Tag Archives: film review

Top Best and Worst Films of 2011

Posted on by

We all had our fair share on films that made us smile and made us frown. To celebrate my recent Writer of the Year award and a step to a new year, I will reveal my list of best of worst films of 2011. I, however, did not get the luxury to see some of the films I would have liked to have seen (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Artist, Melancholia etc.) and this will be a mix of UK and North American release dates.

*BEST*

1) Drive – Nicolas Winding-Refn crafts an artistically pulpy film noir that delivers heart-stopping tension but also brings some humanity to the story. Ryan Gosling is compelling as the nameless driver but it is Albert Brooks that steals the spot-light as the menacing Bernie Ross. The car chases (especially the pre-credits sequence) are brilliantly shot and the editing is fluid. The cinematography brings the darkness to the Los Angeles glamour that we all have been acquainted to from many films set in the City of Angels.

2) The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo – The thought on making an English version of the novel when there’s already a Swedish TV/Movie made two years ago made us all cry in outrage. Then David Fincher came along and proved the nay-sayers wrong! Even if you’ve already read the novel or seen the 2009 foreign film, Fincher still delivers a dark and intense thriller. Rooney Mara makes a career-making turn as Lisbeth Salander and I honestly prefer her take on the character than Noomi Rapace’s (not saying Rapace’s was bad, just prefered Mara’s a bit more)

3) Black Swan – It is essentially Darren Aronofsky’s Swan Lake, though it’s about a ballerina (Natalie Portman) who gets chosen to play the lead of the new version of Swan Lake. The sense of paranoia from the cinematography, visual effects and even from Portman’s Oscar-winning performance is executed brilliantly. You really feel you are descending into madness, blurring the fine line between reality and fantasy. It’s also a body horror film, as Portman’s character slowly becomes the Black Swan. It was seriously a dark start for 2011 but it got me hooked till its perfect finale.

4) War Horse – Spielberg never ceases to amaze with his filmmaking skills (okay, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull aside). The trailer for this film came off (for me anyways) as a parody, so it’s incredible that a filmmaker like Spielberg was able to make that work! The ensemble British cast is astounding, from the likes of David Thewlis, Benedict Cumberbatch, Tom Hiddleston, Emily Watson, Paul Mullan and Liam Cunningham. The score by John Williams is one of the best he’s done since Munich and the cinematography by Janusz Kaminski (Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan) is breathtaking.

5) The Tree of Life – The biggest Marmite movie you’ll come across; you’ll either love it or you hate it! I, however, loved it and found it incredibly intriguing and ambitious. The film’s story is driven thematically and visually, being an expressionistic piece of work. Brad Pitt delivers one of his best performances in his career (along with Moneyball and The Assassination of Jesse James). A personal film that asks universal questions and it is such a beautiful and majestic piece of filmmaking.

*Honourable mention; Hugo*

*WORST*

1) Transformers: Dark of the Moon – Second highest grossing film of 2011 (behind Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2) but it comes up to my list as the most unbearable film to watch of 2011. The human characters are ungodly annoying, Shia LaBeouf has nothing we could relate to and constantly screams more in this film than the two previous films combined! The new girl in the block, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, is completely emotionless and nothing more to show than her looks. The action sequences are better executed this time around but the Transformers gets shoved aside in favour for the human characters. The film is also way too long, the rest of the film is just filled with filler and characters that don’t need to be in the film (i.e. Sam’s parents). Michael Bay said he didn’t care for Transformers before he made the first film and it still shows he’s not suited for this film.

2) Sucker Punch – This is an unfortunate case where you give too much money and creative freedom to a film director that’s all about style and no substance. The problem is, it tries to bring a message and empower women but there’s nothing to it to get and the women are no way represented in a positive note by wearing corsets and fish nets. The film is completely incoherent (both in story and style), the action sequences have no purpose but to be there and non of our heroines have any characteristics to make them any different from another. It is a complete mess of a film and hopefully Man of Steel will bring Snyder’s reputation back.

