(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.awardscircuit.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F09%2F1.-DF-08971-brighter-%2B-cropped-3.jpg&hash=dee7569d0f31d3475dfafe8d74775958100d6d3c)
Foxcatcher is an upcoming American drama film, directed by Bennett Miller, and starring Channing Tatum, Steve Carell, and Mark Ruffalo, and the screenplay was written by E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman, based on Olympic wrestling gold medalist Mark Schultz's autobiography.
It's all about the nose.
Quote from: Sleepless on September 27, 2013, 09:46:14 AM
It's all about the nose.
It seems to be pulling his face upwards.
It's all about the Michael Scott creeping the shit out of me.
Trailer was pulled, here's one that's still up:
This looks so awesome.
Thanks for finding a new trailer Wilderesque.
/Film just posted that the film has been delayed until 2014 (http://www.slashfilm.com/bennett-millers-foxcatcher-delayed-until-2014/)
In theaters November 14, 2014
Clip (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/watch-first-clip-from-bennett-millers-cannes-drama-foxcatcher-starring-channing-tatum-steve-carell-mark-ruffalo-20140515)
Holy shit there are giant horses in that trailer.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.awardsdaily.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F06%2Fchanning-tatum-768.jpg&hash=566abae04ad5c4559f8a7ca9bb26d8c13da8ceb2)
and
Steve Carell (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r02YfPQ-g9k&list=UUJa04c1KoMuti02B5Ji38kQ) and
Mark Ruffalo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3rt9USK85M&list=UUJa04c1KoMuti02B5Ji38kQ) interviewed on DP/30
New Trailer (http://movies.yahoo.com/video/foxcatcher-trailer-4-151206563.html)
This was really good but not great. Fantastic performances, I actually thought Ruffalo was the standout, doing the most with the least crunchy material. The formal style sort of alerts you early on that there are strict limits about where the film will go, how much can be shown and stay within the boundaries of classy filmmaking, etc. I was engaged but could also sense where it would and wouldn't develop based off the first few scenes, and I think that choice about where it does is more based off a wanted perception about the "type" of movie it's going to be than the needs of the story. The story was X, and the style was Y, and X fit Y almost exactly but at the end of the day Y was still favored over X.
Blu-ray (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/Foxcatcher-Blu-ray/ref=%26%2574%2561g%3d%2562l%2575r%2561y%252d010%252d20?SubscriptionId=AKIAIY4YSQJMFDJATNBA&tag=bluray-010-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B00QK4ANEI&ASIN=B00QK4ANEI&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER) on February 17, 2015
Bennett Miller interviewed on The Treatment (http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/the-treatment/bennett-miller-foxcatcher)
Spoiler
It reminds me of what Michael Mann was able to do so well in early 90s: make very good looking films. The drama is done well enough and the cinematography is beautiful. I imagine Miller says he was trying to capture character nuances with focusing heavily on their actions but the portrait of Du Pont is lukewarm. He was much more a comedy reel of uncomfortable weirdness that put everyone off and the film only goes into it somewhat. Reading deeper into the true story, there were many more darker and disturbing instances of Du Pont doing alarming things. The film is trying to balance perspective of many characters and their own motivations, but from what I think, the film plays low to interest of Du Pont losing himself to insanity of self promotion and idealization. According to Mark Schultz, Dave wanted out at the end and never got away quick enough. In the film, the perspective is Dave wanting to stay for sake of the wrestling crew and a career. The films plays off the randomness of Du Pont shooting him for realism sake. Very good film, but like said already, not great. Miller so far has limited himself to that.
