|
Based on true events, FOXCATCHER tells the dark and fascinating story of the unlikely and ultimately tragic relationship between an eccentric multi-millionaire and two champion wrestlers. When Olympic Gold Medal winning wrestler Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum) is invited by wealthy heir John du Pont (Steve Carell) to move on to the du Pont estate and help form a team to train for the 1988 Seoul Olympics at his new state-of-the-art training facility, Schultz jumps at the opportunity, hoping to focus on his training and finally step out of the shadow of his revered brother, Dave (Mark Ruffalo). Driven by hidden needs, du Pont sees backing Schultz’s bid for Gold and the chance to “coach” a world-class wrestling team as an opportunity to gain the elusive respect of his peers and, more importantly, his disapproving mother (Vanessa Redgrave).  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8361stZ8n0w >>>US/Canda Release Date and City Calendar<<<
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 12:39 |
|
|
Didn't see a thread anywhere for this so I figured I would make one. I saw this tonight in NYC and had high expectations going into it after only watching about half of the trailer (I don't like having too much plot ruined for me). I was a bit underwhelmed, unfortunately. The actors played their parts well and it was interesting to see Steve Carell take on a dramatic role like this, if anything he's shown that he's perfectly capable of playing parts like this in the future. There was no trace of Michael Scott or any other zany character he's played, just a pretty solid performance. Mark Ruffalo is especially sincere in his role and the chemistry between him and Tatum is pretty great. Tatum's strongest scenes are when he's by himself and you get a glimpse at the core of his character. That said, the chemistry and story development between characters was a little off, I blame the overall poor pacing. What could have been a fantastic movie turned out to just be somewhat decently solid but not really worth more than a single viewing, in my opinion. e: apparently I'm the only person on the forums who has seen this movie 
ShoogaSlim fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 07:49
|
|
|
ShoogaSlim posted:Didn't see a thread anywhere for this so I figured I would make one. I saw this last night and I totally agree. I love the idea of taking a bizarre true story like this, giving it an appropriately dramatic treatment, and allowing it to play out like a tragedy, but the film just didn't quite pull it off. As you say, everybody involved does a solid job, but the different parts don't come together. I think the key problem is that the film sets up the dynamic (first Mark coming to the farm, then his falling out with John and Dave being brought in) and premise (John, representing the decline of American strength and vigour, sees in wrestling a chance to regain the glory of the past, but in trying to do so he pits brother against brother - thus also recreating the internecine conflict of America's history) well, but then hangs on one note for the rest of its running time. There was so much room in the last half of the movie for developing those themes that was simply left unused. It doesn't help that the film could really use some tighter editing; with just 10-15 minutes lopped off it would have been much punchier and would have done a better job of building up tension.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
ShoogaSlim posted:I was a bit underwhelmed, unfortunately. This makes me sad - this is one of my most looked-forward to films at the moment, and I really want it to be good. Ruffalo is one of my favourite actors and he's in so much poo poo, I want this to be another Zodiac.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Disagree almost entirely. A lot of the more disappointed reviews refuse to view the wrestling (performance) as the story, which seems bizarre to me. Four really great physical performances, especially from Ruffalo. This movie is to Behind The Candelabra what Gone Girl is to Side Effects.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
I read the script for this over two years ago and had been highly anticipating it's eventual release. I caught the film at VIFF last month and was rather disappointed. I hate using the term "boring" but I can't think of any other words to use to describe my feelings towards it. It's a truly engaging story but didn't translate onto the screen very well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Going to echo a lot of what is being said here. Easily one of my most anticipated films of the year, and performances were almost all stellar. Yet somehow it all fell a bit flat. I thought it was because i knew the whole story up front, but my wife fell asleep halfway in and everyone else seems to agree. Quite a disappointment even if I didn't hate it
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Walked posted:Going to echo a lot of what is being said here. If your wife my girlfriend? She also fell asleep watching it. Hah.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Disagree almost entirely. A lot of the more disappointed reviews refuse to view the wrestling (performance) as the story, which seems bizarre to me. Four really great physical performances, especially from Ruffalo. This movie is to Behind The Candelabra what Gone Girl is to Side Effects. I am clinging onto your opinion for dear life!