3) Green Lantern – Talk about being hugely disappointing. The marketing for this film was far superior than the final product (I have seen an Extended Cut version was released but heard it barely made any improvements). This really could’ve set a new movie franchise for Warner Bros./DC Comics; you had a director that’s competent in action and drama (both GoldenEye and Casino Royale are proof of that) and Ryan Reynolds being the likable cocky hero. This could’ve been as exciting and epic like Star Wars but the script and creative decisions got lost in the abyss. The film looks and feels so lifeless and artificial, you cannot help but feel underwhelmed this could’ve been a great film if more time and effort was put into it. The ending teased with a sequel baiting scene but this bombed at the box-office (even though Warner Bros. were convinced it would be a success that they green-lit a sequel. . . . Beware Green Lantern’s light? I think he should beware of our expectations).

*Dishonourable mention; Cowboys & Aliens*

*BEST BLOCKBUSTER*

X-Men: First Class – The X-Men franchise nearly had the last nail to its coffin, after the dull X-Men: The Last Stand and the terrible X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Matthew Vaughn, after his huge success with Kick-Ass, comes along and tells the story of the complicated friendship between Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender) and the origins of X-Men. The film is the best of the series, creating a huge sense of fun but not having the spectacle get in the way of character development (especially between the two leads). Both McAvoy and Fassbender are incredibly engaging from the start, though the project started on being another origin story but solely about Lensherr’s past and eventually becoming Magneto. Although the thing that brings the film down is January Jones as Emma Frost (strong contender for Razzie nomination) but that didn’t stop me from enjoying the hell out of this film.

*BEST TRAILER*

There was some huge decision making for which trailer would win this particular award, so it wasn’t easy to choose from previews of what is about to come in 2012. As much as the latest trailers for The Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey were hugely exciting but I would go for Ridley Scott’s, Prometheus. All to do with Ridley Scott returning to the genre that got him on the Hollywood map (Alien and Blade Runner) and the fact it looks spectacular. Being an Alien prequel but not featuring any xenomorphs that we all know an love. Though it does show snippets of the origins of the derelict ship featured in the first film (and second film if you watch Special Edition version of Aliens). Also the cast looks fantastic, ranging from Noomi Rapace, Charlize Theron, Michael Fassbender, Guy Pearce and Idris Elba. The trailer even pays homage to the trailer of Alien (the title slowly fading in and the eerie sound effect that rings through-out the trailer).

Top Five Films Of 2011

Posted on by

Well okay, maybe that title is somewhat inaccurate. These are my top five films of the year; the ones that moved me, thrilled me, chilled me and left me bowled over by the endless power of the movies. Obviously I didn’t get a chance to see everything that came out though I like to think I gave as much effort as I could to see stuff from across the spectrum of releases. I don’t expect everyone to agree with my choices; one of them I know has incensed arguably more people than it has awed. But like I say it is my humble opinion. Agree or disagree to your content…

1) THE TREE OF LIFE

Terrance Malick’s fifth and most ambitious feature to date, feels like something that we may never see again; a $30 million mainstream film that unashamedly confronts the meaning of life, the cruelty of death, the absence of faith and belief in the divine. Audiences today are so used to having narrative drip thread to them that the astonishingly loose and flowing construction of The Tree Of Life led to outright hostility from many critics and audience members. Despite my initial bewilderment at it through, it stayed with me through the months and on repeat viewings has grown into a profound and deeply moving work. Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain are extraordinary as a married couple bestowing their differing views on life to their children. What follows is overwhelming vision of the minutia of family life compared with nothing less than the birth of life itself. For me The Tree Of Life does what cinema should do; it takes the most intimate, recognisable aspects we understand and contrasts them against something unfeasibly epic, powerful and ultimately incredibly moving.

2) DRIVE

Roaring out of Cannes like the greatest Michael Mann film that Michael Mann never made, Nicolas Winding Refn’s sleek, blood splattered romantic fairytale captured the hearts of minds of critic and audiences alike. Ryan Gosling truly cements his star status with a near mute role as a stunt driver by day and getaway driver by night who goes up against the LA underworld (personified by a spectacular and unexpected villainous turn by Albert Brooks) when he falls for troubled Carey Mulligan. The two worlds of the story smack head into each other in a spectacular climactic scene in an elevator. The scenes of extreme violence could have been too alienating yet Refn directs with such flair and panache that nearly every scene makes you hairs stand on end. Throw in the best soundtrack of the year hands down and you have an instant cult classic. I walked out of it like i was walking on air.

