Pitt attempts a home run
In Moneyball, Billy Beane (played by the emphatic Brad Pitt who is in need of an Oscar win) doesn’t make the Oakland Athletics, a World Series winner; he makes it a better team by bringing in valuable players who fit into the budget. As the opening text states, this film is all about managing a team which is worth around $40 million. Directed by Bennett Miller (Capote), Moneyball hails from the odd mix of screenwriters Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin, who infuse a handful of characters and try to bring out a dramatic influence on the viewers.
If you were expecting Moneyball to be 2011’s Social Network, you’ll be disappointed. In that perspective, Moneyball is no Remember The Titans either. The film gloats on the fact that there are winning teams that can also be cheaper. As Beane states “There are rich teams and there are poor teams, then there’s fifty-feet of crap, and then there’s us.”
The film introduces us to Peter Brand, an imaginary character created on the lines of Paul DePodesta. Played by Jonah Hill, Brand is Sorkin’s character. Just like Mark Zuckerberg in Social Network, Peter Brand is your fast-talking analyst who brings along tacky one-liners that help if you’re looking for witty humor. After all, witty humor is all you can expect in a film written by Sorkin. Remember the Tom Cruise character’s humorous breaks in A Few Good Men?
Sorkin has added a few extra scenes to show Beane’s relationship with his ex-wife and daughter, who are introduced as the film’s dramatic structure. However, he doesn’t let them get involved in the storyline. He plays them like commercial breaks, not allowing the viewers to invest any interest in them.
Philip Seymour Hoffman plays Coach Art Howe, who becomes Beane’s secondary antagonist. Hoffman plays his role aberrantly and devoid of clichés that Hollywood’s sports coaches usually have. Chris Pratt’s Scott Hatteberg is a lively portrayal of a baseball player who desperately sought for a second chance.
While the film doesn’t deem Beane and Brand as winners, it is revealed that their strategy helped Boston Red Sox win the 2004 World Series. But, isn’t that what the film is about? A winning strategy and not the men who made it happen?