Film Review: Wild (dir by Jean-Marc Vallee)

Posted on January 6, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Wild opens with Cheryl Strayed (played by Reese Witherspoon) standing on the edge of a cliff. She has been hiking for days and, because her hiking boots are too small, she’s limping and in a great deal of pain. She takes off a boot and a sock and stares at her bloody big toe. With trembling fingers, she removes what is left of her big toenail. And then, she throws her boot over the edge of the cliff while screaming, “FUCK YOU!”

And, from that moment, Wild had me.

For the next two hours, I sat there and I was absolutely enthralled as Cheryl, an aspiring writer and a recovering drug addict who was still struggling to come to terms with the death of her mother (played, in heart-breaking flashbacks, by Laura Dern), hiked her way from the Mexican border up to the Canadian border. I watched as she learned how to survive in the wilderness, how she cautiously learned to trust some of her fellow hikers, and as she dealt with sexist rangers and creepy hunters.

And there were a lot of reasons why Wild held me so enthralled. There was Reese Witherspoon’s performance, for one thing. Reese is on screen during every minute of Wild and, for a lot of that time, she’s alone with her thoughts and her emotions. She gives an amazingly focused performance, one that should regain her some of the respect that she sacrificed by appearing in movies like This Means War and publicly asking, “Do you know who I am?” Both the film and Reese’s performance resist the temptation to idealize Cheryl. Instead, both the film and the performance feel real and because Cheryl comes across as a real person (flaws and all), it makes her journey and her achievement all the more powerful.

I couldn’t help but relate to Cheryl. Like her, I’m an aspiring writer. Like her, I’m still learning how to deal with the loss of my mom. Like her, I have trust issues. Like her, I am sometimes too stubborn for my own good. Like her, I like to leave quotes in guest books. Like her, I always pack a few paperbacks before I go on a trip and I like to write in my journal. Like Cheryl, I’m a survivor and I’m proud of it.

Unlike Cheryl, however, I’ve never gone hiking and I doubt if I ever will. As much as I loved Wild (and it’s definitely one of my favorite films of 2014), it didn’t leave me with any great desire to go on a hike. That’s largely because of that first scene. When Cheryl threw away her boots and screamed, I thought to myself, “That would so be me.” Of course, the difference is that Cheryl did that after hiking for a month. I would probably end up doing that after the 2nd day. And then I’d turn around, go back home, and spend the weekend watching Netflix.

But here’s the thing: Wild is not really about hiking. Wild is about the journey. What’s important is not that Cheryl hiked but that Cheryl accomplished what she set out to do. No matter how difficult it got, no matter how many people told her she should give up, Cheryl walked from Mexico to Canada. By the end of the film, I felt like, if Cheryl could do that even with boots that were too small, than there was nothing that I could not do.

As a result, Wild is not only one of the best films of 2014.

It’s the most empowering as well.

Film Review: Palo Alto (dir by Gia Coppola)

Posted on January 6, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Palo Alto came out in May of last year and it never quite got as much attention as it deserved. A lot of that is because the film is based on a collection of short stories by James Franco and a lot of critics apparently decided ahead of time that Palo Alto was some sort of vanity project.

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Palo Alto is actually one of the better films of 2014, a minor masterpiece of ennui that also serves as a promising directorial debut for Gia Coppola. (Of course, Gia’s aunt Sofia made her directorial debut with an ennui-centric literary adaptation of her own, The Virgin Suicides.)

Palo Alto follows several teenagers over the course of one school year. (It’s no coincidence that, at one point, Fast Times At Ridgemont High shows up on a TV screen.) The film itself is deceptively plotless, with its occasionally drifting narrative mirroring the lives of protagonists who literally have no direction. April (Emma Roberts), who is too intelligent to really fit in with either her shallow friends or her flakey family, plays soccer and has a crush on both Teddy (Jack Kilmer) and her coach, Mr. B (James Franco, playing an unapologetically sleazy character). Teddy is a talented artist who, after a drunk driving accident, finds himself on probation and sentenced to do community service. Making it difficult for Teddy to stay out of trouble is his best friend, Fred (Nat Wolff), who hides his sociopathic nature behind a constant stream of jokes. And then there’s Emily (Zoe Levin), who hides her insecurities behind a wall of blow jobs and demeaning sexual encounters.

