Moneyball (2011)

Every critic seemed confident that Bennett Miller's "Moneyball" would receive a Best Picture Oscar nomination, and indeed they were right. I assumed as much as well, but stop short of agreeing that the accolades are truly deserving. To me, "Moneyball" is a solid and enjoyable film that can now claim its Best Picture nominee status only because of the new rules allowing for a bloated list beyond what should probably be the five most worthy films each year. I enjoyed watching it, was impressed by how engaged I was in a film about a sport that I care little about, and then promptly forgot about it.

Based on Michael Lewis' supposedly un-filmable bestseller of the same name, "Moneyball" tells a true story from the recent past of Billy Beane, the general manager of the Oakland A's who, due to lack of finances, cannot compete in the major leagues with a team like the New York Yankees, the MLB's "best that money can buy."

In a serendipitous moment of opportunity, Beane (played by Brad Pitt), is open and observant enough while sitting in a player trading meeting to notice something in a punky, pudgy young Ivy league graduate named Peter Brand (Jonah Hill). His theory? Beane can also have the best that his money can buy. Even with a budget that is modest by comparison to other ball clubs, Brand needs little time to convince Beane that there is a mathematical formula that can be used to determine if a player is worth the investment.

As we now know, Beane nabbs Brand away from his low-level position with another team and promotes him, and before long, Brand becomes Beane's timid Yoda and Oakland turns around its win-loss record and barrels into the playoffs with nary a big-named player on its roster. It's a classic underdog story from the sports world built for the movie screen.

Without question, "Moneyball" is well-acted, and indeed, both Pitt and a surprisingly good Jonah Hill are both nominated for Oscars, though I would contend without a second thought that Pitt's truly great performance this year was not in this film but in "The Tree of Life." Personally, I could have done without the repeated image of Pitt's Beane throwing metal folding chairs around in impulsive fits of frat boy anger. But maybe that's Miller's fault and not Pitt's.

Miller, who worked with "Moneyball" co-star Philip Seymour Hoffman in "Capote" (a film I liked better than this one), gives us a few moments of lovely cinematography but also throws focus on some tired cliches. In addition to Beane's chair-throwing tantrums, for example, he dots the film with scenes of Beane as a divorced dad madly in love with his teenaged daughter. Each of these instances in the film felt forced. The only emotion meant for this story is the emotion that sports fans feel about their teams. The rest of this movie is, by design, entirely cerebral. Yet Miller feels the need to throw in a cheap attempt at tugging at our heart strings. They didn't work.

When I finished watching "Moneyball," I agreed with all I had heard from those who said things like: "This is a baseball movie for people who don't like baseball" and "This is a math movie for people who don't like math." Indeed, baseball is low on my list of interests and math is at the very bottom, so the fact that I was engaged at all certainly requires me to agree with these statements.

But is this the new "greatest baseball movie of all-time"? I'm not sure I think so. And I wouldn't call it one of the greatest movies of 2011 either. For me, it was merely a solid movie, and I'm left wondering why others see it as more than this. Are we all now delusionally worshiping at the altar of Aaron Sorkin, who co-wrote the script? Are we stunned by the muted and excellent dramatic work of the potty-humored actor Hill? Is this the great Pitt performance we've all been waiting for because nobody is willing to watch "The Tree of Life"? These are all valid questions, I think.

In the end, "Moneyball" is a great rental. It's a smart film, but delivers its intelligence with a side order of cliches. I enjoyed it while I watched it, but I don't find myself remembering much about it.

3.0 out of 4