VERDICT: “Foxcatcher” is a good movie made from a great premise. If it were an athlete, it would deserve a medal. But not gold.
“Foxcatcher” snatched four OSCAR nominations: best screenplay, best director, best actor (Steve Carrell) and best supporting actor (Mark Ruffalo). Had it been nominated for the big prize, best picture, it would have joined four other movies based on real stories. Yet, does it work as a film as well the others?
The movie tells the story of brothers Mark (Channing Tatum) and David Schultz (Ruffalo), both Olympic wrestling champions, as they accept to join a team led by coach John du Pont (Carrell), a millionaire who loves the sport and seeks to make American wrestlers the best in the world.
The short answer to the question in the introduction is yes. “Foxcatcher” is ultimately a movie you want to like. It excels in showing the blood and tears that lead to a gold medal. All three main characters are multi-dimensional and filled with nuances of desire, love and jealousy. The cast brings forth amazing performances and director Bennett Miller handles gracefully two elements of tension – a big house in the middle of nowhere and a psychologically unstable character. These elements set up an intriguing story.
Yet, when Miller stretches the rope of tension to its maximum, the result is nowhere as satisfying as it could have been. “Foxcatcher” is a cinematic story, no doubt, but the movie rarely reaches the high notes this story allows.
When du Pont, the “Eagle,” begins to undermine Mark, the confrontation between the two — a man who struggles with his frustrations and one who has reached the peak of his sport — never takes place. du Pont slaps Mark in the face and calls him an ape. Mark just retreats and seems to have no ability to react.
The characters are passive at moments when some kind of reaction would be expected. This is not an acting flaw but one that is rooted on the script.
Carell, Ruffalo and Tatum deliver great performances. Ruffalo’s acting is the great surprise of the film: More mature and focused than in his previous works such as ‘Now You See Me.’ In one of the most dramatic sequences, Ruffalo shines as he helps Tantum’s character lose 12 pounds in 90 minutes before the weighing session of the Olympic trials. Ruffalo plays one of the best roles in his career as the older brother and mentor who will not let Mark give up on himself.
Miller succeeds in showing the psychology of his characters. After du Pont’s mother passes away, he lets her beloved and award-winning horses run free, in one of the most beautifully acted and photographed scenes of 2014. The horses were a passion du Pont could never understand, just like his mother never understood his love for wrestling, which she called a “low sport.” This psychological battle is beautiful to see and Miller is able to do it again and again for every character.
The movie, however, struggles with pacing. It never rushes to the action and ample time is given for character development. There is nothing wrong with this approach, but “Foxcatcher” fails to provide a payoff in key moments of the story.
In one moment, du Pont begins to horseplay with his athletes. There is a palpable anticipation in the air, arising from his own frustrated wrestling career, but the scene never escalates to a moment of tension. Miller does this often in the movie, taking viewers close to the heart of a scene, but he rarely lets this heart bleed and sequences become bland.
When Miller does get it right, however, the results are noticeable. In the sequence where du Pont drives up to David’s house to kill him, Miller builds up the tension with the coach on a slow drive in his car just after a snowstorm. The coach maneuvers his car on David’s driveway and as the wrestler compliments him, du Pont fires a few accusations. Without warning, he also fires his gun.
This well-paced buildup shows what the movie could have more of. Inevitably, however, the police quickly interrupt the runaway. Instead of letting the climax play out after so much tension has been built, Miller just lets it go too quickly.
At the end, it is hard to decide whether to admire “Foxcatcher” for its brilliant display of character psychology or criticize it for a story structure that could have offered a much better payoff for all the tension it builds. And this fight, where positive and negative points both bring similar weights to the fight, makes “Foxcatcher” simply a good movie even though there is a constant and uneasy feeling that its premise could have yielded much more.
