Based on a true story and adapted for the big screen from the book of the same name, Moneyball follows Oakland Athletics’ General Manager Billy Beane (a worn down-looking Brad Pitt) in his quest to keep his franchise relevant. After falling short of winning it all in the 2001 season, the A’s lose key starters Johnny Damon, Jason Giambi and Jason Isringhausen to free agency. The budget is tight in Oakland, and no extra money is going to be spent for Beane to bolster his roster for the upcoming season. Simply put, Beane works for what is known as a small-market team.
Yet he has a loyal fan base to impress, an owner who expects a good product to still be placed on the field and a coach (Phillip Seymour Hoffman, excellent as always) nagging for a new contract. What’s a general manager to do?
Beane turns to the often-dismissed method of sabermetrics. In theory, sabermetrics is supposed to increase your chances of winning, as it is a more in depth way to view statistics that otherwise would go unnoticed by large-market teams.
At the time, though, this idea was considered radical and was believed to be a sure way of losing lots of games and lots of fans. Beane’s group of player talent scouts followed this arrogant line of thinking. But one scout, Peter Brand (Jonah Hill), is in sync with Beane. A student of sabermetrics, Brand helps Beane in putting together a roster based on statistical odds rather than well-known, highly paid players.
Through a rough start to the 2002 season and the doubters becoming louder with each additional mark in the loss column, Beane and Brand still stick to their plan.
It’s difficult to not love a true underdog story, and Moneyball exemplifies just that. Director Bennett Miller (Capote) does a tremendous job forcing our hand in rooting for a team we may not care less about in present day. Utilizing flashes of the highlights from Athletics’ games in the ’01 and ’02 seasons, Miller invokes our true fandom for the game while becoming enamored with the outcome. The intensity is built up whether or not you recall the results of these games.
Pitt and Hill surprisingly work very well with one another, perhaps because their uncomfortable pairing in the movie allows them to play off each other effectively. Peter Brand is contained and borderline awkward, while Pitt portrays Beane as outspoken and impulsive. The storyline also makes way for a great performance from Kerris Dorsey, who plays Beane’s daughter.
The problem with Moneyball is that it has conflicting ideas of what it wants to accomplish. Should we care more about Beane as the baseball enthusiast or human being? This is a not a question that is intentionally raised by the film, but rather left unclear—and it’s an important question considering much of the movie focuses on the game of baseball, then hones in on Beane’s personal life in the finale.
Moneyball would have benefited from cutting 20 minutes from its 126 minute runtime, which included at least three possible instances to end on.
We get a few too many wide-shots of a helpless Beane sitting alone in his office or the stadium, followed by close-ups of his morose face.
The positives of this movie vastly outweigh the negatives, however. Brilliantly shot and stylistically appealing, Moneyball also goes the extra distance by developing its characters. It manages to get a good laugh over with the audience on a consistent basis as well.
I love the underdog; I thoroughly enjoyed Moneyball. It’s only ironic that a movie about an underdog will be anything but that come award season.
Critic’s Review: 3.5/5
Daniel Feingold can be reached at dfeingold91@gmail.com.
Loading ...