As for the adults of Palo Alto, they’re for the most part a collection of grim but ineffective authority figures and parents who don’t want to grow up. Mr. B hides his predatory nature behind a kind smile and a paternal nature. April’s stepfather (Val Kilmer) is permanently stoned. Teddy’s mother is unconcerned with her son’s drinking. Meanwhile, Fred’s father (Chris Messina) offers weed to and hits on his son’s friends.

And it may all sound a bit familiar. Every year, it seems like there is a countless number of indie films about directionless teenagers and irresponsible parents. But Palo Alto is distinguished by Gia Coppola’s confident and frequently surreal direction. Coppola has a good eye for detail and, as a result of the gorgeous cinematography of Autumn Durald, the film is always interesting to watch regardless of how familiar the story may seem. The entire cast does a good job as well, with Emma Roberts and Nat Wolff as clear stand-outs.

And, I have to admit, that on a personal level, there was a lot of Palo Alto to which I related. Whether it was the awkward conversations between April and Teddy or the sad look on Emily’s face as she stared at her reflection, there were so many small moments that just felt true. As I watched Palo Alto, it was impossible for me not to think about my own time in high school. I knew quite a few Teddys. I even knew a few Freds. And sometimes, I was April and then other times, I could have been any of the other characters who wander throughout Palo Alto.

Don’t listen to the haters. Palo Alto is more than worth your time.

A Quick Review: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (dir by Peter Jackson)

Posted on January 5, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

It seems kind of weird to do a quick review for a 144 minutes film that not only serves as the end of one epic trilogy but also as a prequel for yet another epic trilogy.

Well, so be it. I hate to admit it but I really don’t have that much to say about The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies beyond the fact that I saw it on the day after Christmas, I enjoyed it, and I thought Aidan Turner was really hot. It’s not a perfect film but then again, The Hobbit has never been a perfect trilogy. As opposed to the Lord of the Ring films, The Hobbit told a story that could have easily been told in two films. As a result, whenever you watch one of The Hobbit films, you’re aware of all of the filler that was included just to justify doing three films.

But so what? The Hobbit films are fun. Despite the cynical economic reasons behind turning The Hobbit into a trilogy, director Peter Jackson’s love for the material always came through. In the title role, Martin Freeman was always likable. Ian McKellan and Christopher Lee made for properly enigmatic wizards. Though apparently his inclusion caused some controversy among purists, it was nice to Orlando Bloom as Legolas. I also liked Evangeline Lilly’s elf character, even if everyone else seemed to dislike her and her love story with Aidan Turner. And then there was Benedict Cumberbatch providing a perfectly evil and self-satisfied voice for Smaug.

I have to admit that, with the exception of Aidan Turner, I was never a big fan of the dwarves. They were all so surly and bad-tempered and it didn’t take me too long to get tired of Richard Armitage showing up as Thorin and acting like a jerk. However, in the final part of the trilogy, Armitage’s surly performance started to make sense. As Thorin grew more and more paranoid, I saw that The Hobbit was actually using both the character and Armitage’s performance to make a much larger point. Power corrupts and most conflicts are ultimately all about money and property. It was a good message.

When the Battle of the Five Armies started, I was shocked to discover how little I remembered about the previous two Hobbit films. It took me a while to get caught up on who everyone was and why they were all fighting over that mountain. As opposed to the LoTR films, it’s not always easy to get emotionally invested in The Hobbit films. But, Jackson is a good director and he’s a good storyteller and, even though it took me a while to get caught up, I was still often enthralled with what I was watching on screen. The images were so stunning and the battle scenes were so spectacularly done that I could handle being occasionally confused.

