‘Moneyball’ Review

Published 4 years ago by

Moneyball Review Brad Pitt Moneyball Review

Screen Rant’s Ben Kendrick reviews Moneyball

Moviegoers can be pretty skeptical of sports films – especially films about a real-life team’s championship bid. Often, these movies follow a standard, and predictable, format that fails to capitalize on behind-the-scenes drama without resorting to cringe-inducing melodrama.

However, Moneyball isn’t just another Hollywood sports story adaptation – especially considering Academy Award winner Aaron Sorkin rewrote the film’s script followed by Steven Zaillian (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo). Moneyball‘s director  Bennett Miller  is no slouch either – responsible for helming the critically acclaimed, true-life-story to film, Capote. Interest in Moneyball, among non-sports types, was furthered by the casting of Brad Pitt (who continues to rack up one impressive dramatic role after another) and interestingly, Jonah Hill – who aside from a few turns in low-profile indie films, has mostly played to type since Superbad put him on the map. Does Moneyball, which enjoys a host of household names, successfully convey the excitement of the no-name Oakland Athletics’ 2002 team?

Fortunately, the answer is yes – for the most part. While Moneyball isn’t the grand slam home run that some movie (and sports) buffs might have been hoping for, the film is at least a quick mid-field grounder that gets the job done with plenty of excitement. The momentum of the film is no doubt buoyed by the source material, “Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game” by Michael Lewis – which featured a lengthy breakdown of the Oakland A’s unorthodox, and roller-coaster ride, 2002 season. While the film doesn’t get too bogged down in the mathematics, the true story does offer plenty of truly intriguing behind-the-scenes character moments as well as on-the-field action.

Moneyball Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill Moneyball Review

Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill in 'Moneyball'

Moneyball centers around Oakland A’s general manager, Billy Beane (Brad Pitt), a former ball player turned ball club honcho that, following a disappointing title run in 2001, loses several of his key players to teams that can shower money on them. In order to have a chance at the playoffs, Beane must rebuild his team using 1/3 of the financial resources that the championship Yankees were working with at the time. When Beane’s scouts offer up the same tired ideas, the GM turns to bean counter Peter Brand (Jonah Hill), who name is Paul DePodesta in real life, to help him assemble an “island of misfit toys” – players that other teams would reject (due to age, attitude, or play style) but consistently get on base. As Beane and Brand attempt to implement their new approach, tensions rise between scouts, players, and coaches, leading the pair to engage in a drastic series of events – in an attempt to forever change the game.

As mentioned, unlike the 2002 A’s team, Moneyball has a plethora of big-names (in this case actors and filmmakers) backing the project – and, for the most, it shows on screen. The cinematography is sharp, taking full advantage of the tight behind-the-scene hallways of  (at the time) Network Associates Coliseum – as well as the expansive sprawl of the ball field. Unlike other true-life sport movies, the film isn’t overly stylized (or too nostalgic) but still manages to offer some exciting and epic moments by juxtaposing the larger-than-life personalities with the realities of the story’s context – meaning, while Billy Beane may have changed baseball to a degree, he doesn’t sit in a corner office doling out orders. Moneyball is, at least in its attempts, an honest film and the audience has unobstructed access to Beane’s journey, warts and all.

While Brad Pitt is rarely considered just a pretty face anymore, after taking on a decade’s worth of diverse and challenging roles, there’s no doubt he once again delivers as Beane – bringing a down-to-earth look at the evolution of not just the Moneyball strategy but Beane’s approach as general manager. Moneyball relies heavily on Pitt’s ability to bring subtle humor to the real-life proceedings – and simultaneously, delivering believable emotional complexity in some especially tough scenes. The supporting bench definitely helps Pitt (and the overarching proceedings) with Philip Seymour Hoffman (as field Manager, Art Howe) and Brent Jennings (playing A’s coach, Ron Washington) offering some especially entertaining counter-points to Beane’s portrayal.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman Moneyball Moneyball Review

Phillip Seymour Hoffman as Art Howe in 'Moneyball'

Plenty of suspicious baseball fans, as well as raunchy-comedy faithful, have their eye on Jonah Hill’s performance as Peter Brand – as a reason to either see or pan Moneyball. It’s true that Brand is the comedy actor’s most high-profile dramatic role to date but there’s little to say about it either way. Hill is competent in the role and certainly doesn’t detract from the proceedings – but isn’t much of a standout either. Portrayed by Hill, Brand is mostly a subdued version of many of his prior characters – awkward, unassuming, and unsure of himself but likable nonetheless. The interplay between Beane and Brand accounts for some of the more “humorous” moments in the film, but each and every one of these scenes relies on the subtlety of the performances – a mark that can, once in awhile, escape Hill.

The overarching story captured in the film is definitely intriguing and moment to moment offers plenty of entertainment value – even for non-baseball fans. That said, with the exception of Beane, the story almost entirely pushes side characters out of the picture in the closing act – and the narrative becomes much more about Beane and how he “changed baseball” than about his (on and off the field) team. Peter Brand and Art Howe get especially short-shrift – acting more as moons circling planet Beane than actual people with lives, or meaning, outside of their relationship to the Moneyball philosophy. It’s not that these guys needed a lot of closure but it’s unfortunate that the film isn’t nearly as good at handling people as it is delivering exposition about the sabermetric approach to baseball scouting.

Despite some uneven storytelling priorities, Moneyball is definitely an enjoyable film – with some truly great performances, exciting moments, and creative cinematography. Too bad it only reinforces Hollywood’s reliance on big name talent to sell movies (I’m still waiting for Hollywood’s version of Peter Brand, so that Michael Lewis can write Moneyfilm).

If you’re still on the fence about Moneyball, check out the trailer below:

[poll id=”192″]

Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick – and let us know what you thought of the film below:

Moneyball is now in theaters.

Our Rating:

4 out of 5

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. Great to hear you liked it! I’ve been really excited to see a new baseball film that actually looks good, I had my doubts about Moneyball, but the cast looks great, and seeing good reviews like this one make me even more excited to see it!

  2. Nice review, Ben. Other review writers on this site could learn something by following this example. You actually discuss the film’s story, its elements, the characters, and the actors portrayal of them rather than your opinions of how the film should or should not have been, or trying to place a label on what the film was or should have been. It’s pretty refreshing to see that you didn’t jump on the Brad Pitt love wagon either, and that you didn’t just assume the movie would be good because of a cast and writers that the public expects to be good. Good job!

    • Thanks Nick. I’m glad the review was helpful. We definitely all have our different styles/approaches to reviews – hopefully there’s a little something for everyone.

  3. @Nick

    Yeah… the other pesky reviewers on this site never do anything like that in their reviews. D-bags.

    • Now now, Kofi, don’t be too hard on yourself.

  4. great baseball movie from a unique angle. I knew from the start however, that it was gonna be a reflection on Billy Beanes failed player career. I liked the way the story followed the traditional theory of scouting in spite of the successes that developed until a triumphant “win at the end”. great job by Pitt, Hill, and Hoffman.

  5. I loved combination of Jonah and Brad together. They have this very different vibe in themselves separately, but when they are together there is a chemistry that I haven’t seen before. I hope they do another movie together.