In Attempt to Meet Fanfare, “Moneyball” Had Only Warning-Track Power

I wanted to be open-minded about “Moneyball,” overcoming an internal doubt about how a book about baseball statistics could magically turn into a compelling movie. Then I saw the acclaim the flick was receiving and started growing a small optimism that I was ready to be proven wrong. Then I saw the film and, quite simply, just couldn’t understand what all the hubbub was about.

Sure, Brad Pitt was pretty good as Billy Beane, combining smarm and charm, and Jonah Hill was a revelation as stats dork Peter Brand. But Philip Seymour Hoffman was a gross miscast as manager Art Howe and Robin Wright was wasted as Sharon. I also understood the choice to cast actual baseball scouts in the flick, but that also lent to the awkwardness of a confrontation between Beane and the head scout.

After a slow start, the momentum of the movie relied quite a bit on a winning streak, but overall, it sort of glossed over the fact that the strategy, on the whole, kind of failed. And I felt that if we’re led to believe that Beane’s disappointing playing career—which tagged him with a “bust” label—had influenced his executive career so much, it should have been connected more clearly to the story arc.

At the end of the day, despite reviews and accolades to the contrary, “Moneyball” didn’t rise above being “just” a baseball movie. Not that there’s anything wrong with that—it’s a worthy genre even if baseball isn’t the national pastime anymore. But this film purported to be so much more than what it actually was ... which set up disappointment for anyone expecting—or needing—more than that.