Battle of the Five Armies is a fitting end for the Hobbit trilogy. It’s not a perfect film but it is exciting and fun and that’s really all that matters. At the end of it, the audience in the theater applauded, not just for the film but in recognition of everything that Peter Jackson has given us over the past 14 years.

It was a good way to spend the day after Christmas.

Film Review: Unbroken (dir by Angelina Jolie)

Posted on January 5, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Ultimately, Unbroken is a victim of expectations.

From the start of last year, Oscar watchers and other film critics were united in fully expecting Unbroken to be a great film. No sooner had 12 Years A Slave won best picture then we were all predicting that Unbroken would be named the best film of 2014 and that Angelina Jolie would be the 2nd woman to win an Oscar for best director.

And can you blame us?

Unbroken seemed to have everything that you would expect to add up to Oscar glory. Not only was it directed by a celebrity (and, ever since Argo, everyone has been under the impression that all performers can also direct) but it starred an exciting and up-and-coming actor. It was not only a war film but it was a war film that took place during the only war that everyone agrees was a good one, World War II. It was based on a true story and what a story! Louis Zamperini was an Olympic medalist whose athletic career was put on hold when he joined the U.S. Air Force. After a plane crash, he and two other survivors spent 47 days floating in a lifeboat. They were finally captured by the Japanese and Louis spent the rest of the war as POW. During that time, he survived terrible torture. When the war finally ended, Louis set aside his anger and publicly forgave those who had nearly killed him. When he was 80 years old, he returned to Japan and carried the Olympic torch. It’s an incredibly touching story and it should have made for a great movie.

And, ultimately, that’s Unbroken‘s downfall. It has all the ingredients for being a great movie but instead, it’s only a good one.

That’s certainly not the fault of Jack O’Connell, who plays Louis and gives a strong and sympathetic performance. Actually, the entire film is well-acted, with everyone fully inhabiting his role. Perhaps the film’s best performance comes from Miyavi, who plays “The Bird,” the sadistic head of both of the POW camps where Louis is held prisoner. The dynamic between The Bird and Louis is an interesting one, with the film emphasizing that The Bird is in many ways jealous of Louis’s previous fame and Miyavi plays the character as if he were a high school bully who has suddenly been left in charge of the classroom.

That the cast does well should not be a surprise. Actors-turned-directors can usually get good performances but often times, they seem to struggle with shaping a narrative and this is where Unbroken struggles. It’s not that Unbroken doesn’t tell a worthy story. It’s just that it tells it in such a conventional and predictable way. The entire film is full of scenes that seem like they were lifted out of other, more memorable movies. The scenes with Louis growing up and competing in the Olympics feel like they could have come from any “inspiring” sports biopic. (It doesn’t help that Louis’s brother and coach has been given dialogue that sounds like it should be surrounded by air quotes.) When Louis is joking around with the guys in the plane, it feels like a hundred other war films. When Louis is floating in the ocean, it’s hard not to compare the film’s static and draggy approach to what Ang Lee was able to do with Life of Pi or J.C. Chandor with All Is Lost. Miyavi brings a feeling of real menace and danger to the POW scenes but it’s not enough. Jolie’s direction is competent but there’s not a single moment that feels spontaneous or truly cinematic.

In fact, I sat through Unbroken totally dry-eyed, which is somewhat amazing considering how easily I cry at the movies. However, towards the end of the film, there was a clip of the real-life, 80 year-old Louis running down the streets of Tokyo with the Olympic Torch and, at that moment, his story became real for me. And that’s when the tears came.

I really wish Unbroken had been better because Louis Zamperini seems like someone who deserved to have a great film made about him. Angelina Jolie’s heart was in the right place but, ultimately, it’s just not enough to make Unbroken the film that it deserves to be.

What Lisa Watched Last Night #108: Damaged (dir by Rick Bota)

Posted on January 4, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Last night, I watched the first Lifetime movie of 2015 — Damaged!

Chris Klein in Damaged

Why Was I Watching It?

You guys know me and how much I love Lifetime movies! Damaged was the first Lifetime movie of 2015 so it’s less a question of why was I watching it and more a question of how could I not watch it.

What Was It About?

Damaged is yet another Canadian thriller that has found a home on Lifetime. Sam Luck (Chris Klien) is the big, affable, and quite frankly dumb teacher who has a nice house in the suburbs with a dog and a wife (Tasya Teles). He also is co-owner of a diner because … well, why not? (I got the feeling that the filmmakers just happened to have a diner set available.)

Anyway, Sam’s luck changes when the new teenage neighbor moves in. Her name is Taran (Merritt Patterson) and, along with frequently flirting with Sam (who also happens to be one of her teachers), she also constantly has flashbacks where she’s either watching her mother have sex with an unseen boyfriend or standing in a cemetery while it rains.

As Sam grows closer to Taran, strange things start to happen. His car is stolen but fortunately, Taran offers to allow him to drive her never-seen father’s car. His dog disappears. He’s informed that a student has accused him of sexual harassment. His partner in the diner accuses him of embezzling money. With all this happening, who else can Sam turn to for comfort other than ~~his wife~~ the teenage neighbor girl next door?

What Worked?

Damaged was an example of my favorite type of Lifetime movie: A complacent couple in the suburbs has their life destroyed by a malevolent outside force. There’s something always fun about watching these smug suburbanites discovering just how easily their domestic bliss can be destroyed.

Merritt Patterson did a pretty good job in the role of Taran. At the very least, she seemed to be having more fun than anyone else in the cast.

Finally, Damaged deserves some credit for not shying away from giving us a properly dark ending. If this was an old grindhouse film, Damaged would be advertised as being a movie that “goes all the way.”

What Did Not Work?

So, here’s the thing. If you, as a filmmaker, want us to sympathize with your lead character or, at the very least, hope that he doesn’t end up getting totally destroyed, it might help to not make the character a total moron. As I watched the film, it was hard for me not to think about all the things that Sam could have done that would have prevented him from getting into this situation.

Here’s just a few examples:

1) When you’re a teacher and one of your students offers to give you her daddy’s car, don’t accept the car. Why? Because you’re a teacher and she’s a student in your class! Yes, I understand that it was a really nice car but again: Student. Teacher.

2) When you’re a teacher and you’re feeling depressed because someone has suggested that you’ve been sexually harassing your teenage students, don’t pour your heart out to the teenage girl who lives next door.

3) When you’re a teacher and one of your students offers you an expensive watch, don’t accept it!

4) When you’re a teacher and one of your students says she wants to go out and have fun with you, don’t go!

Seriously, it seems like most of Sam’s problems could have been avoided if he had bothered to read the Rules For Teacher/Student Interaction booklet that I’m sure he was given when he was first hired. As such, it was hard to have much sympathy for Sam. (Or his wife for that matter because, as badly as things turned out for her, she is the one who married the idiot in the first place.)

However, just to make clear: part of the fun of a movie like this is shaking your head at the stupid things some of the characters do. And overall, Sam’s stupidity just made the film more fun. So, I guess it’s debatable whether this is something that did not work. (Though it certainly didn’t work that well for Sam, personally…)

“Oh my God! Just like me!” Moments

At first, when I thought Taran just had an obsessive crush on Sam, I related to her because it reminded me of when I was in high school and I had a crush on Mark, who was engaged to our speech and debate coach. One weekend, Mark accompanied us all on a road trip to a speech tournament in San Antonio. One night, at the motel, I slipped on this pink Victoria’s Secret nightie that I had specifically bought for the trip and then I sneaked out of my room and pulled down on the fire alarm so that I could specifically meet Mark when he came running out of his room in his boxers and I could pretend to be all panicky (and in need of comforting) about the fire. Ah, memories.

But anyway, as the movie progressed, I realized that I actually had less in common with Taran. For instance, I’ve never tried to kill anyone.