3) MELANCHOLIA

It could have been overshadowed by director Lars Von Trier’s poor taste in humour at this year’s Cannes Film Festival but thankfully his intimate apocalyptic drama is strong enough to stand on its own feet as an astonishing singular vision of brilliance. Kirsten Dunst and Charlotte Gainsbourg are terrific as two frigid sisters both thrown together by a disastrous wedding and then the arrival of a rogue planet on a collision course with Earth. Filmed in a woozy, dream like palette with very deliberate framing and hauntingly beautiful compositions it takes the difficult subject of depression and manages extraordinarily to turn into a transcendent and oddly uplifting experience.

4) WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN

Arguably the boldest novel adaptation of the year, British director Lynne Ramsey makes a stunning return to screens with a disorientating and devastating tale of a women living in the shadow of her monstrous son and terrible crime he has committed. Tilda Swinton is reliably brilliant conveying both the mother’s dawning horror at steadily disturbing events and the guilt that she feels for not showing the love she should have for the child. It’s a role that most actresses would have balked at yet Swinton plays it with such mesmerising confidence. As good as she is though the film arguably belongs to Ezra Miller as the teenage Kevin who beneath a seemingly innocent, sweet veneer chills to the very bone. Hopefully we won’t have to wait so long for Ramsey to release her next work.

5) CAVE OF FORGOTTEN DREAMS

Having dragged a steamer over a mountain, travelled to the furthest reaches of the Amazon and Antarctica acclaimed German filmmaker Werner Herzog goes into the depths of the Chauvet Cave in southern France to document not only it’s astounding geographical presence but also the oldest cave paintings known to man, perhaps they are the beginning of art itself. Shown in 3D at cinemas, I caught up with the film in 2D and was still floored by the beauty and skill with which Herzog examines these paintings as well as the brilliantly dry wit in his unmistakeable Bavarian drawl as he spends time with the familial team of scientists living in the shadow of the caves and simple yet deeply profound musings on the passing of time and the origins of these extraordinary drawings. When it comes to the vision of nature itself, Herzog is rarely topped.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey trailer

Posted on by

It has been eight years since we saw the end of Frodo’s journey to destroy the one ring in Mordor and bringing Sauron’s reign in Middle-Earth to an close. Now Peter Jackson is back and this time, telling a story from a different Baggins; Bilbo Baggins (played by Martin Freeman).

This honestly came as a surprise, as I thought to believe they were still shooting and would be too busy to release a trailer not for another month! Maybe Peter Jackson decided to release his Christmas present to audiences around the world. If that’s the case, then I say “thank you, Mr. Jackson!”

It starts off Bilbo (played by Ian Holm, returning as old version of our protagonist), telling Frodo that he hasn’t exactly told the whole story. As traditional hobbit behavior, Bilbo has no interest in having adventures but unfortunately has no choice when Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellan once again back for the prequel) appears. Though he doesn’t come alone, he introduces the thirteen dwarves; (deep breath!) Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Dwalin, Balin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Dori, Nori, Ori, and Thorin Oakenshield. You’ll notice that Balin was mentioned in The Fellowship of the Ring in the mines of Moria, whose dead carcass was on top of a tomb. Also Gloin was mentioned in the same film, he’s father of Gimli (played by John Ryhs-Davies).

Then the dwarves begin to sing a song and really sets the tone that Jackson knows best when bringing drama. We get glimpses of Gandalf traveling to various ruins, Bilbo first seeing the shards of Narsil (the sword Isildur used to defeat Sauron and Aragorn would eventually wield in The Return of the King) and Cate Blanchett returns as Galadriel. Then Howard Shore’s majestic score kicks in but the theme is entirely new and all the better for it! Finally we see Jackson continue his action chomps with a few fight sequences with the famous scene between the dwarves and trolls.

The ending is very fitting and makes links to The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Bilbo asking “can you promise I will come back?” and which Gandalf responds quite bluntly but honestly “no and if you do, you will not be the same!” Finally we see Andy Serkis as Gollum in the shadows, crawling sinisterly above our hero.

The movie is a complete reminder on how much The Lord of the Rings has played a huge part in our culture and the way the film industry have viewed on fantasy films (look at Harry Potter series and tell me it doesn’t have some LOTR influence)

Unfortunately, we all will have to wait till December 14th, 2012 to get our tickets back to the world of Tolkien.

