‘Foxcatcher’ draws us in with riveting acting but denies dramatic satisfaction

November 14, 2014 by

Alert: This review contains a spoiler.

Foxcatcher posterFoxcatcher/2014/Sony Pictures Classics/134 min.

“I’ve been looking for a father my whole life and I finally found him in John du Pont,” says Channing Tatum as Olympic wrestling champ Mark Schultz in “Foxcatcher.”

The movie is based on the real-life saga of the ultra-wealthy du Pont (Steve Carell) and his working relationship with Mark Schultz and his older brother Dave Schultz (Mark Ruffalo), both of whom won Olympic gold medals in 1984.

With the apparent aim of coaching wrestlers for the 1988 Seoul Olympics, du Pont invites Mark to train on his family estate, Foxcatcher Farm. But du Pont has little talent for coaching and it’s clear he wants to be more than a father figure to his protégée.

When Dave joins his brother at Foxcatcher, Mark is pushed aside and becomes alienated. Du Pont sours on his coaching plans and ultimately commits murder.

Director Bennett Miller (“Capote” and “Moneyball”) won the Best Director prize for “Foxcatcher” at the Cannes Film Fest. E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman wrote the script. The film strikes a grim and chilling mood, and Miller elicits memorable performances. From his pasty skin to his hunched gait to his clipped, halted speech, Carell perfectly conveys the menacing arrogance and internal emptiness that apparently defined du Pont’s personality. Ruffalo and Tatum are excellent as well.

But the film is strangely lopsided. Though it creates intensely compelling portraits on the surface, it shies away from examining the characters, especially du Pont, in real depth (once the triangle grows strained, Mark is essentially sidelined) and avoids any probing of du Pont’s interior life or motive for a cold-blooded killing.

Steve Carell is almost unrecognizable as creepy John du Pont.

Steve Carell is almost unrecognizable as creepy John du Pont.

That was a conscious decision, said Miller at a recent press conference in Beverly Hills. “[The film] resists the temptation of concluding anything, of putting labels on what this complex is. It purposely denies you the satisfaction of saying that’s what it was and to let you stop thinking about it. There was no conclusion in real life.”

At du Pont’s trial, neither the prosecution nor the defense suggested a motive for the crime. A jury rejected du Pont’s request to be found not guilty by reason of insanity. He was found guilty but mentally ill.

Carell said du Pont’s longtime sadness and loneliness influenced his portrayal. “I never approached him as a villain,” he said at the press conference.

And though Carell is compelling to the point of being almost unrecognizable as this awkward creepy loner, the fact remains that du Pont was indeed a villain, in more than ways than one. Completely sidestepping this essential component of the story dilutes the overall impact.

That said, “Foxcatcher” is worth seeing, especially given the Oscar buzz around the actors. “It’s very rewarding that it is resonating with people,” Carell said. “It was challenging, exciting and exhilarating.”

“Foxcatcher” opens in theaters today.

Filed Under: Neo Noir Reviews Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Stylish, seductive ‘Side Effects’ intrigues, doesn’t fully satisfy

February 8, 2013 by

Side Effects/2012/Open Road/106 mins.

Steven Soderbergh’s provocative new thriller, “Side Effects” is drawing much buzz. Glossy, intelligent and compelling, with an A-list cast, it’s part mystery, part exposé, part strangely subdued melodrama that’s played out among good-looking, affluent people, all of whom are in some way affected by the use of prescription medicine. “One pill can change your life,” says the movie’s tagline.

The movie opens with a shot of a New York apartment building; inside one unit is a bloody crime scene. Then we flashback several months before to another pivotal moment – the flat’s owners Emily and Martin Taylor (Rooney Mara and Channing Tatum) are reunited after Martin is released from a four-year prison sentence he received for insider trading. The two try to rebuild their lives, but it’s an uphill struggle.

Emily suffers from depression and, after a failed suicide attempt, she agrees to take an antidepressant prescribed by a kind, ambitious doctor named Jonathan Banks (Jude Law). When her symptoms don’t improve, Dr. Banks suggests a new drug, one that turns out to have dire results for the Taylors as well as for Banks and his wife (Vinessa Shaw).

And as Emily grapples with the consequences of committing a crime she doesn’t remember, Banks probes ever more obsessively into her past, specifically her psychiatric treatment by Dr. Victoria Siebert (Catherine Zeta-Jones), icy and ultra-competent with an answer for everything.

Though at times “Side Effects” is a little hard to follow and perhaps awkwardly plotted, it’s well directed and never boring. There’s a lot going on and the powerful final twist upends everything we thought we knew about the principals.

“I wanted to write a noir-style thriller that took the audience in and spun it around, like ‘Double Indemnity’ or ‘Body Heat,’ set in the world of psychopharmacology,” says screenwriter Scott Z. Burns (“Contagion”).

