Kritiken

“Borg vs. McEnroe” conveys every bead of sweat and every ounce of rising tension in that titanic showdown. Thanks to adroit performances from perfectly cast lead actors and seamless visual effects, movie audiences will believe that they’re watching the real thing, right down to the muffled scrape of tennis shoes on the grass of Wimbledon’s famed Centre Court... [The film] exemplifies its own kind of virtuosity: It’s eminently worthy of the athletic genius it both captures and celebrates.

“Borg vs. McEnroe” is an anecdotally gratifying, psychologically nuanced, and dramatically agile character study of Borg, but, despite its extended depictions of a celebrated match, it’s not a satisfying tennis movie at all.

The rising star vs. the old master narrative is also prone to becoming formulaic. So the genius of Ronnie Sandahl's script for tennis drama Borg vs McEnroe is the subtext that, rather than being polar opposites, Björn Borg and John McEnroe were near-identical, and recognized that in each other.

Though American sports dramas find it hard to avoid heartwarming elements, this is a decidedly more even-keeled film, its European nature allowing it to focus on the drama of character as well as what happened on the court.

These performers keep you mesmerized, making the most of what they’re given even when the film sinks into a swamp of whose-dick-is-bigger competitions and sports clichés about product endorsements.

Ultimately, the main hurdle (or net) not quite cleared by this film from Danish director Janus Metz is that it's difficult to translate Borg's inner turmoil and discomfort with his celebrity into a compelling movie.

]The film] feels unlike most sports films made under American auspices — mostly quiet, almost meditative. That’s a strength for "Borg vs. McEnroe," but it’s also a liability... ultimately, [the film is] hamstrung by its choice to focus largely on one side of the match — the less interesting one, in movie terms, anyhow.

The smoothly crafted, satisfyingly earnest Borg vs. McEnroe [does not venture] far from the standard sports biopic template... Nicely gussied-up with special effects and tennis-playing stand-ins intercut with actual footage, the finale is a riveting spectacle. The rest is biography, heavy on the flashbacks, of two radically different temperaments with more history in common than meets the eye.

Borg vs. McEnroe isn’t your usual phony recreation of one single and telling momentous sporting event. It’s far more interested in the psychology of these two rivals and polar opposites – in what made them tick long before they stepped onto the grass at Winbledon’s hallowed Centre Court.

Throughout the many games and sets of this most thrilling of matches, the filmmakers never once bother to show us, without cutting, a full volleyed point. The flow of the match gets butchered. If it weren’t for LaBeouf’s raw and antsy embodiment of McEnroe, I’d suggest just watching the real thing on YouTube.

You’re still always aware of the artifice, which is part of the fun. Nothing too grand or grave is at stake here. No special cultural or historical importance can be derived from the Borg-McEnroe battle, but sports don’t always carry that kind of significance. “Borg vs. McEnroe” is a modest, tactful movie about two guys who, at their peak, were neither.

This fabulous, moody film isn’t your typical jock flick where bitter rivals compete to a crowning, sweaty end. There isn’t a real victor in ”Borg Vs. McEnroe ” and the points don’t prove anything. It’s less a tennis movie than a meditation on the personal costs of chasing excellence.