Cinepub


Review: Foxcatcher by Jamie
10/01/2015, 9:21 pm
Filed under: Review | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Have you ever had boring sex? I mean like completely and absolutely terrible boring sex? Well I have and there is literally no other way to describe how I felt about Foxcatcher without going in to this because it’s my point of reference. So anyway, I had sex once whilst wearing a super safe condom and it went on for about as long as the running time of Foxcatcher. And it was boring. It was boring as hell. I honestly couldn’t tell you if we finished or not. To be fair, I don’t think we did. I think both parties just agreed this was a lost cause and maybe we should just go for a drink or something… Right, Foxcatcher. Foxcatcher is like that. Because even during the most boring sex you have ever had, your brain, and I admit I speak exclusively for males here, will try and convince you that this is awesome because you’re having sex. But there’s something in the back of your mind telling you that as awesome as this is, something is not quite right. Something is off and it’s not worth it to drag it out but you will because sex.

This is the experience of watching Foxcatcher. You know it’s an Oscar season release and so you’re initially forgiving during the opening because, hey, some of the best movies start of slow, right? And of course, you’ve heard great things about Steve Carell so maybe things will pick up when he’s on screen. And they do, for a moment. And then once the novelty has worn off you’re just like huh? Yeah, that was Steve Carell and he was definitely doing an impression of that guy I watched a YouTube video of earlier. Good for him.

I kid Steve Carell but to be fair, he’s great in this. Everyone is. It’s just the directing that is so fucking poor. This movie was around two hours and forty five minutes long. If they’d cut out every slow, ponderous scene where someone drives a car or two people sit down and one of them composes themselves for a minute before talking or cut out every scene where people just weren’t talking to each other, this easily would have been an hour and a half. Easily. And yeah, I get that the latter example there, people sitting and not talking to each other, can be used to great effect to build dramatic tension but once you’ve spent an entire movie watching people sit around and not talking, it kind of loses it’s dramatic effect and just winds up being “Oh great, another minute or two dragging this shit out.”

In conclusion, because I can’t be bothered to write about this any more, I feel like this was a potentially great story, poorly told. I mean Channing Tatum’s character was the main character through the entirety of the film but hey, last half hour you’d best forget about him. And going back to the boring sex analogy, this film is boring sex with a pretty good orgasm but it’s still over so quickly and without the end result really gelling quite well enough with the build up that it’s ultimately disappointing. In conclusion, again (yes I realise that I wrote that already but I got distracted because booze) this film was less an actual film than it was a slideshow with some story thrown in to try and distract you from the fact that it is just awful. And yet it’s not awful, thankfully because of it’s actors. They all really shine and I can’t help but get the feeling that even they were pissed off by the director’s ‘style’ because everything just feels flat, pedestrian. Dull. Yeah, so anyway this has been instant drunk reviews. 1 1/5 out of five for the acting but everything else? Fuck this movie.

Foxcatcher




%d bloggers like this: