This review of a heavily nominated film is able to capture the essence of the movie as well as voice some criticisms in a subtle fashion through its arrangement. The piece begins with a look into the history that the film is based upon. While perhaps giving away some spoilers (only to those unfamiliar with the true event) this opens the article to those who have not seen the movie and are looking for some insight.
Directly following the historical background is a paragraph dedicated to praising the director, Bennett Miller. As someone who has seen the movie, the review's author Ty Burr beautifully describing how Foxcatcher "could have made a three-ring circus of this story, pushing the weirdness and driving home his points about the evil, idle rich. Instead, “Foxcatcher” is measured and mournful sometimes to a fault." Burr is able to describe what you should expect going into the theater to see this movie, as it isn't action filled but rather tediously developed and possibly uncomfortable.
Following praise of the director is praise of the actors. Truly a film that is victorious because of its well-developed characters, Burr is able to emphasize the quality of the three male leads while continuing to explain a little more about the plot of the movie itself.
The review concludes with a repeated stance on the overall movie as "terribly sad". Which trust me, it was. Once again Burr peers at what some other critics say this time about the movie being a little far from the actuality of the event, but in his last effort to defend the film, explains why it may not matter.
