I am a fan of movies that are based in actual events and/or true stories. For these films to be successful, in my estimation, the actors cannot resemble the person they are attempting to portray. Be it physically, verbally, or in their portrayal. I don't want to constantly remind myself that "oh, Steve Carrell is John du Pont" throughout the film. It's difficult to hold the thread of the story for me. That written, kudos to Steve Farrell for his portrayal of duPont. Aided through the use of prosthetics, it was easy to forget who the actor was and concentrate more on the actual story. The same really cannot be said of Channing Tatum. I'm not familiar with the resemblance Tatum would have had with Schultz. I just couldn't get past the actor. I agree that the film portrayed Mark Schultz as delayed or slow. I know that not to be the case. Further, the job of Vanessa Redgrave was executed quite well, as was Mark Ruffalo in portraying David Schultz. I found the film incredibly sad. Not in content, in the life of constantly seeking approval, having everything imaginable, yet not being happy with who you are. Not finding independent, healthy friendships and interests that could take away from the disappointing childhood and lack of affection. Overall, the film lagged, tremendously, to the point of being awkward at times.
Review of Foxcatcher