Andrew Tiernan {Frost Interviews}

Posted on by

I recently had the pleasure of working with one of Britain most hard working and talented actors, Andrew Tiernan, on Jason Croot’s new film Le Fear, Le Sequel. He was kind enough to give Frost an interview, and it’s a stunner.

You are in “Prisoners Wives” the new BBC Drama, what was it like working on that?

All credit to the Production as they took a risk with me, as usually I’m the Bad guy, so this time I’m on the other side of the law playing DS Hunter who is investigating the murder that Gemma’s (Emma Rigby) husband Steve (Jonas Armstrong) has been accused of. The Directors and Producers wanted an edge to this guy and they knew I could bring that to the role, which was great for me. I had to get my head into Cop mode, as I haven’t done that for a very long time, in fact since “Prime Suspect” when I was a young copper with Helen Mirren and Tom Bell. Hopefully I’ve done a good job. But that was easy as Julie Geary’s writing is fantastic.

You played Ephialtes, in Zack Snyder’s “300”, how did you manage to put in such a good performance under all of that prosthetic?

It’s great because you don’t get recognized. I have always tried to transform myself for each role. The prosthetics was like a mask that I could manipulate with my facial muscles, but I had to exaggerate my expressions to move the inch thick prosthetic. I enjoy mask work, so that wasn’t the hardest thing for me to do. When you’re trying to transform yourself without the use of prosthetics, that is the challenge. I’ve fluctuated my weight and appearance over the years to fit the roles, I was influenced by Robert De Niro when he put a ton of weight on for “Raging Bull,” but it’s quite a dangerous thing to do and not everyone in the business appreciates it, some have thought that I’ve just let myself go, so I doubt I’ll be putting on the pounds again anytime soon, unless it is under prosthetics.

You are a successful Actor, but still do your own projects, why?

It’s all about the work. It’s what I’ve always wanted to do. I wanted to have some kind of control over my work at some point. What people forget is that it’s the Writer and Producers who are in control we can only perform what is written on the page. And when we’re not doing those jobs, we’re waiting around for work, it can send most Actors insane, so I try to keep myself busy between jobs.

Tell us about the short film you’ve recently directed; “Flush”:

“Flush” came about after the writer; Kevin O’Donohoe, told me about an experience he had with some Estate Agents. One of the estate agents asked to use the toilet in his flat and was in there for an unexpectedly long time and managed to stink the place out. He thought that the guy had done it deliberately, so he decided to get his own back and came up with this very funny little script. We made it Independently, I got Shona McWilliams and Simon Balfour in to help me produce it. We’ve just finished Post-Production and we’ve entered it into some film festivals, we’re very excited about it. We’re planning to do some Feature Films later in the year with the same Production Team and a new script by Kevin called “UK18” a Political Drama set in the near future.

How did you get started as an actor?

I was into films from an early age and would visit the local cinema on my own, The Grove. I’d watch all the Ray Harryhausen adventures and then I managed to see some of Peter Bogdanovich’s films, such as “Paper Moon” and “What’s up Doc?”. So I suppose the bug started there, and eventually I decided it was something I wanted to do as a Career. I started working at the Midlands Art Centre after joining the Youth Theatre there, then ended up at the Drama Centre London.

Who/what is your inspirations?

If you’d asked me a few years ago, I would have said De Niro and Scorsese, but I think really it is people like Powell and Pressburger, Nicholas Roeg, Lindsay Anderson and Ken Russell who inspire me, and always have. I also have an admiration for Polanski’s films, one of the very first films I remember seeing was “Repulsion” when it was screened on television and it freaked me right out.

What is your favourite film?

At the moment, I would have to say it’s Ken Russell’s “The Boy Friend”. It was such a shock when he passed away, but I had managed to finally get the film on DVD the week before his passing. And it’s just as wonderfully spectacular as when I first watched it, what a genius. But there are so many films that I love, that I have a top 40 in my head every week. Though there are certain ones that always top the list and not necessarily everyone’s favourites.

How has the industry changed for Actors?

