Print Topic

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board  /  Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  /  Foxcatcher (2014)
Posted by: Demento, January 1st, 2015, 11:39am
Did anyone see this movie?

Well... I did. The movie itself is so factually wrong, it's comical. They really should have written, INSPIRED BY, instead of BASED ON. So many things are twisted around. They show a UFC fight that took place in 1996 and claim it was in 1988. When the UFC started in 1993. The have Dave as some sort of father figure to Mark, yet Dave was only a year older and in many people's eye was the weaker wrestler of the two. This is purely a work of FICTION.

SPOILERS:

Interestingly enough the killing of Dave Schultz is shown in the EXACT manner that eye witnesses described it.

Anyway Mark Schultz has gone psycho crazy about this movie, see for yourself:







Posted by: DustinBowcot (Guest), January 1st, 2015, 11:50am; Reply: 1
This drama looks better than the film... not that I've seen the film.
Posted by: Reef Dreamer, January 1st, 2015, 4:10pm; Reply: 2
I know nothing about this...at all...but that is one major public rant. I love the way he goes from sane to...not
Posted by: DustinBowcot (Guest), January 1st, 2015, 6:43pm; Reply: 3
I think something has made him angry.
Posted by: Demento, January 1st, 2015, 6:50pm; Reply: 4
This movie was an interesting watch, because it made me question how much of other biographical movies I've seen have been BS. The stories have been exaggerated or twisted. We all know they add fiction to biographical movies to add drama, but just how much do they really twist the original stories.

Here is what Mark Schultz had to say via FB:


Quoted Text
"I was already an Olympic and WORLD Champion before I met du Pont. The director took my 1985 World Title away in the film. I was not emotionally fragile as critics suggest. I didn't move to Pennsylvania to wrestle for Foxcatcher. I took an assistant coaching job at Villanova. I never looked up to duPont as a mentor, leader, father figure. He was a lot dirtier the first time I met him and he was drunk. He told me he would have nothing to do with Villanova which was the only reason I went there. du Pont was a repulsive sickening freak. I could barely stand looking at him. I never touched him except for a photo at the hall of fame and when I threw him in a headlock for a documentary. I never showed him any moves or taught him anything about wrestling. I never coached him in a wrestling match. I never read any speech he gave me. I never dyed my hair. Dave was my older brother, not a father-figure. After I won the NCAA's and Dave took 2nd, Dave started asking me about technique and calling himself Mark Schultz's brother. I was a 3x NCAA Champion. Dave won once. After 1986 I started beating Dave in practice consistently. I never worked out in the new wrestling complex duPont built in the film. If du Pont ever slapped me I'd have knocked his head off. I never wrestled after Dave moved onto Foxcatcher Farms. I was doing Jiu-Jitsu at BYU. Dave was never a head coach anywhere. I was a Division I University Head Coach for 6 years. Dave was intelligent but no more than me. Just coz I wasn't filling the silence with superfluous noise all the time doesn't mean I was inarticulate. I earned a masters degree with a 3.6 gpa. I'm a corporate speaker and life coach. The movie doesn't show hardly any of my victories. It focuses on only my losses. The personalities and relationships between the characters in the film are primarily fiction and somewhat insulting. Leaving the audience with a feeling that somehow there could have been a sexual relationship between duPont and I is a sickening and insulting lie. I told Bennett Miller to cut that scene out and he said it was to give the audience the feeling that duPont was encroaching on your privacy and personal space. I wasn't explicit so I didn't have a problem with it. Then after reading 3 or 4 reviews interpreting it sexually, and jeopardizing my legacy, they need to have a press conference to clear the air, or I will."


Also about the tweets:
Posted by: DustinBowcot (Guest), January 2nd, 2015, 3:20am; Reply: 5
Good for him.

He should also blame the producers. They have to OK everything the Director does.
Posted by: Ryan1, January 2nd, 2015, 4:48pm; Reply: 6
What's odd is that Schultz was completely supportive of the film until a few days ago.  He was a consultant on the set and is credited as an associate producer, so he obviously knew the screenplay as the project was being filmed.   According to an article published just a few weeks ago:

Schultz praised Bennett Miller for his creativity and his intelligence. “He listens very carefully, and he is a great observer. He stuck to the heart and soul of the story,” Schultz said."

Apparently it's some of the critical reviews that have made Schultz change his tune so drastically.  
Posted by: Demento, January 2nd, 2015, 5:00pm; Reply: 7

Quoted from Ryan1
Schultz praised Bennett Miller for his creativity and his intelligence. “He listens very carefully, and he is a great observer. He stuck to the heart and soul of the story,” Schultz said."

Apparently it's some of the critical reviews that have made Schultz change his tune so drastically.  


I think Schultz wasn't really on set, he only visited once or twice, from what I read in an interview. In any case he had to have read the script, unless he's a total moron.

From what it seems, Miller convinced him that things would be a certain way, maybe even manipulated him into believing that they would be and now when he sees that people are interpreting things unfavorably, he's gotten upset.

But he must have given the "go ahead" in some respect before filming.
Posted by: AnthonyCawood, January 2nd, 2015, 5:35pm; Reply: 8
I wonder if there's a connection between his inabilty in reading the script, and what it could imply... and his years of getting in the ring and taking repeated blows to the head - and I mean punches, not anything else that could imply ;-)
Posted by: Demento, January 2nd, 2015, 5:46pm; Reply: 9

Quoted from AnthonyCawood
I wonder if there's a connection between his inabilty in reading the script, and what it could imply... and his years of getting in the ring and taking repeated blows to the head - and I mean punches, not anything else that could imply ;-)


He really only had just one fight in the UFC. But all that weight cutting in wrestling isn't very healthy, especially because you drain your brain fluid and then you get slammed around by some strong dude.

Brian trauma in fighting is serious business. It's scary scary stuff.
Posted by: AnthonyCawood, January 2nd, 2015, 5:50pm; Reply: 10
I'm sure you are correct Demento, but I was going for more of a comedic slant and a blowj*b pun :-)
Posted by: Ryan1, January 2nd, 2015, 6:46pm; Reply: 11
All kidding aside, those tweets sound like someone on the verge of a breakdown.  
Posted by: Scar Tissue Films, January 3rd, 2015, 5:43am; Reply: 12
Never heard of him, and couldn't care less about him or his sport...but seeming as his pathetic rant is my first impression of him...I don't think much of his attempts at protecting his legacy!
Posted by: albinopenguin, January 3rd, 2015, 4:39pm; Reply: 13
Post release drama aside, Foxcatcher is an excellent film. The acting, directing, and cinematography are all exemplary. Furthermore, the tone is well developed and unsettling. Definitely one of 2014's best.

Lastly, according to eye witnesses the climatic scene at the end of the film occurred almost exactly as it did in real life. So much so that they have trouble watching it.
Posted by: Demento, January 3rd, 2015, 5:56pm; Reply: 14

Quoted from albinopenguin
Lastly, according to eye witnesses the climatic scene at the end of the film occurred almost exactly as it did in real life. So much so that they have trouble watching it.


It is.

SPOILERS

But... what the movie doesn't tell you is that Dave Schultz didn't have a happy family life at Foxcatcher. He was getting ready to leave the place, but felt he needed to stay and prepare the wrestlers for the Olympics that year and was planing on leaving right after.

Further more. The movie shows events that happened in 1988 then shows Dave's murder like it happened right after. When in reality it happened 8 years later in 1996.

PS: I wasn't fan of the movie itself as a work of fiction.
Posted by: Demento, January 4th, 2015, 9:41am; Reply: 15
Print page generated: March 29th, 2024, 4:45am