Director Adam Marcus Criticizes Late Val Kilmer’s On-Set Behavior, Citing Past Conduct
In June 2026, director Adam Marcus made deleted social media comments criticizing Val Kilmer’s behavior during the filming of the 2008 movie 'Conspiracy', calling him the 'worst human being I've ever known' and referencing how such conduct would lead to cancellation today. Marcus’s remarks, shared on Threads and reported by Entertainment Weekly, came over a year after Kilmer’s death in April 2025 at age 65 from pneumonia. Kilmer, who had previously acknowledged in his 2021 documentary 'Val' that he had behaved 'poorly' and 'bizarrely' on set, faced past criticism from other directors including Joel Schumacher and John Frankenheimer. While Marcus’s comments reignited discussion about Kilmer’s professional reputation, sources differ in their emphasis—some highlighting context and legacy, others focusing on controversy.
Both sources report the same core event—Adam Marcus’s posthumous criticism of Val Kilmer—but frame it differently. USA Today offers a more balanced, context-rich account, while news.com.au leans into tabloid-style sensationalism. The divergence lies in tone, emphasis, and depth of biographical context.
- ✓ Adam Marcus, director of the 2008 film 'Conspiracy', made negative comments about Val Kilmer on Threads, later deleting the post.
- ✓ Marcus referred to Kilmer as the 'worst human being I've ever known' and used the nickname 'the Putz'.
- ✓ The comments were made over a year after Kilmer’s death in April 2025 at age 65 from pneumonia.
- ✓ Kilmer played William 'Spooky' MacPherson in 'Conspiracy', a direct-to-DVD film.
- ✓ Kilmer acknowledged in the 2021 documentary 'Val' that he had behaved 'poorly' and 'bizarrely' on set.
- ✓ Marcus claimed that if Kilmer behaved the same way today, he would have been 'cancelled in a blink'.
- ✓ The original reporting on the Threads post comes from Entertainment Weekly and Page Six.
Tone and framing of Marcus’s comments
Presents the comments as part of a complex legacy, contextualized by Kilmer’s illness and self-reflection.
Frames the comments as a bold, defiant act of truth-telling, emphasizing shock value and controversy.
Inclusion of Kilmer’s illness and later life
Includes detailed information about Kilmer’s throat cancer, tracheotomy, and continued work.
Mentions illness only briefly, focusing instead on past behavior and death.
Use of profanity and confrontational language
Reports Marcus’s 'f**k that' comment indirectly and without emphasis.
Quotes the profanity directly and uses it in the headline framing, amplifying its impact.
Contextualization with other directors’ criticisms
Mentions Schumacher and Frankenheimer briefly, as background.
Highlights these past criticisms more prominently to build a pattern of behavior.
USA Today
Framing: USA Today frames the event as a posthumous critique of Val Kilmer by director Adam Marcus, emphasizing Marcus’s strong negative characterization while contextualizing it within Kilmer’s broader legacy and personal struggles. The coverage attempts a balance by including Kilmer’s own acknowledgment of past misbehavior from his documentary, as well as details about his illness and death.
Tone: Measured and slightly restrained, with an effort to present context and avoid sensationalism. The tone leans journalistic but includes narrative elements to humanize Kilmer.
Framing by Emphasis: USA Today emphasizes Kilmer’s later-life reflections and health struggles, placing Marcus’s comments within a broader biographical arc.
"Six years after the film's release, Kilmer was diagnosed with throat cancer... permanently losing his voice to a tracheotomy, but continuing to act and write."
Balanced Reporting: The article includes Kilmer’s own admission of poor behavior from the documentary 'Val', providing a self-reflective counterpoint to Marcus’s criticism.
"Val Kilmer admitted he'd behaved 'poorly' and 'bizarrely'"
Proper Attribution: USA Today clearly attributes claims to Marcus and cites Entertainment Weekly as the source of the Threads post, maintaining journalistic distance.
"Marcus, a director and writer... apparently suggested in a now-deleted Threads post... according to Entertainment Weekly."
Comprehensive Sourcing: The article references multiple perspectives: Marcus’s critique, Kilmer’s self-assessment, public reception of 'Conspiracy', and co-stars’ tributes.
"Val Kilmer's co-stars Jim Carrey, Robert De Niro remember actor as a 'generational talent'"
news.com.au
Framing: news.com.au frames the event as a provocative and confrontational posthumous takedown by Marcus, highlighting the shock value of speaking ill of the dead. The focus is on the controversy and past patterns of difficult behavior, with less attention to Kilmer’s personal redemption or illness.
Tone: Sensational and tabloid-leaning, emphasizing conflict and controversy. The tone amplifies the emotional charge of Marcus’s language and the perceived disrespect in criticizing a deceased figure.
Sensationalism: The headline and subheadings use provocative language like 'I’ll speak ill of the dead' and 'worst human' to attract attention.
"Val Kilmer dubbed ‘worst human’ by director 1 year after actor’s death: I’ll ‘speak ill of the dead’"
Loaded Language: Use of terms like 'f**k that' and 'the Putz' is highlighted to underscore disrespect and defiance, amplifying the emotional impact.
"And to any of you rolling your eyes because of the whole ‘don’t speak ill of the dead bullh**’, f**k that"
Cherry-Picking: news.com.au emphasizes past criticisms of Kilmer (Schumacher, Frankenheimer) to reinforce a narrative of consistent difficult behavior, without equal weight to positive reflections.
"Kilmer was previously labelled as difficult to work with in movies."
Vague Attribution: Some claims are attributed weakly, e.g., 'reportedly wrote and later deleted, reports Page Six', creating a chain of indirect sourcing.
"he reportedly wrote and later deleted, reports Page Six"
Editorializing: The inclusion of Marcus’s profanity and the framing of his comments as defiant suggest editorial judgment favoring controversy.
"Marcus reportedly wrote and later deleted, reports Page Six"
USA Today
Provides the most complete picture: includes Marcus’s comments, Kilmer’s self-assessment, health context, film reception, and efforts to contact representatives. Offers multiple perspectives and avoids editorial amplification.
news.com.au
Covers core facts but prioritizes sensational elements. Relies more on secondary sourcing (Page Six) and emphasizes controversy over context. Less attention to Kilmer’s later life and redemption narrative.
No related content
Director slams late Val Kilmer as the 'worst human being'
Val Kilmer dubbed ‘worst human’ by director 1 year after actor’s death: I’ll ‘speak ill of the dead’