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
It's difficult to counter. It's not a plotty movie so you have to go with the characters. It's all hung on the performances.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Disagree almost entirely. A lot of the more disappointed reviews refuse to view the wrestling (performance) as the story, which seems bizarre to me. Four really great physical performances, especially from Ruffalo. This movie is to Behind The Candelabra what Gone Girl is to Side Effects. I only saw one of these movies, so I don't know what to make of this
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Honest Thief posted:I only saw one of these movies, so I don't know what to make of this All four are good to great and worth seeing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
The wrestling performances early on made me really excited for what was about to unfold on screen. You can tell the actors put a lot of effort into learning the craft. It feels very believable. Even later on everything looks just right. Unfortunately it's not enough to rely on watching guys wrestle when there's an engaging and devastating story to tell that doesn't grip like it should.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Foxcatcher relies on the power of its performances to a degree that makes it feel more like a ballet or an opera. And also like being at an opera or ballet, I was bored for about half of it, but when I wasn't bored I was loving spellbound. Man was that some loving Acting from everybody, striking this pretty amazing balance of understatement and stylization. Good movie!!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Stylization is a good way to put it. John is always holding himself up, literally, like he's posing for a portrait, but as he and Mark, a hulking simpleton, an "ungrateful ape!" grow closer, he adds more and more looseness to his poses. There's real affection there, but for different reasons, neither man knows how to express it. John prefers the abstraction of a physical contest, the great sport of wrestling, but it's pretty clear what we're seeing: a relationship. The scene where Mark overeats as an act of rebellion, like a bad breakup, is really good. Dave on the other hand is a big ol' bear, both lumbering and supple. More than once, we see his kids climbing over him. He's a wonderful dad and a wonderful brother and that warmth is what John finds so threatening - John is a guy who has to get drunk to halfway tell a joke. It reminded me a lot of Coriolanus, where they do a lot of subtle characterization with just the way Ralph Fiennes sits in a chair. Another obvious link is Vanessa Redgrave stealing the pants off the movie with her few lines and scenes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
Mark Ruffalo's physical presence was maybe my favorite thing. He carried himself with such confidence and grace and good humor that despite being the shortest dude in the room most of the time, he was, like clearly in charge (or maybe there's some better way to put it). I love how Ruffalo can pull off that effect as Schultz and do essentially the opposite as Bruce Banner. Cool actor. Vanessa Redgrave owned too, despite being little more than a set piece.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
"How you doin' bud," is such a powerful, simple line that opens something as sublime and, to use your word, balletic, as their workout sequence. I appreciate when a movie makes it that easy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 17:45
|
|
|
Mark Ruffalo definitely surprised me- I had heard so much about Carrell and Tatum, but really it was Ruffalo I enjoyed most. I think Wesley Morris' review sums up a bit of my thoughts on the film: http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/foxcatcher-serial-true-crime/ I agree with the other sentiments in the thread that it seemed to have all of the necessary ingredients for A Great American Film, but seemed for some reason to fall flat. Like Morris says in his review, I think Bennett Miller took his usual strategy of filming at a remove too far- it felt strangely impersonal. It obviously wasn't all bad, it was generally a really good movie, but I was surprised that it wasn't a great movie. It really seemed to pale in comparison to Capote, which is a wonderful character study that is as deep as it is nuanced- Truman's relationship with Perry plays like a chess-match not just from scene to scene, but within the scenes themselves- although Capote's motives are always in question, it feels like you see enough of him, hear enough of him, see enough of his face, to really understand the character, even when you're not entirely sure. It also, on the side, did a great job of humanizing a killer, where Foxcatcher almost seemed intent on doing the opposite- it's portrayal of Du Pont was neither sympathetic or vilifying, it was merely...static. edit: As a former wrestler, I have to say the wrestling in this movie was superb- at certain points I was definitely having flashbacks to old matches of mine. I was hoping for a little bit more perspective on wrestling culture "away from the mat" so to speak (i.e. the terrific weight cutting sequence), but generally anyone who hasn't wrestled and is curious should know that they did a really fantastic job with that element of the movie. If I didn't know better, I'd say Tatum was himself at least a collegiate-level wrestler. Ruffalo also got enormous for this role. Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
I love Catherine Keener but I absolutely could not stand one single second of Capote.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I love Catherine Keener but I absolutely could not stand one single second of Capote. They're pretty different movies, on the whole. Other than their general shared sense of dread, they don't have a lot in common.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
That's why I was surprised that I loved this movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:That's why I was surprised that I loved this movie. In that Wesley Morris review I posted, he claims that the scene where Du Pont wakes Mark Schultz up to wrestle in the middle of the night was actually an unwanted sexual advance that served as a bit of an inflection point in the movie, and marked the noted transition in Schultz's (Schultz'?) attitude towards DuPont. Did anyone else fail to pick up on that, utterly? I found the queer elements of a movie like The Master a little bit more believable, though I'd be curious now to read Schultz' memoir (also called Foxcatcher), to see if it's something he digs in to.  oof 
Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
I fail to see how you could not pick up on it, it's the most blatantly sexual scene in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
As a wrestler I've become inured to the sexual innuendos of one man mounting another (and overnight practices).
Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
I liked that it didn't overdo it in that regard. I mean "everybody knows" wrestling is gay as poo poo, but Bennett Miller uses that intimacy in interesting ways, particularly in the brotherly relationship.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
The homoeroticism and the Olympic setting gave me some real Greek tragedy vibes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I liked that it didn't overdo it in that regard. I mean "everybody knows" wrestling is gay as poo poo, but Bennett Miller uses that intimacy in interesting ways, particularly in the brotherly relationship. Yeah, I liked how every embrace between the brothers, even in a non-competitive context, was sort of half-wrestling, half-cuddling. It reinforced the sort of animalistic side of Mark, particularly as an ersatz equestrian showpiece. edit: Wow, this is eerie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4WOqUkJmFQ Jewmanji fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Nov 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
I loved this. Was surprised and impressed that a mover about Olmypic athletes took place in such an intense place of physical awkwardness. It's a shame that Whiplash also came out this movie because Miles Teller is just about the only guy preventing the race for "best physical performance of the year" to being a Foxcatcher-exclusive competition.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Yeah, I liked how every embrace between the brothers, even in a non-competitive context, was sort of half-wrestling, half-cuddling. It reinforced the sort of animalistic side of Mark, particularly as an ersatz equestrian showpiece. The JJ Dillion-ish lackeys in this are so, so great. It gives me the same exact feeling as Front Row Center: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzIYfb3QVSQ Even if you know nothing at all about the Von Erichs, in like five minutes, you can tell something seriously hosed up happened here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
As a proud (of our tax law) resident of Delaware this movie was a surprise pick by me and my girlfriend to watch since the Du Pont family is really an intregal part of the story of Delaware, a close knit and weird place that seems almost sculpted by the god-like rich. Turns out my childhood hangout, The Delaware Museum of Natural History, was founded by John Eleuthère du Pont because he loved birds and wanted to show off birds and meet other people to talk and/or teach them about birds. The film felt a bit weak to me as well, tragic since the acting was top notch and the absolutely amazing parts sprinkled throughout the film- the story of how that part of the Du Pont American Pseudo-royal Family mindset operated was pulled off fantastically even if not the focus of the film. The tension between John Eleuthère du Pont and his mother's opinion of him doing "low" activities is absolutely spot on, the absence of racism was a nice surprise because average quality writing tends to use the cheap "elitist = racist" characterization too often and with people like Jean Liseter Austin du Pont it was never about race or wealth but always about class and status similar to a "royal family" etiquette expectation. Looking at the screen writers, who I'm not that familiar with, I get the feeling a sub-par script was directed and acted incredibly well and pushed what they had to the limits. Sound was so well used (or left absent) in the film which I think made the less stellar dialogue stick out more.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
I caught this one yesterday. Fantastic acting by all 3 leads. I wish Ruffalo got a bit more screen time. I wasn't aware that Tatum had this type of performance in him. He did a very good job coming off as a victim of PTSD and a victim of abuse. Carrell was also impressive. I'm so used to seeing him as a comedy actor that it's difficult to see him as anything else, but his performance easily cleared this mental hurdle of mine. I'm not sure if I'd describe the movie as boring, but I can see where those complaints could come from. There definitely needed to be a bit more editing to tighten things up. It's a really good character study nonetheless. One thing I will say is that it's a very quiet movie. There's very little non-diegetic sound present, and diegetic sound is used sparingly. I don't think any music plays at all in the first act.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2014 13:57
|
|
|
I saw this today and the way I'd describe it to somebody would be to say "Hey, remember that last part of There Will Be Blood? The bits that took place in 1927? Foxcatcher is like that, except quieter and for a whole movie."
