“MONEYBALL”Based upon the book Moneyball: The Art Of Winning An Unfair Game by Michael Lewis
Story by Stan Chervin
Screenplay Written by Steven Zallian and Aaron Sorkin
Directed by Bennett Miller
*** ½ (three and a half stars)
“Baseball is a beautiful game. Once you get into the strategy of it, you can see how beautiful a game it is.”
-Powhatan Collins, October 9, 2011
Those are the words of my Father during a recent phone conversation. My Father was, is and will forever be a sports enthusiast. He loves sports as much as I love film, music, or literature so you can gather exactly how much he loves sports. That said, and for whatever reason, that particular brand of enthusiasm for athletics and the passionate love of the game—no matter what game it happens to be-is a level of enthusiasm that was not genetically passed down to me. Baseball in particular is especially confounding. To my eyes, it is painfully slow, a turgid, torpid, endless experience that I just cannot believe that anyone would get themselves feverishly excited over. But, of course, millions upon millions of people do get that excited and joyous over the art and artistry that embodies what is essentially, what my Father long ago referred to as, “a child’s game.”
I have to make an admission to having more than a bit of trepidation to viewing a showing of the biographical baseball drama “Moneyball,” Director Bennett Miller’s first film since his highly accomplished debut with “Capote” (2005), for one simple reason: the subject matter just does not appeal to me in the least. Now, I also have to admit to having nothing against sports films or baseball themed movies as a rule, especially as so many baseball themed films, from Ron Shelton’s peerless “Bull Durham” (1988), John Sayles’ extraordinary “Eight Men Out” (1988), and Phil Alden Robinson’s deeply moving “Field Of Dreams” (1989) for example, have proven to be grand movie experiences.
But, “Moneyball” is a baseball film that actually does not feature much of the game of baseball. This film is about the business of baseball and if I can find the actual game to be more then enough of a snoozer, then the business side, I feared would induce flat out narcolepsy. But, the pedigree in front of and behind the cameras spoke to me and I knew I had to see it before I weighed in with any actual opinions and I am happy to say that while the film is perhaps a tad too languid for its own good, “Moneyball” is a completely involving experience. Intelligent, perceptive, celebratory yet rightly critical and featuring a complex leading performance from Brad Pitt, “Moneyball” is a strong adult movie made by adults for adults and perfect viewing during this cinematic fall season.
Brad Pitt stars as Oakland Athletics’ General Manager and failed Major League baseball player Billy Beane. At the film’s opening, Billy is caught in a triumphant quandary at the conclusion of the 2001 post season as his team has lost to the New York Yankees and the loss of three of his major players to other baseball teams. As Billy and his staff struggle to conceive of a new way to mold and produce a competitive and successful baseball team franchise, especially as their team functions at a severely lower financial budget than other Major League teams, Billy makes a provocative discovery while on a trip to visit the Cleveland Indians.
It is there where he meets Yale Economics graduate Peter Brand (an excellent Jonah Hill), who possess potentially revolutionary ideas with how to assess a baseball players value therefore transforming the team in question and the industry of baseball as a whole. Utilizing a set of statistics which values a player’s on-base percentage (OBP) rather than the collected wisdom of baseball insiders from managers, scouts, and coaches, as well as the statistics of a player’s actual skill and talent, a team could conceivably assemble or rebuild a poorly functioning team into a winning baseball team. And at a fraction of the cost on the open baseball market.
Sensing the potential in creating a game-changing scenario to push the Oakland A’s to the top of the heap, Billy hires Peter as his Assistant Manager. Completely against the wishes of his staff, especially Manager Art Howe (the great Phillip Seymour Hoffman), the twosome begin to place their unorthodox strategies into motion and create a new, and possibly great team within their meager budget and solely through OBP statistics, which places the spotlight on baseball players who would have otherwise have gone forever unnoticed.
