Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JasonBryant

For those who have seen Foxcatcher, I'm looking for your comments

Recommended Posts

Seems like Mark Schultz has some bizarre agenda.  He's seen the movie, been involved in premiers, parties, etc.  He's quite familiar with the movie's subject matter, tone, etc.  Now to go (apparently) crazy, IMO, is a ploy to sell his book.  Either that, or he's going batsh*t crazy....literally.  He's always been a bit unhinged/bi-polar on social media, but this latest outburst on Twitter & Facebook is a bit more troubling.  

Edited by fudge_tunnel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the book and saw the movie. the book is quite different, as you'd expect, since it's 100% the story of Mark Schultz from the perspective of Mark Schultz. the movie has a different agenda and the result is what Bennett Miller wanted to make, not what Mark Schultz would have made. 

 

i can't possibly imagine what the whole experience would be like, including the movie business part of it, for Mark. the book does help provide more background to the tragedy (the movie elides many years and events) and it also shows reveals quite more about Mark, some of which is clearly by design and some of which probably wasn't Mark's intent. 

 

so i'm not going to pretend like i can explain Mark's social media reaction but I will recommend people buy and read his book. i doubt it's all a marketing ploy but even if it was, i'd recommend the book anyway. it's a fascinating read and I believe Mark will benefit more directly from book sales then he will from movie tix. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the movie on Dec 27th w/ my son (who was also a college wrestler) and my wife.  Overall I/we thought the movie was very slow moving and close to being boring.  The acting was excellent especially Rufalo playing Dave Schultz.  From an actual video I saw of DuPont doing a self-promotion, DuPont was weirder than Steve Carell's acting portrayed, but he did terrific job.  Not sure why the movie skipped from 1988 to 1996, but it would have been cool to show Dave carrying Kenny Monday after Monday won the '88 Olympics after Monday beat him out for the spot on the team (that story alone would have made the movie a lot more interesting).  I wished I had saved the $10 and waited until it was 'free' on cable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I previously made a comment or two about the movie, which I deleted, largely out of respect for Mark/Dave. 

 

I don't know Mark personally, but I thought the implications that Mark refers to, were puzzling.  I don't know if Mark is gay or not, and could care less.  I was just shocked that the movie implied there was some kind of deeper relationship between the two.  I had never heard that as any possible connection to the story, or Mark for that matter.  I will buy the book, and I look forward to a good read. 

 

A man that I work with was once in the movie industry.  He is allowed to vote for the academy awards.  His opinion is just one person, but he has seen the movie and thought it was depressing, and that Steve Carrell was amazing.  I personally think Mark Ruffalo is deserving of a supporting actor nomination, but imo the general public and certainly voters for the academy have no idea how he nailed that role.  The Dupont Character was played very well too.

 

Overall, I don't know if I would recommend this movie for high school athletes.  That means, I would definitely not take athletes to see it, and I would be prepared for questions to arise from watching it during practice the next day if any of your guys see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Overall I/we thought the movie was very slow moving and close to being boring. The acting was excellent especially Rufalo playing Dave Schultz..

I had a similar point of view on the film. Feeling it was very slow and choppy at times. Seemed as though I was getting small glimpses into moments on a timeline rather then building towards some pivotal moments of a story as most movies due. Yes that may mean skewing or combining some of the actual evebts but that's what movies have to do in order to cover the main points of emphasis that are at the core of the story. I to felt they could have related more of DuPonts downward spiral and what the wrestlers noticed in order to start showing the rift that was forming between them. Maybe much of that was left in the cuttings room floor due to the multiple edits. This was never going to be a movie is rising from the ashes or happy endings, so in those terms it did depict what is was suppose to I just felt in movie terms it could have been edited together in a much more flowing way that help build toward a few major situations better (even without giving away their would end up being final confrontation with Dave).

 

As for Marks comments on the film it may be he's been annoyed by some questions about the film and eventually it became such an annoyance to deal with that he's backlashing against Miller for even having to be put in that position. I took it as DuPont was just and odd and irrational guy who was trying to pretend he was some wrestling guru that could somehow build Mark into the greatest. Yes I'm sure some people could take the midnight workout scene in a different sexual direction but it wasnt overtly going in that direction. But from Marks viewpoint I could see where answering questions related to those type of scenes would he annoying. Hiwevet it looks like his extreme reaction in recent days could be a culmination of much more than just a few questions about one scene.

Edited by MadMardigain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question I have is regarding Mark and Dave's respective abilities. The movie made it seem like Dave was significantly better and more accomplished. They're before my time but I was always under the impression that they were pretty much dead even in terms of talent and accomplishments, and if anything the edge would go to Mark. Was the movie accurate in this depiction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave is a 7x world level medalist with 2 gold. Mark is a 3x medallist, all gold. Dave also won 2x Tlibisi which some consider WC equivalent.

 

NCAA Mark clearly better, 3x champ to 1x.

 

From what I've seen (just video) Mark at his best was pretty unstoppable but was somewhat inconsistent. Unreal speed and power, bit suspect cardio which he attributes to bad luck genetically. Dave more methodical and less emotional as a wrestler but had trouble with really fast and athletic guys. Also not sure if he tightened up under pressure a bit ir had bad luck but he lost to some guys at worlds or NCAAs that he beat elsewhere.

 

Technically both great, Dave more diverse.

 

All in all I think "better" is debatable either way, unless someone can tell us how they did head to head (and how much bigger Mark was).

Edited by armspin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The second image in this page is a facebook post from Mark (since deleted) that gives some further insight into what he was reflecting on which lead to his social media rants this week.

 

http://m.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/olympic-wrestler-mark-schultz-nuts-foxcatcher-article-1.2062409#bmb=1

Edited by MadMardigain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×