Anyway, this isn't about my sense of self-entitlement. I'll touch on that again during my review. Our intern, Filosofer, shared some quick thoughts about Moneyball and really enjoyed it. I'll have a much more detailed review after I see it. Fair warning, I was pessimistic before Keith Law dismantled it.
Without further ado, here are Filosofer's thoughts on the film based on the book written by Billy Beane about how he saved Oakland from certain doom at the hands of space robots using only math...
When Moneyball hits theaters Sept. 23, you might want to check it out.
If you’re a fan of sabermetrics (and, since you’re reading this blog…), how can you not love a movie about a book which focused on sabermetrics?
But the film doesn’t alienate non-sabermetricians. The statistics used in the game are actually fairly minimal. The ideas are there, but it’s essentially watered down to ‘walks are good.’ There’s a decent balance, though.
There was surprisingly little baseball shown in the film, but a lot of action within the front office that kept it interesting.
It would have been nice to keep a tally of how many chairs were harmed in the making of this film, though.
For as tense as some of the scenes can get, there were always comedic elements thrown in, and there was plenty of laughter throughout the two hours.
Fans of Aaron Sorkin’s Sports Night will almost certainly enjoy Moneyball, even though it’s not just Sorkin’s screenplay. There are definitely some similarities between the two, but the dialogue is noticeably different.
Sports Night’s dialogue was typically quick, witty and cyclical. Moneyball’s tends to be more direct. Although the first time Beane tries to get his scouts on board with sabermetrics is very Sports Night-esque.
Also, isn’t it ironic that Steven Soderbergh got fired for wanting to use unorthodox methods of filming for a movie about using unorthodox methods?
Thanks, bud. Man, how before its time was Sport's Night? Loved that show. Stay tuned for more Moneyball madness.