Very interesting of you to mention. He seems to love it, comparing it appreciatively to "Bonnie and Clyde".vid87 said:I'm going to guess that guy hated the hell out of Pain and Gain as well.
http://www.nyfcc.com/2013/05/pain-gain-reviewed-by-armond-white-for-cityarts/
I think the difference is that Pain and Gain was the bastardization of the American Dream, while Fox Catcher is something he views as an indictment of it. Maybe.
The first one had a great concept: extract DNA from dinosaur era mosquitoes caught in amber and clone an extinct species. This one? Hybrid? Yawn.On Jurassic Park: no one? Absolutely no one is going to mention the Sea World scene at all? As far as I'm concerned it's the only thing that had me interested since it seems like the whole thing is just going to retread the theme of "this all looks incredible but it's actually a really bad idea seriously don't make this real."
The first one went wrong for 2 reasons:
1) There is nothing inherently wrong with what they did (creating the park). But, were someone to do it just as badly with lions, tigers and bears, people would still get eaten.
2) At some point, you had a group you knew would live. At that point, for me, it was all very pedestrian.
This one, with actual examples of circus animal like exploitation (Sea World, Race Tracks), does appear to have a little bit of wit.
Me? I'm more jazzed about this preview:
and
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/star-wars-force-awakens-teaser-752571