MONEYBALL (2011)

Directed By: Bennett Miller
Written By: Aaron Sorkin And Steve Zaillian 
Story By: Stan Chervin
Based on the book “MONEYBALL: The Art Of Winning An Unfair Game” by: Michael Lewis 
Cinematography: Wally Pfister
Editor: Christopher Tellefsen 

Cast: Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Robin Wright, Chris Pratt, Stephen Bishop, Reed Diamond, Brent Jennings, Tammy Blanchard, Nick Searcy, Arliss Howard

Oakland A’s GM Billy Beane is handicapped with the lowest salary constraint in baseball. If he ever wants to win the World Series, Billy must find a competitive advantage. Billy is about to turn baseball on its ear when he uses statistical data to analyze and place value on the players he picks for the team.


This film feels like a classic story. It is told simply not in a flashy way with plenty of dramatic scenes and even leaves room for light humor. Though it is intricate in the details and methods it is told. 

It feels like a film that has confidence in itself and how important it is. Whereas for the audience your enjoyment of the film matters in your interest in the subject and even the sport of baseball. As the film feels strong and partially nostalgic about the feeling of baseball and what it represents for some but also represents the players who seemingly

Give their all even when they might have run out of what makes them special, but also by making it more about numbers and probability. While trying to humanize these players it also undercuts them as at times liabilities more than anything. 

Why is it that baseball is the most respected sport when it comes to movies? Even though it is the sort that had a public cheating scandal in its heyday? As it strangely seems to represent Americana. As it has always seemed to be around and played?

Jonah Hill underplays In his role showing he can be quite effective without really doing much and more letting the character stand out for his skills rather than his behavior or words.

Bennet Miller behind the camera directing is always a joy. As he always seems to disappear and once he comes back around to making another film it stands out in many good ways. As they always seem more prestige than anything else. Good but they seem to lack passion or too much emotion. Here he has another home run. 

As a director, he tends to be very atmospheric. Especially when it comes to a consistent tone. As he seems to seek to say so much. While seemingly doing very little but it feels bigger. It’s hard to believe he only came onto this project after Director Steven Soderbergh left the project. 

This is one of Brad Pitt’s better performances where he seems to be in a role later in his career. As in the role, he plays it as more neutral, cocky, and as much of a show-off as he has done in the past. Here he doesn’t have to rely on looks, personality, or charm. 

The cast is full of heavy hitters who never let the film or the material down.

As this film is a true story it doesn’t have a storybook ending. But even as it is downbeat it is a quietly satisfying one. 

It not only takes you behind the scenes of the organization but also a great story with real characters going through inner turmoil. Though they stay in check of their emotions, you can read the drama clearly on their faces and in their eyes. 

The story is all about the details that shape and define it. 

GRADE: A

WEAPONS (2007)

Written & Directed By: Adam Bhala Lough Cinematography: Manuel Alberto Claro Editor: Jay Rabinowitz 

Cast: Nick Cannon, Paul Dano, Mark Webber, Riley Smith, John Campo, Regine Nahu, Brandon Mychel Smith. Arliss Howard, Aris Mendoza,  Amy Ferguson, Serena Reeder, Jade Yorker 

Weapons present a series of brutal, seemingly random youth-related killings over the course of a weekend in a typical small town in America, and tragically reveals how they are all interrelated.


The film’s structure is Tight and how it begins with a shocking and graphic scene. Then the rest of the film explores how we got to that event by following different characters’ experiences or their own points of view. Leading up to one event where it is handed off to a character who was more in the background of the last character P.O.V.

I don’t like the film but I can’t Lie. It has you as an audience member thinking about it a lot for a few days after. But I can’t say if I didn’t like it because it’s a gruesome story that I felt didn’t need to be told and had no real desire to ever see again or did one just not like the film. 

In its own way. The film tries to have a message of what is going down on the streets with teenagers at the time. it makes no real decisions. It doesn’t condemn nor does it celebrate these kid’s behavior, but tries to show it in simple terms. No gloss, no glory but it still feels wrong.