Lessons Learned

The main lesson I learned was one that I already know. If the police ever catch you doing something wrong, be sure to cry. I already knew that crying was a good way to get out of speeding tickets but, according to the final scene of Damaged, it can get you out of a lot worse as well.

As for any teachers who may have been watching, I think the main lesson would be to read your code of conduct.

Film Review: Venus in Fur (dir by Roman Polanski)

Posted on January 3, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

One of the best films to be released in American theaters last year was also one that never really got as much recognition as it deserved.

Roman Polanski’s Venus In Fur (which, itself, is based on a play by David Ives that was loosely adapted from a novel written by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, whose name and book would inspire the term masochism) features only two characters. Thomas (Mathieu Almaric) is a neurotic playwright and director whose latest production is based on Sacher-Masoch’s book, Venus in Furs. Vanda (Emmanuelle Seigner) is an actress who shows up late to audition for a lead role.

At first, Thomas is annoyed with and condescending towards the actress. After all, she shows up late for the audition and gives a rather long and convoluted explanation as to why. (It involves a dog wanting to fuck her.) Despite the fact that she’s auditioning for a play set in the 19th century and featuring repressed members of the upper class, she shows up for the audition wearing leather and a dog collar. (“I’m usually really demure and shit…” she assures him.) At first, Thomas refuses to allow her to audition and says that there’s nobody in the theater for her to read with. Vanda suggests that he read with her. Reluctantly, Thomas agrees…

And suddenly, Vanda goes from begging for his permission to taking control of the situation. It turns out that she’s brought a period costume with her. Before going up to the stage, she skillfully sets the stage lights to create the perfect effect. (A stunned Thomas admits that he’s not even sure how the lighting board works.) And when they’re on stage together, Vanda stuns Thomas by suddenly transforming herself into the character that he wrote.

The audition itself quickly becomes a not-quite friendly game between the two. (This is a film that anyone — even little community theater actresses like me — who has ever auditioned for a role should be able to relate to.) Vanda frequently interrupts the audition to question what Thomas has written and Thomas finds himself growing more and more disoriented as he’s frequently pulled out of the world he created and into reality.

Whenever challenged by Vanda, Thomas argues that the play has no deeper meaning. It’s simply an adaptation of a work of literature. However, as the audition continues, it becomes apparent that there’s more to the play and to the two people on stage than was originally apparent…

Venus in Fur is a fascinating film. In its way, it’s also a playful one. (You have to love the scene where a lingerie-clad Vanda suddenly takes on the role of therapist and perfectly psychoanalyzes Thomas’s fiancee. Never has the invoking the name of Jacques Derrida led to so much laughter.) Intelligently filmed by Polanski and wonderfully acted by both Amalric and Seigner, the power struggle between Thomas and Vanda makes for compelling viewing.

And hey, it’s currently on Netflix so you can watch it anytime you want. Of course, it is subtitled but so what? If you don’t know how to read, how did you make it through this review?

Seriously, find 93 minutes to spare and watch Venus In Fur.

2014 In Review: Lisa’s Picks For The 16 Worst Films Of 2014

Posted on January 3, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Continuing our look back at the previous year, today I present you with my choices for the 16 worst films of 2014!

I have to admit that 2014 was a strange year for me. While I saw a lot of films that I didn’t think were very good, none of them quite inspired the amount of loathing that I felt while watching previous TSL worst film “winners” like Love and Other Drugs and Man of Steel. Looking at the 16 films below, I’m struck by how many of them were simply films that failed to live up to my expectations. (The Judge and Endless Love are obvious examples.) Some of the other entries are films that we all knew ahead of time would never be good but they made the list because they represent everything that annoys me about mainstream film making. (Case in point: Transformers: Let’s Deafen The Audience or whatever the Hell that thing was called.)

Of course, some of the films listed below are on the list because they just plain sucked. In fact, one made-for-Lifetime movie was so mind-numbingly awful that it made the list despite having never actually been released in theaters! That’s pretty bad!

