Good pace and acting , great story ruined by fictionalized stereotypes

Rating: 6/10 (5 March 2015)

The film is a good movie, but it could have been a great one . It centers on Olympic gold medal winning wrestler Mark Schultz and his brother Dave. Mark is struggling with a boring, lonely life, when he gets a call out of the blue from a billionaire who is heir to the Dupont fortune. The wealthy man wants to sponsor Mark, his brother and their amateur wrestling team as they live for free on his estate.
The film is good because it is an interesting biography, and because it has a slow, realistic pace. Some found it's pace dull but I liked it's dark realism.
The film could have been great, benefiting from both the interesting pace, and the fact that it is based on a fascinating , dramatic biography. However, it is brought down by caving to the PC masses as it portrays all the major characters in a typical stereotypical Hollywood way. It's as if the writers had a focus group whispering in their ears.
Most adult men are creepy and evil, unless they are chaperoned by a woman and children in which case they appear miraculously transformed. They become perfect, smiley faced drones, floating blissfully through life in a quest to serve their children. The "family men" are filled with confidence, wisdom, and self righteous dignity. It goes without saying that women and children are shown as flawless, rays of sunshine piercing an atmosphere foul darkness.
The two main male characters appear to be single, so of course they are shown to be at best creepy and at worst criminally insane. The filmmakers seem to be trying to be subtle in they're portrayal of Dupont as suspect, but I felt as though I was hit over the head with a hammer of overtones and innuendo. This follows the disturbing pattern in recent decades where any single adult male is shown negatively, something to be fearful of.
Dave and his family act as though they are filled with a self satisfying knowledge that they are at the top of the social food chain. No matter Dupont is paying all the bills and puts a roof over everybody's head, they talk to him so condescendingly that in every scene he manages to appear pathetic. Carell also does a good job acting, but almost goes overboard with the "creepy" as it is rare to encounter any guy this weird in real life. . The message the film seems to be tapping at with a jackhammer is - "no matter how much money you have and give away , if you are an adult male you had BETTER KNOW YOUR PLACE". "family and kids good, men bad".
I have read that Mark Schultz was dissatisfied with the way he was portrayed, and I don't blame him. Many who were there at Foxcatcher have been quoted saying the film was largely fictionalized, which is not a surprise. Movies today show sexual overtones to practically everything, so you never know if they were there in real life or they were added to sell tickets.
I wonder if the real personalities were more interesting than those fabricated for the film. We will never know because the film makers choose the easy way out. They pander to those who worship at the alter of the family and children as they show any single guy as an untrustworthy creep. Makes one wish for the old Gene Hackman or Clint Eastwood movies.