It’s like wanna-be kids but with more violence and a lot less sex. It just ends up being very disturbing.

It bothers you the way the characters really don’t care about anything or have no fear of the future. Where their actions might lead. The only time we get a glimpse is when Nick Cannon’s character has second thoughts about a decision he has been dead set to do. Then another person takes the decision out of his hands and does it for him. 

You truly feel sorry for most of the characters. Except two by the end. The kids seem so narcissistic. They are impervious to dangerous and shocking things that lie before them.

Plus the director attempts a gritty realism. Which he gets but some scenes could be easily cut down. I’m all for realism but they go on long. Where the characters do absolutely nothing and don’t add to the film overall or characters unless they are supposed to be as bored as the audience.

One question that was left with where are all the parents The whole time? That bothers you and no answers are offered.

What worked against the film was seeing established actors mixed in with the novices. You could tell the difference. It seems real but when you see nick cannon or someone else familiar. It instantly takes you out and reminds you that it’s a movie. No matter how good and believable he is, which is shocking.

This is definitely not a movie teenagers should see, but maybe parents should at least scare them To pay more attention to their kids.

So this worst-case scenario doesn’t happen to them. As this film keeps leaning towards the artistic

This film feels like it goes overboard to be shocking and provocative. It ends up coming out more exploitive. that’s educating the audience and trying to confirm the worst fears of the viewers 

GRADE: C- 

THE LADIES CLUB (1986)

Directed By: A.K. Allen
Written By: Fran Lewis Ebeling & Paul Mason
Based on the novel “THE SISTERHOOD” By: Casey Bishop & Betty Black Cinematography: Adam Greenberg
Editor: Marion Segal & Randall Torno

Cast: Karen Austin, Diana Scarwid, Christine Belford, Bruce Davison, Beverly Todd, Marilyn Kagan, Arliss Howard, James LeGros, Carol Baxter, Paul Terafotes 

A raped policewoman forms a vigilante group of various rape victims. They abduct and castrate men whom have committed repeated violations of women, and got away with it through legal technicalities.

This rape-revenge vigilante tale is a little different In the way that the revenge seems to never be to kill the men who rape repeatedly. Like Batman, that question only seems to come late but they punish the men by castrating them.

The film for the tawdry subject matter. Plays more like a television movie on the subject as there is barely any bad language and at times the scenes while well-meaning in their direction and emotions come off more melodramatic and unintentionally humorous. 

Especially the scene when a character you get sister is sexually assaulted (luckily never shown) but the aftermath and how it is shown just seems like Something out of a public device announcement you would show to school children about the dangers of going off with a stranger. 

When it begins the film seems like it will be typical and even the perpetrators seem more of a stock room of suspects punks who are looking to rob a house. Discover she is a cop and then decide to rape her and they get off on court easily by acting and dressing like choir boys.

We meet various female characters throughout some of whom stay with their spouses who claim to not even believe them When they said they were raped (what). 

Though most of the males come off bad or unsympathetic by the end. Even Bruce Davison playing a fellow cop who is interested in Karen comes off as a weakling and ineffective even as he tries to romance her and be there for her. 

Arliss Howard shows up playing a co-star’s husband who when he finds out what she is dining and breaking the rules by telling him. As she only tells him because he suspects she was having an affair. He comes across more aggressive and abusive to be believably supportive later on.

While we meet plenty of these women in the group. We only get to know three In particular and by the end the one who didn’t sure become the strongest advocate for what they are doing and the one who was gung- ho at first. Now has reservations.

The third act while obviously done for dramatic purposes seems silly and only there for the ending to finally put a fine point on all of this.

So while the film offers a different take on the vigilante tale. Including where it seems the original Perpetrators that start off the lead and who is the very reason they seek revenge never really come back. 

So the film is something to entertain but very hard to take seriously watching it through the prism of modern times.

Grade: C