(Be sure to click on the links in this sentence if you want to see what I considered to be the worst of 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013!)

Without further ado, here’s the list!

16) Captivated: The Trials of Pamela Smart
15) Ride Along
14) The Judge
13) Into the Storm
12) Endless Love
11) Nuse 3D
10) Barefoot
9) The Best Of Me
8) I, Frankenstein
7) Left Behind
6) Paranormal Activity — The Marked Ones
5) The Legend of Hercules
4) Transformers: The Age of Extinction
3) A Million Ways To Die In The West
2) The Unauthorized Saved By The Bell Story

And finally, without further ado, here is the worst film of 2014!

1) April Rain

Agree? Disagree? Let me know in the comments!

Tomorrow, I’ll be presenting my 10 favorite songs of 2014!

Others Entries In TSL’s Look Back At 2014:

Film Review: Big Hero 6 (dir by Don Hall and Chris Williams)

Posted on January 2, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

For the longest time, I thought that there would never be an animated film that would make me cry as much as I cried at the end of Toy Story 3.

And then I saw The LEGO Movie and I thought that I would never cry as much as I did when Will Ferrell acknowledged that he hadn’t been a very good father and that his son should be allowed to have fun while playing in the basement.

And then, way back in November, I saw Big Hero 6 and there was big, goofy-looking, kind-hearted Baymax asking, “Are you satisfied with my service?” and I sobbed and sobbed.

Baymax, of course, is a big, balloon-like robot that was specifically designed to provide medical care to the citizens of San Fransokyo. After his original creator, Tadashi Hamada, is killed in a mysterious explosion at the local university, Baymax becomes the property of Tadashi’s younger brother, Hiro. Hiro, naturally enough, designs some armor for Baymax and programs him to fight so that he can get revenge for his brother’s death…

And you know what?

The exact plot doesn’t really matter. What matters is that Baymax is probably one of the most memorable and kind-hearted non-human characters to ever appear in an animated film. Significantly, Baymax resists Hiro’s attempt to turn him into a killing machine, making Big Hero 6 into one of those rare films that ultimately celebrates peace over war.

It’s also an incredibly sweet film, one that earned every tear that I shed.

And, as a result, I was very satisfied.

Film Review: Foxcatcher (dir by Bennett Miller)

Posted on January 2, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

What a long and strange trip it has been for Foxcatcher.

Originally, Bennett Miller’s latest film was scheduled to be released at the end of 2013 and it was expected to be a major player in the 2013 Oscar race. And then it was suddenly announced that Sony Pictures would, instead, wait an extra year to release the film. Usually, this is a sign of a film that’s not expected to live up to expectations. (Case in point: The Monuments Men.) But, in this case, it was seen as being the exact opposite. Sony had such faith in the Oscar prospects of Foxcatcher that they were willing to hold off a year so it wouldn’t get lost in all of the attention that was being given to American Hustle, Gravity, 12 Years A Slave, and Wolf of Wall Street.

And, in many ways, it was a smart move. Overnight, Foxcatcher went from being that weird movie with Steve Carell to being one of the most anticipated film of 2014.

Then, during the summer, Foxcatcher premiered at Cannes and was one of the hits of the festival. With the notable exception of the A.V. Club’s A.A. Dowd, the reviewers at Cannes were rapturous in their praise of Foxcatcher. And, though it failed to win the Palme d’Or, it did win best director for Bennett Miller and it cemented it’s status as the Oscar front-runner.

And then, something started to happen.

There was backlash against Foxcatcher. As more and more critics saw the film, we started to hear more and more speculation that the film would fail to live up to all of the hype. Critics generally praised the performers but many complained that the film was too cold and detached for its own good. At first, it was easy to say that this was partially the result of unrealistically high expectations. But, as more and more reviews came in, it became almost fashionable to speculate that Foxcatcher would be left out of the Oscar race.

Of course, most of us who were doing the speculating were doing so without actually having seen the film for ourselves. After all, film critics and festival goers aren’t the ones who actually vote on what films will be nominated for and win Oscars. One need only look at the nominations for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close to realize that.