Since I joined the industry rather a lot has changed. When I first started there was a lot more opportunities and a lot more Drama was made for TV. But also there was a lot more Theatre Companies, we thought cuts were bad back then, but now it’s unbelievable. But on a positive note, technology has improved such that Artists can develop and produce their own independent work a lot easier than back then. And it’s possible for that work to be seen in different markets.

What are your opinions on reality TV?

Unfortunately, I think that it’s had a knock on effect in our industry and not just the fact that there’s not enough Drama being produced, but reality TV is very cheap for the Networks to produce and people seem to want to watch it. It’s a very sad time, as I think that when we look back at this period, we will think, where were the great British TV Drama Writers that we used to produce like Alan Bleasdale, Dennis Potter or Peter McDougall? The Networks should really pump more of the money they make from this cheap stuff into quality writing and drama, instead of squeezing the budgets. But we as Artists can’t rely on them anymore, we have to do it ourselves if we have a story to tell and find our own ways to distribute it.

What do you think of celebrity culture? What harm does it do?

Recently I was having a conversation with a Young Actor and we were chatting about the business and I mentioned that I’d worked with Simon Callow, the renowned Theatre Actor and Writer. He must have misheard me, as suddenly he shrieked in excitement “You know Simon Cowell!?!” I can forgive him for not knowing who Simon Callow is, but that reaction to the possibility that I could introduce him to Simon Cowell was deeply concerning. And I am seeing it more and more. Actors who manage to get themselves roles on Productions and the next step for them is a Celebrity Dance Show or the Jungle one. Shows where you have swallow things in order to gain more celebrity status. How ironic is that!? I think what this culture of celebrity has done has made some people very ignorant and obsessed with materialistic things. I think what will happen is when people think back to the noughties, no one will be remembered for any kind of Art or Music, the era will be remembered for the Wars that took place and the Banking Crisis. And just for the record, I don’t know Simon Cowell.

What next?

We are going to change things.

Links:

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0862907/
Official Website: http://web.mac.com/andytiernan/Andrew_Tiernan
Flush FB Page: http://www.facebook.com/Flush2012

Photo credit; Marac Kolodzinski

Is The Film Industry Sexist?

Posted on by

Is the film industry sexist? It is a broad question, and unfair to label everyone with the same tag. I think the answer is; less so. I think, more specifically, some people in the industry are sexist.

I recently had lunch with a director that had cast a female friend in something. My female friend has three children. The director offered me her part, and all the future work he was going to give her as ‘she could not be totally committed to her work’ as she had children. I was appalled and turned him down. What if I have children soon? I couldn’t work with him after that. The irony is that the director has FIVE children. But no one ever asks a man how he juggles work and kids.

Most of the castings I see are for men, the rest are for women, usually between 18-35, size 8-12 and the part usually requires nudity. I don’t do nudity. The most depressing thing about the movies I see are the amount of naked females in them. Rarely any naked men. What kind of message is this? That women are sexual objects?

Some castings require you to wear a bikini or ask that actresses are a specific weight. Age discrimination is rife, so much so that an actress who was the same age as me when we started out is now four years younger. I won’t lie about my age although I have been told to. It’s a stance against idiocy. I am still young, but I am cast younger. This is a problem. They can cast someone who looks like a teenager, or an actual teenager.

I am making a film, Prose & Cons. I am buying equipment and have been asking for a lot of advice. The most annoying thing about making the film so far is how condescending some of the men are in their answers. If I ask a general question on where to buy a microphone I get a lecture on what a boom is. I have worked in the film industry for eleven years. I know what a boom is, thanks mate.

But this is what happens when a ‘girl’ makes a film, or wants to be taken seriously. When she gets sick of the girlfriend roles, which become the mother roles and go on to be the hag roles. And the constant requests for nudity.

She says I have had enough and I am not taking it anymore, then she goes off and makes her own films while finding other amazing people who make films she wants to be in.

Puss in Boots IMAX 3D Review

Posted on by

I have to be honest, I may be going into this review with a slight bias because I love Puss in Boots. Especially when he does that thing with his eyes.

I wouldn’t normal go to the cinema to see a cartoon, but I also saw Tintin in 3D earlier this year and that was brilliant, so off to Kingston I went.

