of the bunch. Their Oscar nominations were well-deserved.

Now, as far as Tatum goes, I did not see the brilliant, career-changing performance many were raving about. He was more or less his same one-note, depthless self, except he was given a few ridiculously showy scenes here. But, he still underwhelmed me. This part is really the central role and a truly gifted actor could've done so much with it. Mark is naive, ambitious, intense, obsessive, immature, and vulnerable. Yet, in Tatum's hands, who seems to be under the impression that stone-faced staring is great acting, he generally just comes off as dim and foolish, missing all of the emotional layers that should've been there (which could be another reason why it just failed to resonate with me).

If I had to recommend this, it'd only be for Carell and Ruffalo, who both act circles around Tatum. I can understand what Miller was trying to do with the film. Yet, I don't feel compelled to revisit.

John du Pont has more money than he knows what to do with. He is a miserable man who has spent his life trying to be something he can never be. He is pathetic as an athlete, so he brings in a man who suffers from an inferiority complex despite his earning a gold medal in the Olympics. Mark Schultz should have the world by the butt but he is caught in an aimless quest to earn enough to survive. His brother Dave, who has also been an Olympic champion, has gone on with his life. His love and affection for his brother keep the poor guy going, but it also overshadows him. DuPont decides to create a wrestling club and enlist the help of Mark Schultz and pretty soon the poor schmuck becomes his right hand man. Steve Carell is brilliant as the schizophrenic du Pont who imagines himself the savior of the country. He believe he is a real wrestling coach, even though he knows very little (he is able to look good because he gives huge sums of money to his stable of athletes). Carell's sickness pervades the entire picture as the men he commands begin to see his irrationality for what it is. There is also the classic Freudian stuff. This movie makes one uncomfortable from the get-go and yet we can't take our eyes off the sick man.