Well, Foxcatcher has finally been released and we’ve all finally gotten a chance to see it. I saw it last week, while I was in Fort Worth for the Christmas holidays. And my reaction…

Well, there’s a reason why it’s taken me nearly a week to write this review.

Ultimately, Foxcatcher is a good film. In fact, on a purely technical level, it’s probably one of the best films of the year. If it is nominated for best picture, the nomination will not necessarily be undeserved. Bennett Miller comes up with some hauntingly chilly images. Steve Carell, Channing Tatum, and Mark Ruffalo all give excellent performances. It’s a film that stays with you, a powerful depiction of a true crime.

But it’s still not an easy film to enjoy.

Those critics who complained that Miller’s approach was too cold and detached have a point. You watch the film with a sense of dread, knowing what’s going to eventually happen. (Though I didn’t know anything about the murder of Dave Schultz before the film, I had read the reviews and I knew that eventually Mark Ruffalo’s kind-hearted family man would end up being gunned down in front of his family.) But Miller always keeps the characters and the story at a distance. You watch the characters and you struggle to understand them but, by the end of the film, you’re no closer to understanding why John E. du Pont (the eccentric millionaire turned murdered, played by Steve Carell) murdered Dave Schultz than you were at the beginning.

Instead, Miller is more interested as looking at John du Pont as being an example of American exceptionalism gone crazy. Throughout the film, characters frequently comment on the fact that the du Ponts are one of the oldest and richest families in America. (Not coincidentally, we’re also told that they initially made their fortune by producing and selling gunpowder.) Du Pont is an outspoken and proud American. Along with training wrestlers on the grounds of his estate (the Foxcatcher of the title), he also frequently invites the police to use the grounds for target practice. Though Miller couldn’t have realized it when the film was originally shot in 2013, the scenes of the obviously unstable du Pont hanging out with the cops take on an extra resonance in this time of Eric Garner and Tamir Rice.

John du Pont frequently talks about how his plan to open a world-class wrestling training facility is, at heart, a patriotic act. The world wrestling championship, du Pont believes, belongs in America and he’s going to make sure that it gets there. In order to achieve this goal, he hires Olympic gold medalist Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum) to be his wrestling coach. Mark, who has always lived in the shadow of his older brother Dave (Mark Ruffalo), jumps at the chance to establish his own identity. At first, du Pont is like the father that Mark has never had. They even become friends. (Du Pont, at one point, talks about discovering that all of his childhood friends had been paid to be his friend.) Mark shows du Pont some wrestling moves. Du Pont introduces Mark to cocaine.

But, ultimately, it becomes apparent that du Pont’s friendship with Mark was really just a ruse to get Mark to convince his older brother to come work for du Pont. When Dave finally does join Mark at Foxcatcher, it causes Mark to turn self-destructive and du Pont to eventually turn into a murderer.

And, as I said, it’s a powerful film. Channing Tatum gives the performance of his career and Steve Carell is frighteningly believable as John du Pont. (One minor complaint: Carell is being promoted for best actor, even though his performance was clearly a supporting one.) Mark Ruffalo, as well, does great work as Dave and somehow manages to make innate human decency compelling.

But the film itself is so cold and detached that, ultimately, this is a film that you end up respecting more than you end up enjoying.

2014 in Review: The Best of Lifetime and SyFy

Posted on January 2, 2015 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Hello there and welcome to January!

This is the time of year that the Shattered Lens usually takes one final look back at the best and worst of the previous year’s offerings in cinema, television, literature, and music! Last year, I kicked things off by taking a look at the best that the SyFy network had to offer.

Unfortunately, SyFy didn’t produce as many original films in 2014 as they did in 2013.

However, my beloved Lifetime network remained a consistent showcase for some of the best and worst melodrama that one could hope for.

With that in mind, here are my nominees for the best films and performances that were featured on either the SyFy or the Lifetime network last year! As always, winners are listed in bold.