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Mark Schultz yesterday was pretty critical on Twitter about the movie.quote:@MarkSchultzy: In #Foxcatcher the movie my relationship with duPont is fiction. He was so repulsive I could barely tolerate him. I was there for $ only. quote:@MarkSchultzy: #Foxcatcher couldn't have portrayed me more inaccurately if they tried. quote:@MarkSchultzy: I have a love/hate relationship with Foxcatcher. I love the actors performances, Dave being immortalized, choosing me as the main character. quote:@MarkSchultzy: I hate the way I'm portrayed as an emotionally fragile, dimwitted, inarticulate, lost little boy in the body of a hulk. It's simply false. quote:@MarkSchultzy: Thank God I got my book published when the movie came out. I would be destroyed if everyone thought I was that person in the movie. quote:@MarkSchultzy: The film, the performances, the characters are all great. But Mark's personality and his relationship with duPont and Dave is pure fiction. TheCool69 fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Dec 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 13:41
|
|
|
Dang, that's an awful lot different than the last interview I read with him. http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/people/article/64919-four-questions-for-foxcatcher-author-mark-schultz.html quote:Do you feel like the depiction of du Pont in the movie, and your relationship with him, is fair?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
quote:@MarkSchultzy: In #Foxcatcher the movie my relationship with duPont is fiction. He was so repulsive I could barely tolerate him. I was there for $ only. I can see exactly what he means with the rest, as the movie does (unfairly) portray him as an inarticulate lunk, but this is also exactly how the movie portrays their relationship.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I can see exactly what he means with the rest, as the movie does (unfairly) portray him as an inarticulate lunk, but this is also exactly how the movie portrays their relationship. My girlfriend kept asking if he had brain damage or some prior abuse before the movie began, it really did portray him as either dimwitted or challenged by accident or intentionally. I think it was trying to show him as dealing with a lot of complex emotional issues, being unable to express his relationship with his brother while having a strange man as his only support mechanism, but did not pull it off well. There was no point in the movie that seemed to imply he had an actual positive view of duPont past the first few meetings where a guy offered him lots of money for the reason of "America Stuff" and to me it was clear that eventually the only time he spoke well of the man was when he had enough coke to read pre-written praise or when a handler basically asked him to read a script.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Yep, the part where Dave gets incredibly uncomfortable trying to choke down John's words about himself is a parallel scene to Mark's. One particularly mean joke is the twenty dollar check at the beginning, and then later, when Dave asks him how much DuPont is paying him, it seems all Mark can think of is "twenty with more zeroes on it". So I think he has a legit beef with the movie portraying him as a muscular clod, though it is a bit more nuanced than that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
strong movie. barely based on real events. doesn't matter that much. mark ruffalo gives an amazing performance as always. channing tatum: i love watching this guy, he's sexy and he's willing to try. steve carell wants that oscar so badly, and the director wants it for him, but ultimately this is the least interesting part of the movie. it was quite a good movie overall, but finally ruffalo basically dominated the film. the subtlety of his performance is incredible. he underplays in every case, which is exactly what is called for. would watch it again, the cinematography and editing created an uncomfortable experience that potentially expresses the psychosis of a killer (not really though, because research indicates that the film vs. RL. version of dupont diverged hugely).
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:edit: As a former wrestler, I have to say the wrestling in this movie was superb- at certain points I was definitely having flashbacks to old matches of mine. I was hoping for a little bit more perspective on wrestling culture "away from the mat" so to speak (i.e. the terrific weight cutting sequence), but generally anyone who hasn't wrestled and is curious should know that they did a really fantastic job with that element of the movie. If I didn't know better, I'd say Tatum was himself at least a collegiate-level wrestler. Ruffalo also got enormous for this role. this too, from a former (10-year) wrestler, amazing depiction of several elements of the culture
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 12:39 |
|
|
actually, thinking about it more, it does matter a bit that the movie does not portray real events accurately, but primarily because of the portrayal of the killer. having researched killers of this type, it was clear that nothing his mother did could have made him this way; and alternatively, without his mother he would not have been this way. basically, he had to have a genetic predisposition toward violence plus an awful upbringing to end up with a random murder like this. coupled with the actual fact that his mother died BEFORE he ever created the wrestling camp, the movie is mostly fiction. it is obvious that the real john dupont was deeply mentally ill, but that the film version is strongly pointed toward a disturbed relationship with his mother... all the blame is gone toward this broken rich family or blah blah. as far as i can tell mark was almost never even there, and any relationship they had was also completely falsified, so this movie is almost entirely fiction. still, as a fiction it is very strong, if very wrongheaded about the genesis of killers like this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2014 09:44
|
|