This film is the prequel to the Shrek franchise. It is Puss in Boots story up until he meets Shrek. The film is good, the storyline is great. Fantastic for kids but grown up enough to keep the adults happy too. Antonio Banderas is good as Puss and Salma Hayek is perfect as Kitty SoftPaws. The story has a lot of fairytale characters in it so you feel like you already know the characters in the film. It’s a good cast and Zach Galifianakis is wonderful as Humpty Dumpty and has one of the best lines in the film: “Do you know what happens to eggs in jail? Well … it ain’t over easy!

Seeing the film at the IMAX and in 3D makes it more of an experience than just going to see a film. Things jump out at you and the visuals and sound are amazing.

I recommend this film no matter what your age. My only complaint is that, as I wear glasses to the cinema, wearing two pairs when you count the 3D pair hurt my nose!

Shame Review

Posted on by

When talking about a film like Shame, I guess you have to address the controversy head on. This film has a lot of sex in it. And so it should. It’s a film about sex addicts – how else would you film it. To have the sex off screen would go against main intention of this film – to bring this addiction to the public. To stop it from being seen as shameful.

And so the film does. While the sex scenes are many and explicit, they are undercut by a sadness, which stops them ever feeling sexy or exploitative.

The film centre on Michael Fassebender’s sex addict, Brandon, who gets a surprise visit from his sister, Sissy (Carey Mulligan). Something has happened to the both of them in the past (there are suggestions of incest) that has sent them down very different, but equal damaged, paths.

Carey’s Sissy is also suffering, but she’s ‘regular crazy’ – crying on the phone to her boyfriend, self harming, needy, unreliable. She’s the kind of person who comes seeking help, because she has socially acceptable issues. And so she turns to big brother Brandon, hoping he’ll help, because, from the outside he seems like a dependable sort of guy. He’s well dressed, successful, charming and very likeable.

However, this is only the surface. Beneath lies someone in need of help as much as his sister. Yet, while his addiction is just as harmful to his life, almost costing him his job, damaging his relationships with women, and getting him a good beating, he cannot seek help because sex addiction is not something people can comfortably talk about.

In fact, I’m sure there’s many of you reading this now saying, ‘So what, he like’s sex – who doesn’t?’ But what Fassebender’s excellent portrayal shows is that he doesn’t like sex. He enjoys himself while in the act, but as soon as he’s finished, he’s thinking about the next, bigger, more exciting hit.

Shame is not necessarily a film many will want to watch again. It’s not harrowing in the way many drug dramas are, or hard hitting, but it is undeniably sad. Not miserable, more melancholy. It’s almost like Brandon agrees with the public – that his problem shouldn’t be an issue. That he should just deal with it.

But instead, he just hides it. While his boss cheats on his wife, sleeps with Brandon’s sister, and is in general a bit of a sleaze bag, Brandon, to all intents and purposes, is a good guy.

This is the beauty of Fassbender’s performance. You believe the switch from nice guy on a date, to tortured addict during a threesome. But it’s no Jekyll and Hyde. These aren’t too sides to a personality, they are one man. Everything he does in his life is based around sex. Every look on the tube, every time he gets home to his flat, every toilet break at work.

While the subject matter might not be to everyone’s taste, this film should be seen. In a genius piece of marketing, the poster for Shame is a mirror. For we all have our secrets – and this film shows that we need to confront those demons, or have them take us over.

Moneyball Film Review

Posted on by

Baseball, perhaps the most American of all sports, has served up the basis for many films from Bill Durham to The Love Of The Game. It seems to encapsulate all the positive attributes of the American dream, the underdog who overcomes insurmountable odds with a band of seeming
outsiders.

This concept serves the backbone of Moneyball, an adaptation of a factual account, penned by Michael Lewis, of the Oakland Athletics unorthodox rise to baseball history in the season of 2002. It is directed by Bennet Miller who has waited six years since his critically acclaimed debut Capote to pick up the directing reins again. Brad Pitt stars as Billy Beane, a former player whose young hopes have long been dashed, is now the Oakland’s manager fighting a losing battle against teams with more funds at their disposal and as a result better players. A chance encounter with a Yale economics graduate Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) presents Beane with an unusual solution; using a statistics model drawn up by Brand, Beane plans to recruit players whose skills are undervalued due to trivial reasons such as age and personal habits, signing them up within the team’s limited budget. Together Beane and Brand stand by their actions despite the theory being untested and the growing disapproval of the veteran members of management and the existing team members lead by Captain Art Howe (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Can they overcome the odds and earn the respect of their comrades? Take a guess…