Surprisingly, with sports terminology and qualities that essentially function as learning Greek to me, I found myself fully absorbed by “Moneyball.” Bennett Miller has somehow found a way to make this almost cerebral material vibrantly visual and he is served mightily by the excellent screenplay by seasoned screenwriting legends Steven Zallian and Aaron Sorkin, who always seem to be able to find ways to make extremely complicated material sing with profoundly current themes, excellent characterizations and whip smart, adult dialogue. I really loved the lengthy scenes Miller sets up that show Billy and his team of scouts debating one player after another. Despite gaining an inside look into the process of baseball’s business side, I was struck by the fact that Billy Beane, even at the age of 44, is certainly the youngest member in the room yet is in full control of the vast, collective knowledge at his disposal. Once he brings Peter Brand into the picture, and with a full seat at the table, we can see that there is more at stake than just the future of baseball. It is the collective relevancy of experienced people who are now seen to be as nothing more than archaic figures of baseball’s past. The tension in those scenes just crackle especially as we try to figure out exactly what Billy Beane’s endgame happens to be and why he is willing to live or die by this new statistical methodology.
Here is where “Moneyball” shines the most, in my opinion. Like “Capote,” this film serves as a as a character study of another enigmatic and almost unknowable character. Billy Beane possesses an absolutely magnetic presence. His seemingly laid back, laconic attitude belies the fierce determination and competitive streak he possesses. As he plainly states, in a rare publicly confessional moment, “I hate to lose. I hate to lose even more than I love to win.” Yet, this desire to win above anything else threatens to be his undoing as is pride makes it impossible for him to embrace the bigger picture or the sublime victories that occur even when you lose.
Brad Pitt, who bears a striking resemblance to Robert Redford in this film, is just terrific in the leading role and along with his towering performance earlier this year in Terrence Malick’s majestic “The Tree Of Life,” I am certain that he will be receiving more than his share of attention during awards season and deservedly so. He makes it all look so easy, dear readers! The complex levels and shades he brings to this character may seem to be unnoticeable, as he never calls attention to himself. Like the character of Billy Beane, we lean in closer, especially as he keeps us all at arms length. We continuously try to figure out his motivations and life passions especially when we are witnessing someone who does not attend the games, barely listens to them, and rarely makes contact with the players themselves. We even wonder if he even likes baseball to begin with. Furthermore, are his current struggles with Peter Brand’s new statistical system and extreme desires for success a means to gain a sense of resolution with his own failures and disappointments obtained during his past baseball career, a career he threw a full scholarship to Stanford away for?
And then, there are the scenes between Billy and his 12 year old daughter and budding guitarist and songwriter Casey (sweetly played by Kerris Dorsey). There has been some criticism about those tender sequences as not feeling fully necessary to the piece as a whole. I disagree. I enjoyed those sections very much and not because it established a certain humanity for Billy Beane, but that very relationship really brings the entirety of the film together in the final moments.
Despite my enthusiasm, I have to admit that I was a bit put off by the film’s rhythms here and there. It did feel, perhaps, a bit too shapeless for its own good. There were points where it did seem to meander. For its hefty running time of 2 hours and 15 minutes, I did often wonder just exactly what the endgame of this film happened to be. But then those final moments arrived, especially as the last 25 minutes or so did create a palpable sports tension as we watch whether the Oakland A’s will be able to establish a 20 game winning streak. What those final moments brought into full view for me was the questioning of what is actually lost when one arranges and organizes a baseball team at the expense of the tried and true qualities of athleticism, talent, drive, skill and in some cases, even humanity itself. “Moneyball” depicts the point where the game of baseball itself increasingly functions as more of an afterthought when compared to the business of baseball. Moreso, it nails the harsh reality of when actual people are not just treated as people but as commodities to be used, traded and discarded for the faceless powers-that-be. And with those questions, Miller beautifully transformed his film from a character study, and underdog sports drama into nothing less than a cultural commentary.
“Moneyball” is a film about what happens when the concept of winning overtakes everything, including humanity itself and if that is not a metaphor for life in 21st century America, then I don’t know what else could be as what is conceivably more "American" than the game of baseball. This is the magic that Miller along with Zallian and Sorkin have accomplished with this film. It is a baseball film that really is not about baseball, therefore non- enthusiasts like myself will not only be able to follow the mechanics of the piece but we are also able to form our own impressions, and apply them as they relate to how we each view life in our modern society.
I am actually looking forward to one day seeing this film with my Father and hearing his take upon it, especially as he still wants to take me to a baseball game, hoping that I will finally see the beauty that he sees. My Father is brilliant, savvy, and certainly not naïve in any way in regards to his world view and how the world works. But, the joy I hear in his voice when he speaks of baseball is so untainted and so pure, it is almost childlike.
May the purity of that joy never be extinguished; much like the joy I feel when I see an excellent movie. Especially one as strong as “Moneyball.”
No comments:
Post a Comment