Yeah, the critical consensus appears to be that Moneyball is the mainstream hollywood film of the year…..
^ Not sure that’s much of a claim so far this year.
Saw Moneyball tonight. I must admit, it was better than I thought Bennett Miller was capable of. Now I’m not really sure Soderbergh could’ve done any better given the material.
This is definitely an Erin Brockavich/The Blind Side kind of role for Pitt – he’s definitely not straining here but I’m sure he’ll get an Oscar nod for this. The dialogue is pure Sorkin and Pfister makes it look as good as it possibly can – it’s not a movie I’d rewatch anytime soon but for pure entertainment, I was into it.
To me Moneyball screams ‘This year’s Social Network’. A decent film that’s overrated and everybody assumes will win Best Picture, that’s very talky and about a current socio-political issue.
Edit: When I wrote that I didn’t even know Sorkin wrote it. The ads just scream that Sorkin style. I guess I’ll probably see it.
“When I wrote that I didn’t even know Sorkin wrote it. The ads just scream that Sorkin style. I guess I’ll probably see it.”
Sorkin really just wrote a draft of the screenplay between Stan Chervin’s original and Steven Zaillian’s subsequent rewrite. There’s a certain broad thematic similarity to The Social Network, but the execution—both in terms of directing and acting—couldn’t be more different.
I was thinking in terms of tone.
Yeah, I think the trailer probably exaggerates the Sorkinesque qualities a bit. Generally speaking it’s a lot less dense than the style of dialogue I associates with Sorkin (and for this particular film that’s a good thing).
@Jirin – I wasn’t a big fan of the Social Network, but Moneyball felt like another version of the same scenario. A systemic overturn caused by one actor with a personal reason for breaking a cycle. This is an oversimplification of what really happened in MLB. I found the pacing of the film was much slower, like a baseball game, than Social Network, but the themes were close.
“To me Moneyball screams ‘This year’s Social Network’. A decent film that’s overrated and everybody assumes will win Best Picture”
Except for some of the snappy Sorkin dialogue, Moneyball is nothing like The Social Network. If you want to compare it to anything, I’d compare it to The Blind Side or Brockavich (although Moneyball is better). I don’t know anyone who assumes this will win best picture. It might be nominated but even that’s a stretch. I think if it gets any nods, it will be for Pitt, since the Academy likes these types of generic performances.
Regarding the writing, it’s definitely more schmaltzy Zaillian than cynical Sorkin, at least in terms of the plot. Where Sorkin comes in, and it’s very obvious, is in the humor and zippy dialogue between characters (the table discussion with the scouts the most obvious).
Where Sorkin comes in, and it’s very obvious, is in the humor and zippy dialogue between characters (the table discussion with the scouts the most obvious).
That appeals to me. I forgot Sorkin wrote this. I’m a little more interested in seeing this now.
You think Moneyball’s not the current frontrunner for best picture? It’s got an 87 on metacritic, it’s on that level of ‘Literate mainstream’ that the academy goes for, it’s got Brad Pitt, it’s got contemporary topicality and socially analyzes saber metrics, and it’s something palatable to the entire mainstream-art spectrum.
Why is Steven Zaillian considered a good screenwriter? I don’t understand….. He’s done mostly crappy adaptations, no?
Frontrunner? Definitely not. If we’re talking Sony movies, The Ides of March is their big Oscar contender (I’m still not convinced Dragon Tattoo is Academy material). Especially given the new voting rules for Best Picture, it would not surprise me if Moneyball doesn’t even get nominated.