Foxcatcher screenplay (http://www.sonyclassics.com/awards-information/foxcatcher_screenplay.pdf)
I'm not familiar with the real story but the film creeped me out deeply and made me feel an uneasiness I wasn't expecting. the complaint exposed by wilder and gt about the film limiting itself to leave plenty of things unsaid actually worked better for me. I kept feeling there were so many things happening between these characters that were not verbalized or shown beyond the essentials, (SPOILERS) mainly in relation to the homoerotic nature of dupont and mark's relationship, (END SPOILER), that it becomes painful and embarrassing to observe these characters, as if we ourselves are ashamed to be looking in. the perversion of privilege, the testosterone with no place to go. this is a much more non verbal film than what I expected and that's a pleasant surprise.
all three leads are amazing, it really is a pleasure to just see them perform. carrell stands out because it was just harder for him to convince us of this, yet any doubts were dissipated almost instantly. he inhabits this disturbing character in such a way that you feel almost threatened by a simple look.
a fascinating study in masculinity and class and power dynamics.
I was talking with someone about this film the other day and particularly about Steve Carell's performance, and something hit me that made me reflect on context and using an actor's natural talent for different purposes.
(spoiler I guess):
There's a scene midway through the film where DuPont's (Carell's) mother (played by Vanessa Redgrave) finally shows up to watch him "coach" the team of wrestlers. He immediately stands up and starts a kind of performance in which he is this total pro, absolute leader, giving motivational pep talk to the team, etc. We know he barely does anything at all and he's just acting like this to challenge his mother's impression that he is a useless heir who buys his recognition with the family's money.
The way the scene is structured and acted out by Carell is, at heart, no different than many others in his comedic side of the profession. It's basically a scene from The Office, with Michael endlessly pretending to be a mentor and top executive for his employees who hate him and treat him with contempt. But here laughs are substituted for uneasiness, and Carell's wacky persona in The Office displays it's true disturbing and depressing nature. Just a small change of tone and context makes a huge difference in the perception of the characters and the depth of Carell's performance. Not too different from Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love.
Would this movie be appropriate to watch with my 60 year old depressive mother?
Quote from: Reelist on March 18, 2015, 03:37:12 PM
Would this movie be appropriate to watch with my 60 year old depressive mother?
Fuck no. Don't.
I knew it was a bad idea, but I had to because I rented it with her cable and it was about to expire. She hated it, couldn't understand why it was worth our time. At one point she asked "Is this going to get homophobic?", and I just said yes to get her out of the room. I was profoundly affected by it and felt like I was under a trance-like spell the entire time. Knowing it was a true story, the circumstances of the events have been on my mind for days, making me want to investigate what happened on that farm much further than what's explored in the movie. I'm happy I didn't look up the story of John Dupont before seeing this, because he's a much more bizarre character than I expected. The few opinions I'd heard about it seemed pretty mixed, but all of them agreed that it's very disturbing. I guess I've become accustomed to thinking that means there's going to be an anal rape. I was absolutely convinced it would be about a Sandusky type of situation. What I found to be the most unsettling was the complete lack of warmth or any type of camaraderie between the 3 main characters when they're forced to be in such close proximity with each other. The way that Dave is able to look at the situation with rose colored glasses when it's so far beyond repair really just breaks your heart. Ruffalo has always brought out a great amount of pity from me for his characters, there's an aspect of his personality that seems too nice and kind of cuddly, almost like he's playing the part as a favor. This performance seemed to take advantage of all those qualities, which gave me a lot of sympathy for the real Dave Schultz to unknowingly be in such a bad situation.
Steve Carrell's performance is so frustrating, it's hard to feel too strongly about him one way or another. First, there's his moleman like appearance with the body language of a bowl of oatmeal and his complete lack of emotion leaves you begging for him to draw out some sort of reaction in you, whether for or against him. You know that he's a bad guy, but his actions line up to make him seem like a kind and giving person. I haven't felt so ambivalent about a character in years. This movie seems built to be rewatched as there are so many subtleties in the behavior of these guys that tells the entire story on their faces. The more that I look into the real Foxcatcher estate I think I'll much better appreciate how well Bennet Miller was able to finely tune this into a tasteful film.