Moneyball Should be a Major Player Come OSCAR Time

REVIEW: EP spends the night at the movies with our thoughts on Moneyball, the film adaption of Michael Lewis' best-selling book. By Nick Roertgen


In a league where the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees regularly field teams with $100+ million a year payrolls, how do you put together a competitive team with a payroll a third that amount? How do you create a competitive team with the lowest spending money in baseball at $37 million? These questions could have been the source material for a dull documentary or ESPN 30 for 30 film that only interests the regular baseball fan or stat geek. Instead, these questions are the core of an brilliant, though not entirely accurate, film that delivers a great deal of laughs, heart and spirit and can be enjoyed by any audience, no matter what your baseball knowledge.   



Moneyball begins with the Oakland Athletics in the 2001 American League Division Series against the Yankees. Already up two games to none, the A's blow the lead in the series and end up losing in five. During the offseason, the A’s suffer even bigger blows as they lose three of their best players–Johnny Damon, Jason Giambi, and Jason Isringhausen–to teams with much deeper wallets. The A’s have no more money to spend and the general manager Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) realizes that trying to outbid the Yankees and Red Sox will never work. Instead, he has to outsmart them. To put together a competitive team on a tight budget, Beane has to defy everything everyone knows about baseball.  


On a factual note, I have to admit that turning Scott Hatteberg into a first baseman is probably not what won the A’s 103 games in 2002-03. Moneyball makes a big deal about not being able to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox, but statistically speaking, this team had one of the best pitching staffs in all of baseball with Tim Hudson, Barry Zito and Mark Mulder. Each pitcher threw over 200 innings with ERA's under 3.50 during an era where batters were tearing up baseballs. They also had Miguel Tejada, who hit 34 HR, 131 RBI’s and won the MVP, in the field as well as Gold Glove-winning third baseman Eric Chavez, who had 34 hr 109 RBI that year. Moneyball tries to claim that David Justice is their only star, but this is definitely not true. But, this is why they put up the disclaimer in the beginning of the movie saying “based on a true story,” because Hollywood has to tweak the story a little for a more dramatic effect.  


Entertainment Value: Moneyball was made deliberately to be entertaining on many levels and to all audiences. It can be watched purely as a unique report of modern baseball history and how player statistics have become one of the most influential aspects in contemporary baseball. For a more sentimental audience, Moneyball follows the voyage of a man forced to accept change because of countless disappointment throughout his life, ranging from his overhyped but unremarkable career as a professional player and his failings as a small-time scout to getting divorced to becoming a washed-up general manager. Moneyball follows a man who decides its time to take a huge risk and turn his failed life into something special. Though the film lacks action, it is entertaining from start to finish.


Acting: The role of Billy Beane, played by Brad Pitt, is a demanding one with a lot of dialogue, heated arguments, and fits of physical rage.  But, it is the silent story telling, the emotional turbulence, the change-of-heart moments, the nervousness and failures, and so on that are the hardest to portray on screen. But Pitt does a phenomenal job doing so. Not only does he bring you along on his emotional journey, but he makes you laugh quite a lot as well. This is easily one of Pitt’s best performances and should get him the OSCAR nomination nod.  

Pitt’s supporting cast of Jonah Hill (left), Phillip Seymour-Hoffman, and the ensemble of ball players and colleagues, help create what seems to be a realistic world of the Oakland Athletics. Hill and Hoffman especially play perfect compliments to Pitt's fluctuating personalities. Hill is quiet, timid, and very smart. Hoffman is cold, sarcastic, and stubborn. Pitt plays off of both personalities to create remarkable chemistry in each scene they are in together. 


Hill's performance is phenomenal. His depiction of Peter Brand, a Yale economics major and computer nerd, is beyond believable. His chemistry with Pitt helps create much of the humor and emotion that this film brings. Hill should definitely be nominated for an OSCARS in the category for best supporting actor.  


Production Value: The dialogue from the script comprised by the brilliant Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network–“It’s raining outside”) is amazing. Sorkin really has developed a unique talent for writing realistic dialogue. The story itself takes us through a journey about more than just baseball. From the first shot of Pitt sitting alone fighting his urge to listen to the baseball game to his interactions with his daughter, ex-wife, players and colleagues to him doing donuts in the parking lot, every shot and bit of story brings his character to life a little more. Sorkin wrote every character perfectly, allowing for impressive development from so many different characters.  


The editing is also done extremely well with amazing use of sound verses no sound. Some of the best parts of the movie are those where there is a visual on screen with no audio, allowing the audience to really take in the importance of the moment.


The combination of directing and cinematography is excellent as they produce some beautiful shots and capture the emotions of the characters with great precision. Director Bennett Miller really shows us that a sports movie doesn’t need dramatic home runs, stolen bases, or grand slams to be effective. Instead, we feel these exciting moments with a clinched fist from Hill or a solitary hand pump celebration from Pitt. Don’t expect any electrifying music or epic speeches. Instead, you’ll feel the excitement from the simple notion that one phone call can change everything. 


OVERALL: Moneyball is definitely one of the best films of 2011. At its core it is a baseball-centered docudrama, but it also brings us on an extraordinary and fresh reenactment of a truly unique underdog story.  Moneyball can and will be enjoyed by all different types of audiences and has a great chance at being nominated for an OSCAR for best picture.