During the year-end rush of top 10 lists and awards, a movie that's received some of the odder reactions has been Benett Miller's Moneyball. Its detractors have taken it to task for being too straightforward and lacking the edge of favorites like Drive and The Tree of Life. I'm not saying it's a particularly daring movie, but it accomplishes something that's becoming pretty rare. It's a modestly budgeted Hollywood film (by today's standards) that tells an effective story without overplaying the drama. This approach has raised questions on whether it has the depth to warrant the acclaim. I ranked Moneyball as my #4 film of 2011, so my views sharply differ from this opinion. However, the complaints are understandable because the story avoids the conventions. It's a well-acted character piece that has appeal because it goes beyond just presenting this different approach to analyzing baseball. For more details, check out my review for PopMatters and let me know what you think.
It may not feel quite like the classic baseball movie others have achieved, but it’s certainly pleasant enough to be enjoyable even by non-sports fan, and features great performances from Hill and Pitt. Good review Dan.
ReplyDeleteThanks Dan! I'm a sports fan, but I agree that Moneyball's a movie that could be enjoyed even if you're not that into sports.
DeleteI think I'm too much of a baseball nerd to enjoy it. "What? He flew to Cleveland just to talk about trades? That's a phone call at most!"... "Nobody would get that crazy about a lefty specialist like Ricardo Rincon"... "Carlos Peña was nowhere near that hot of a commodity"... "No GM would dump off a player just to spite his manager"... and so on and so forth.
ReplyDeleteI liked it, I enjoyed it, I don't particularly think it belonged in the Oscar conversation, and there were just enough incorrect baseball facts to drive me a little crazy.
I was wondering about some of the facts after watching Moneyball, so I re-read the book last week. It's true that they stretch some things for dramatic purposes, but I was surprised that certain scenes actually closely mirrored what's in the book. There's a whole chapter that goes into the Rincon trade in particular, including Billy offering up his own money to finalize it. Assuming what Lewis wrote is accurate, that scene fits the actual events. That said, I do see your point about the overall story, which ignores the three big pitchers that really helped to drive that season.
DeleteFor the Oscars, I didn't have a problem with the Best Picture or Best Actor nomination. I liked Hill's performance, but there were better roles out there for that award that weren't recognized.
Thanks!
I didn't have complaints about the movie. I thought it did a decent job of translating the non-fiction book into a fictional movie. I enjoyed it well enough (3 stars out of 5), but I wasn't "wow"ed by it.
ReplyDeleteChip, I've heard this reaction pretty frequently to Moneyball, and it's understandable. It's shot in a straightforward way and tells a pretty direct story. What drew me beyond just thinking of it as a three-star movie was the characters. I was really surprised by how much I connected with them, and that made the difference for me. Thanks!
Delete