Sony Sets Oscar-Friendly Release for ‘Moneyball’ Director’s ‘Foxcatcher’

Published 2 years ago by

Moneyball Review Brad Pitt Sony Sets Oscar Friendly Release for Moneyball Directors Foxcatcher

The summer months often bring a slew of prospective blockbusters, as studios trot out their annual selection of big-budget spectacles. These films often feature Hollywood’s hottest actors saving the day in any number of ways, whether it’s the magical mayhem of the Harry Potter films or The Avengers assembling to ward off an alien invasion.

However, while summer films are centered largely on fun heroics, the winter months have become renowned for being prime real estate for Oscar contenders. Director Bennett Miller’s upcoming release, Foxcatcher, certainly qualifies as the kind of film that could be positioned for awards contention, and now it looks like it’s lining up for just that.

Sony Pictures Classics has announced that Foxcatcher will be released on December 20th, 2013. According to the studio’s press release, the film – written by E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman – chronicles the “true story of Olympic Wrestling Champion brothers Mark Schultz and Dave Schultz and their relationship with the eccentric John du Pont, heir to the du Pont Chemical fortune, that led to murder.”

Foxcatcher‘s ensemble cast includes Channing Tatum, Mark Ruffalo, Steve Carell, Sienna Miller, Vanessa Redgrave and Anthony Michael Hall. The film is currently in post-production, and as such, the studio hasn’t begun much of a marketing push for it just yet. However, with the release date now announced (and an awards season campaign likely to follow), that should change shortly.

capote 570x380 Sony Sets Oscar Friendly Release for Moneyball Directors Foxcatcher

Given Miller’s track record, Sony’s decision to maximize on Foxcatcher‘s Oscar potential is a smart business move. After all, Capote and Moneyball – Miller’s previous directorial efforts – attracted heavy awards attention in 2005 and 2011, respectively. In fact, both films featured high-profile casts, were based on real life events and secured Academy Award nominations for Best Picture.

If the film truly lives up to its pedigree, Foxcatcher may prove to be one to watch this holiday season. Considering that Sony will likely want to drum up buzz before the film hits screens in a few months, it’s possible that the studio will start with a limited release so that moviegoers can discover it gradually, a release pattern that many Oscar winners have used to great effect. In any case, keep an eye out for more from this promising film.

Do you think Foxcatcher will follow suit with Miller’s other releases and achieve Oscar buzz? Let us know in the comments section below.


As mentioned above, Foxcatcher will now be released on December 20th, 2013.

Follow Robert Yaniz Jr. on Twitter @crookedtable
TAGS: Foxcatcher
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. Great.i loved moneyball and hate that I haven’t seen capote yet, and didn’t even realize miller was making another movie. I’ll get over Channing tatum I guess

  2. The term “Oscar-Friendly” is really infuriating. For me, as a blockbuster fan, the Academy is simply out of touch with modern cinema. There used to be a time when then Best Picture-Oscar went to the biggest films of the year: Ben Hur, Gone With the Wind, Braveheart etc… The last time that happend was LOTR:ROTK… after that, the Academy has deliberately alienated itself from REAL movie-making and ignored pictures like TDK and AVATAR, only picking mediocre, lukewarm arthouse stuff without any mass appeal at all… I’m not saying thta cr*p like “Transformers” should be receiving any Oscars, but there are still loads of features out there that are both popular, well-made and artistically appealing.

    This is why I hate the Oscars these days. While Slumdog Millionaire, The King’s Speech, The Artist etc. maybe good independent films they are simply NO Best Pictures. They can’t be! They simply don’t play in the same league with real cinema, you know, the movies that are NOT “Oscar-friendly” anymore. Either the Academy comes to its senses with the a new generation of profession als taking over, or the Oscars is no longer a pop-cultural event but a nichefest for arthouse enthusiasts…

    • I’m not particularly inclined to disagree. The division between what audiences love and which films receive critical praise has gotten even more polarized in recent years. As it stands, the Oscars have become not so much a reflection of the “best” films of that year, but in many respects, the “best” films of certain genres, though expanding the Best Picture category to as many as 10 nominees was ostensibly an effort to fix this.

      • I’ve noticed in the last few years at least (when the Oscars expanded Best Picture), a lot of the nominees have also done very well at the box office. I remember reading last year that six of the nine nominees made over $100 million domestically and ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ was close behind in the low-to-mid $90s. I think 2010 had similar numbers because I know off the top of my head Inception, Toy Story 3, The Fighter, Social Network, Black Swan, The King’s Speech, and True Grit were all hits critically and commercially. Usually the Oscars get criticized for being “out of touch” with what the general public is seeing but lately that hasn’t exactly been the case. I wonder if there’s a cause for this or if it’s a strange coincidence?

    • I agree kind of. IMHO, “The Dark Knight” should have been nominated and blew Slumdog Millionaire out of the water. IMHO, “Star Trek”(09) should also have been nominated the year after as well, some can argue it is one of the best sci-fi films of the last 5-10 years. “Avatar” people could actually argue, but I also think it should have won. Movie was a groundbreaking film in multiple aspects. I also think “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2″ should have been nominated for Best Picture and should have won. I also think “Marvel’s The Avengers” should have been nominated for Best Picture last year.

      I would like nominees to be a combination of blockbusters/artistic films and them the winner be chosen out of those films, which ever film truly deserves it.

      • You’re so biased. Channing Tatum didn’t go to an acting school. He was not a child star. But his acting has been improving. With a good director like Miller, he could give a good performance. Some people like to bash his acting based on prejudice and it quite often became a habit. I wonder which of his latest movie did you see? I wouldn’t say he is a bad actor as some people remembered. Also you haven’t seen the movie, how can you even judge? It’s just showed your ignorance.

    • I’m curious, how exactly do you define best? Are you suggesting Avatar or the Dark Knight should have won this category?

  3. I’m interested to see this, but to comment based on the context of this post, I can’t imagine anything with Channing Tatum getting serious Oscar attention. Or, at least, serious Best Picture attention. I should probably do some research but how many Best Picture nominations have there been with a bad/below average lead performance?

  4. Can we start judging a film after actually watching it? What’s the point of judging a film without a trailer? Plus this is an indie film and Miller is also the producer. He probably has a lot of power on which actors he wants for the roles. So if he is fine with Tatum then I don’t understand why we need to b**** about it.