Music, Style & Culture
| Print : Web : Radio : Mobile

Moneyball

Reviews

All the makings of a juicy sports drama, so why does Moneyball feel so flat?

Posted 30th November 2011, 9:55am in Film, by Becky Reed


Released in cinemas 25th November 2011.

An underdog sports drama from the PoV of the boardroom, with a script co-written by Aaron Sorkin - expectations are high for a sharp, wordy drama with some good old-fashioned melodrama in the world of baseball.

Capote director Bennett Miller tells of the Oakland Athletics' controversial adoption of the sabermetrics method of selecting players, focusing on general manager Billy Beane. Brad Pitt gives one of his increasingly mature performances as the failed former baseball star, whose confident and stubborn streak draws him to Yale economics graduate Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) and his suggestion that they assemble a team based on statistics rather than star players.

As the unlikely team of transferred misfits and awkward pitchers come together, sabermetrics makes its mark despite the reluctance of the men behind the scenes, including Philip Seymour Hoffman's grouchy coach. All the makings of a juicy drama then, so why does Moneyball feel so flat?

Its biggest problem is the lack of focus. The named baseball players are introduced, but never really explored. The pivotal role of Peter is almost a background figure content to bounce off Billy, with Hill's thoughtful, underplayed enthusiasm given little to work with. There's barely a spark between the two stars, which doesn't help. The film revolves around Billy, with time devoted to repetitive flashbacks of his career and his personal decisions. His personal life (featuring Robin Wright turning up to deliver literally one line) takes up a huge chunk of the two hour, 13 minute run-time, with his cutesy father-daughter relationship bonding incongruous to the team-building that should've been shown between the newly assembled players.

A strict biopic of Billy Beane would've been a more honest movie, as Moneyball fails to deliver anything near fascinating or informative. It feels directionless, and it's surprising to learn Christopher Nolan's Oscar-winning regular cinematographer Wally Pfister is behind the lacklustre photography. Following the suspenseful pay-off for the Oakland A's new technique (they have a staggeringly successful run of wins, which is nicely handled), it begins a prolonged ending that would rival Return of the King. It's ironically when the film makes its point that this is the Billy Beane story, after two whole hours teasing with forced snappy dialogue between executives that has little of the cadence needed to be satisfying.

Rating: 5/10

Comments