Lewis’ account has been adapted by Aaron Sorkin, best known for television milestone The West Wing and last year’s award heavyweight The Social Network. If you’re familiar with Sorkin’s work then you know the score; machine gun speed dialogue, razor sharp wit and facts and figures fired out with such pace and panache the audience have no choice but to keep up and stay there. The sense of audience participation is confirmed with the heavy use of jargon and the refusal to stop the action to define what everything means. Anyone unfamiliar with baseball (including myself) may initially find these scenes impenetrable though the refusal to talk down to the audience grabs attention and creates an engagement with such scenes. The best parts of Moneyball play to these strengths very well indeed. Pitt and Hill’s scenes together spark with a playful yet mature weight to them; they deliver the jargon heavy dialogue with tremendous energy and verve whilst still finding room to inject humour and character development. An actor who in my opinion often swerves between excellent and bland quite erratically, Pitt is thankfully on quite excellent form here. He portrays the weary and bitter part of Beane’s personality very well, his sudden outbursts of anger coming out of left field and sending up the idea of a performer who must keep a grinning handsome face on an incredibly unstable empire. Hill in particular is extremely charming in a role that requires him to bypass the bawdy, frat boy style of humour that has marked out his film roles so far. It’s a classic fish out of water style role braced with moments of surprising dramatic clarity such as a brilliant moment when Pitt jokingly guides him through the tactics of firing players before ordering him to do it for real. It marks what hopefully will prove to be an exciting period in his career.
Director Miller takes the unusual and quite effective idea of taking us away from the pitch to focus on the background details of the sport. Beane refuses to watch matches in person fearing he may jinx the outcome so all of the actual playing for the most part of the film the game of baseball itself is confined to archive footage, televisions playing quietly in the corner and snatched radio reports. Miller sticks to the boardrooms, the changing rooms, offices and corridors of the stadium framing the characters within a world of closed in interior spaces juxtaposing against the wide open playing fields of the game. The film is shot by Wally Pfister, Christopher Nolan’s regular cinematographer, bringing a surprisingly cinematic feel to the back room proceedings including one elegant tracking shot that follows Pitt from his office through the various hallways to the dressing room. Accompanied by a minimal yet stirring score by Mychael Danna, such scenes take on a fascinating edge providing a glimpse of a world that most sports based movies choose to ignore.

Yet as the action wears on the cracks begin to appear within Moneyball’s own formula. Compared with the astonishing pace of some of Sorkin’s previous material, there are moments when the action does unfortunately drag. The first two thirds spend too much time on the resistance Beane faces from his fellow team members and management. Such scenes do allow the incidental pleasure such as Pitt locking horns with Seymour Hoffman, Hoffman comfortably holding onto his title as one of America’s great character actors. Yet there are also distractions such as scenes touching on Beane’s relationship with his ex-wife (a wasted Robin Wright) and daughter. Clearly meant to cement the emotional connection with Pitt’s character but that has already been established in the scenes portraying his regret and disappointment with the game. It does manage to wring out an amusing cameo from Spike Jonze as Pitt’s spineless romantic replacement but the whole framing device feels rushed and forced and in the case of a wrap round sing-a-long narrative device, overly sentimental and a tad trite. Unfortunately Miller also looses confidence in his approach to the material as the third act succumbs to the obvious clichés that it had previously managed to steer clear of. The traditional turning of the tide montage is certainly to be expected but the last minute decision of Beane to attend a crucial game and watch it live is a step too far. We know exactly what to expect as players make their final, desperate stand against the odds and attain glory and this sudden ham-fisted finale can’t help but feel like a betrayal of what has gone before it. Some may argue that Miller and Sorkin manage to retain a bittersweet outlook of the closing scenes but for my money the damage had been irrevocably done.

How exactly a film about such a particularly American subject will be embraced here in the United Kingdom is uncertain. The sheer slew of information and sometimes sluggish is a barrier that may limit its appeal outside the State’s but Pitt’s charisma, Hill’s charm and the verve of many of the early scenes do make Moneyball a worthy if somewhat drawn out watch.