Enjoyment of the movie may hinge on this factor: knowledge of these superficially interesting characters never develops into caring about them – they’re not sympathetic nor are they entertaining in their badness. For me, that made a difference – Rooney Mara’s character in particular struck me as more than a little odious, a woman with zero redeeming features.

Also, the insistently low-key emotional tone (almost as if the film itself had popped a Prozac) feels unsatisfying, given the high stakes of the story. But perhaps that was exactly Soderbergh’s intent. In a society that places a premium on quick fixes, instant answers and easy panaceas, it stands to reason that we’re comfortably numb more than often than we like to acknowledge.

“Side Effects” opens today nationwide.

Filed Under: Neo Noir Reviews Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

‘Magic Mike’ has bump and grind of truth, some of the time

July 3, 2012 by

Magic Mike/2012/Nick Wechsler Productions/110 min.

By Michael Wilmington

The art and commerce of striptease – at least as we see it in director Steven Soderbergh and producer/star Channing Tatum’s “Magic Mike” – is entertainment in a very elemental (let’s not say stripped-down) form. The performer takes off her/his clothes and dances suggestively. Audience members, if they choose, holler rude, lewd lines, drink themselves into a stupor and sometimes shower the stripper with bills.

Technique is helpful, but not as crucial as looks or stage presence – both of which Tatum must have had in his brief career, in his teens, as a male exotic dancer. The dancing doesn’t have to be particularly good, but it’s best when the dancer has a sense of humor or drama. (I guess Tatum must have had those too.)

The well-upholstered Tatum, who plays Magic Mike, star dancer dude at the raunchy Tampa club Xquisite, is also one of the film’s producers. (“Magic Mike” must be one of the few movies where a producer has to take off his clothes and get money jammed into his thong as part of his duties.) His producing partner Reid Carolin wrote the script (I assume based largely on Tatum’s memories) and plays the part of Paul. The plot Tatum and Carolin have come up with loosely resembles “All About Eve” crossed with “Boogie Nights,” “Showgirls” and Christina Aguilera’s “Burlesque” – with male strippers, mostly without bitchery.

Here’s what happens. Tatum as Magic Mike, ab-happy king of the strip hill at Xquisite, befriends college dropout Adam aka “The Kid” (Alex Pettyfer) on a construction job, introduces him to Xquisite head honcho Dallas (Matthew McConaughey), and gets him a job at the club. The Kid’s fresh looks and what-am-I-doing-here? attitude make him an immediate sensation. Meanwhile, Magic Mike, who wants to go legit with a custom-made furniture business, also gets a yen for Adam’s sister, sensible Brooke (Cody Horn).

The Kid’s star rises. Things get darker. There’s a lot of sex and nudity, including an orgy with a pig wandering around. (You suspect something like this once happened somewhere.) Dallas wants to take the act to Miami. The club deejay, good-natured and chubby Tobias (Gabriel Iglesias), peddles Ecstasy on the side. Adam loses a lot of drugs and dough. Hey, stripping isn’t all “woman, money and good times,” as one character puts it. Some mornings you wake up with a pig staring you in the face.

“Magic Mike” struck me as realistic in its depiction of the whole club milieu (not that I’ve done any research), but as somewhat phony in its story – though the dialogue is periodically sharp and the acting is much better than usual for this kind of show. (Remember “Showgirls”?)

Matthew McConaughey gives depth to the part of Dallas.

There’s one knockout performance, by McConaughey as the affable, energetic and utterly shameless club czar and sometime stripper. McConaughey plays it strictly for sleaze and laughs, but he also suggests a real person: a sleazy, funny one. If the entire movie were as entertaining as McConaughey – or a bit darker than Tatum, Carolin and Soderbergh seem to want to make it – it would have been better.

Tatum, as mentioned, has the looks and presence for Mike, but not quite the magic. He does a fairly good job, and his onstage backflips are awesome, but I thought he spent too much time seducing the camera, James Deaning it up and getting us to like him, and not enough digging into the guy and making him real. It’s a very self-conscious “good” performance.

Pettyfer does an even more narcissistic job, and I’m not sure the fact that The Kid is supposed to be narcissistic and irresponsible is much of an excuse. Sister Brooke is a typical decent-onlooker part, which she does OK. People who like the dancing won’t care all that much about the acting – and that’s probably a good part of what made the movie such an opening-weekend hit.

So why did a sometimes brilliant and unpigeonholeable filmmaker like Steven Soderbergh want to make this movie? Well, sex, if not lies and videotape, has usually worked for him, and it’s always good news when a gifted moviemaker – especially one like Soderbergh, who really takes chances – gets a financial success. Obviously, he likes to work, likes the whole job of making movies. (He also photographed and edited this one.) He likes working with good-looking actors, and “Magic Mike” allows him to twist around sex roles for men the way “Haywire” shuffled them around for a woman (Gina Carano). Maybe he liked the music. And maybe he secretly harbored the desire to do a pig-at-the-orgy scene.

Filed Under: Neo Noir Reviews Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,