Skip to main content

Foxcatcher - When Creative License Changes History

All I had heard about Foxcatcher, was how three vastly different actors, came together to give performances that should have won awards. I was told by some that despite the "depressing" ending, the movie was one of the best of the year. What I also heard, was the guy who the movie is about, the man who wrote the book, was disgusted by how this film ended up. As someone who followed this story as it unfolded, I feel like the participants were wronged.

Mark Schultz is a simple man. He's not the smartest guy in the world, but he's hardly the mentally challenged character, that Tatum plays. His brother Dave, was a gregarious man. Fun-loving,  intelligent and nothing like the sad sack he's portrayed like in the film. He was also the buddy to du Pont in real life, not Mark. Then there is du Pont, who despite quite possibly being clinically insane, wasn't nearly as outwardly odd in interviews and footage, until he snapped. All this doesn't come close to what truly bothered me about the film. The false ending, which in reality takes place six years after Mark leaves Foxcatcher.

The truly interesting part of this story, takes place after Dave's murder. The fact that a white man of wealth had committed the act of murder and the police did nothing. They allowed him to hide in his house and performed hostage negotiations, despite there being no hostages. All this happened, while his still, very successful, Foxcatcher farms was putting out Olympic quality wrestlers, such as Kurt Angle. Anyone who followed the real story, understands that 90% of the film is fiction, which I felt really takes away from the story. Aside from being painfully long and boring, it's inaccuracies are something I just couldn't get past.

I have always been OK with creative license for the purpose of drama, as long as it doesn't change the events. Take a movie like Argo for example. The dramatic ending was actually, not at all the close call that was detailed in the film, but the panic and fear of being caught, wouldn't have translated had the timeline been two hours apart, as in real life. Then there is American Sniper, which I haven't seen, but know enough, that I'm prepared to see a version of a "true story," that is completely distorted. The book depicts Kyle as a sociopath (and remember, he wrote it), while the movie shows him as one who was just following orders. Subsequent articles written by other snipers who knew Kyle, shine a much darker light on him, both before and after his tours. While I don't believe the film's intent was to do anything more than show the effects of PTSD, it has turned Kyle into a cult hero. One that others who have performed his duties, neither revere or feel is warranted. In an age, where the most watched news source, has been cited as being 60% false and the average news, somewhere in the 45% range, maybe we need to stop blaming the entertainment industry and look at ourselves and our growing inability to tell truth from fiction. Or better yet, our desire to even care what is true or not.

Comments

  1. This is exactly why bibliophiles get upset at movies! Good thing I didn't read the book first and had no idea how inaccurate it has been or I would have kicked a hole in the movie poster on the way out! boo

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think in almost all cases, unless it is something that needs to be visually experienced, stay with the story. Even if it fails, it will feel right. Foxcatcher just felt wrong from start to finish. Same way I felt about Whiplash, because I already knew how it would play out within the first 25 minutes.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

White Privilege

This was a post I wrote on Facebook after surprisingly not seeing any moaning about the Documentary by Jose Antonio Vargas, titled White People Dayyum! I just scrolled my timeline and not a single white person got their feelings hurt by White People. I unfortunately haven't seen it, but the number of fake accounts that popped up on twitter, tells me it was a damn good show. Here's the thing. If someone of color aka non-white says "White Privilege," are you offended? If you said yes, then you are exhibiting white privilege. It has nothing to do with how hard you work or study, how you stayed out of trouble, because here's the thing, that is entirely the point. Somewhere out there, there are 100 Black, Spanish, Native American, Arab, Asian, who worked and studied as hard as you and never got in trouble, but they don't have what you "earned" or achieved. Stop looking at the one person you know who isn't white that achieved as your benchmark. Loo

11 Rules of Life - Bill Gates?

I read this on Facebook this morning.  A friend had posted it and said that every child should have to receive this. I of course read it and started to think.  I immediately wondered who really wrote this, as I rarely see things like this attributed to the proper person.  I immediately found it was written by Conservative Charles J. Sykes when he wrote a book about how America is dumbing down our youth.  I read it twice and started to wonder how true it was.  Below is a link to the actual picture I saw. So let's look at each of the rules and analyze them. Rule 1: Life is not fair — get used to it! - Life is not fair in that we are not all afforded the same opportunities based on race, creed, color, socio-economic background, but in general, those who are afforded the same opportunities to succeed are very often rewarded for their individual efforts.  Sure there may be underlying circumstances, but hard work is proven to pay more often than not and those who strive for succ

Quickie Review - Finding Vivian Maier

While I thoroughly enjoyed the film, especially the first 15-20 minutes, I was a little bothered by the way the film played out. The interviews with the clearly disturbed brother, sister and the mother, who obviously, was in for a cut, didn't need to be in the film. Then the woman who suggested abuse, yet seemed to have her life defined by Maier, as she tried to muster every ounce of emotion and fake guilt. Her friend, more than happy to be party of the charade. People who talk about abuse for the first time, usually don't do so on camera. The fact these scenes were so prominent, shows that they felt wronged that they were not rewarded. Maloof on the other hand, seems to disappear from the documentary during this part, almost hiding away from the fact, he went from complete praise, to even making money off of her, to destroying her personal legacy. He almost mentions the family of boys taking care of her rent, as an afterthought. Her burial spot, never shown, yet a video of her