‘Foxcatcher’ Wrestler Mark Schultz Slams Movie, Director: ‘I Hate Bennett Miller’

Mark Schultz Slams Bennett miller Foxcatcher
David M. Benett/Getty Images

In a surprising rant on Twitter and Facebook, “Foxcatcher” subject Mark Schultz apparently blasted the movie and director Bennett Miller on Wednesday, citing complaints with how he was portrayed in the wrestling movie and threatening to damage his career.

Schultz, who was played by Channing Tatum in the Oscar contender, said in his rant that he “hates” Miller and accused the director of disrespecting him.

Sources associated with the film say they were caught off guard by Schultz’s recent turnaround, given that his previous comments have been largely positive.

Schultz provided a bit more context on Facebook, saying that there was an implication that he and his former coach John du Pont (played by Steve Carell in the movie) had a sexual relationship in the movie, which he called “insulting.”

Oddly, Mark Schultz’s previous comments on the film have been supportive, raising suspicion that his accounts may have been hacked. He praised Tatum’s portrayal of him in the past, saying he was snubbed in the Golden Globes nominations, and actively retweeted press materials and reviews of the movie. The wrestler also appeared at Cannes, where the movie premiered, to support it, and he is credited as an associate producer.

Schultz’s turnaround on the film began in mid-December, saying his portrayal in the movie is “inaccurate.”

Even so, as recently as Dec. 21, he praised Miller.

Schultz released his own book in November, called “Foxcatcher: The True Story of My Brother’s Murder, John du Pont’s Madness, and the Quest for Olympic Gold,” which he says is the real version of what happened.

“Foxcatcher” is based on the true story of du Pont, a mentally ill, extremely wealthy wrestling fanatic who was convicted of the murder of wrestler Dave Schultz, portrayed by Mark Ruffalo in the film.

Sony Classics, the studio handling the film, had no comment. Schultz is currently out of the country and could not be reached for comment.

“Foxcatcher” hit theaters on Nov. 14 and is generating Oscar buzz, with Carell and Ruffalo nabbing Golden Globe nominations for their performances and the film being nominated for best drama.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 23

Leave a Reply

23 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Dande Lion says:

    Anyone who sat and read the actual Executive Producers & Funders for this movie says it all: they all had alias’s///I wondered right off the bat, who doesn’t want to be SUED for damages of the untruths in this so called “this is based on a true story”…Miller should be sued along with anyone else who is in alias support of this work of fiction..& i have been watching films for over 50 years…anyone who takes this money is as full of horses manure as John’s mother’s horses & I have known a member of that family for years!!! a HORRID tale to make MONEY$$…

  2. Niles says:

    Either this is a bogus account, or Shultz finally realized what the movie was implying and could not deal with it.

  3. DIpiityDoo says:

    Sounds like duPont shot the wrong brother.

  4. newtemplar says:

    Sounds like a phony rant to draw more box office interest (hmm, not working!). A fake hacker attack worked for a lousy film recently, so why not launch a fake argument for a mediocre film? Go Hollywood.

  5. He doth protest too much, methinks.

  6. Hanna says:

    Okay, I’m just gonna say it: That rant comes across like the disappointed slur by someone infatuated with a person but turned down romantically. Written under some kind of influence. There. I said it.

  7. Channing Tatum in ANYTHING is a disappointment. For the life of me, I do not, cannot understand why he is even considered an actor. I’m surprised it took the wrestler this long to complain.

  8. Jack Russell says:

    After waiting for this movie to be released, I was incredibly disappointed in the tale, and performances. The producers and director isolated three characters and created drama that should have and could have easily reflected the entire story of the athletic dedication to become an Olympian, but of the personal sacrifices to achieve these goals. John DuPont offered a solution, a deal with devil that over a dozen athletes accepted, (not just the Schultzes) yet none of these complex relationships were chronicled, nor the physical sacrifice of these guys placed in the film. The film made Mark out to be a one-dimensional character which he isn’t. This could have really been a good film that the wrestling community would have loved. Instead it’ll be a dillente’s foolish take on a subject they know nothing about.

    • Sal U. Lloyd says:

      Schultz is depicted as a troubled man, but Miller fails to explain the why.

      • Sal U. Lloyd says:

        Russell, I DID say “depicted as.” Do you NOT understand a filmmaker’s interpretation??? Why do you get defensive??? Okay, so you’re a wrestling fan, but why do you get defensive? There have been other similar movies based on true events, the subjects which, I know, are NEVER as positive or evil as portrayed on the screen.

        You want to talk about omissions or inaccuracies or unconvincing case and effect (the character arc in DALLAS BUYERS’ CLUB being one)??? Look at THE IMITATION GAME for starters, only because it’s fresher in the memory.

      • Jack Russell says:

        Your comment, as well as Stinson’s illustrates the issue Mark wasn’t able to express. You’ve taken the movie, if in fact you’ve seen it, as reality, and convey statements for someone whom I assume you don’t know. I don’t know Mark Schultz either, but I’m familiar with his greatness on the mat. Because he doesn’t seem to be as savvy with communication indicates a frustrated individual against a monster media machine. Problem seems he trusted the movie industry, and as we all know, Hollywood promises you everything and…. well, you know.

        Mark Schultz is one of 25 3x NCAA Champions. He was a Gold medalist in the Olympics and World Championships before he met Dupont. To understand what it means to be an US Olympian on the U.S. Wrestling team would be like having Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Charles Barkely all competing for one slot. Mark won at these levels before DuPont, so all of the DuPont Jedi mindtrick issues in the film seem to be for dramatic purposes only. Problem is people will take this film as gospel.To reduce him on film as unstable is reckless and damaging to the all who take the film for reality. The Foxcatcher saga seems to be more complex.

        The Producer and Director have the opportunity to create any film they’d like, but the omissions from a dramatist and athletic standpoint are ridiculous. Case in point: Before he killed Dave Schultz, John DuPont threatened other Foxcatcher wrestlers at gunpoint. These athletes fled foxcatcher farms for fear their life was at risk. None of this was in the film. There are more issues that could have and should have been provided for the film, that would have shed a light on the sport, all of the Foxcatcher athletes and reliance on the financial support from Dupont, but it’s a producer and director decision on what they what an audience to see. Tragedy is this is was a wonderful opportunity that failed.

        To take this movie as “this is what happened” and put the “Mark is troubled tag” is just tragic to him, his brother, the sport and all of those athletes affected by DuPont.

  9. Pat Petschow says:

    I just saw it tonight and it was dreadful. The director does stink. Steve Carell had one expression on his face for the whole movie. It was ridiculously bad.

  10. Roger G says:

    Maybe tweeting under a little NYE influence of sorts? Headscratcher.

  11. “Your** career is over.” When you insult someone at least have the decency to use proper grammar.

More Film News from Variety

Loading