We're up, we're live and ready to hit the road in the summer of 2014. I hope you'll take a look at our kickstarter page and share it with anyone you think might be interested. Film research review #2:
Eight Men Out is an strangely romantic movie about the periphery of baseball much more than the game itself. Often beautifully shot, with detailed sets and wardrobe that make one feel like he is looking in on a fine piece of art, it is a spectacle. At the same time, there is a great deal of unevenness that makes it a hard film to really sink into. The performances of the actors are, by and large, very solid. None of them have enough time on screen to make a deep impression on the audience, though John Cusack probably comes the closest with his portrayal of Buck Weaver. The actual play of the game on screen, which is often a hallmark of how “realistic” a sports movie is believed to be, is pretty shoddy. The actors were likely chosen for their ability to act, first, which is understandable – but still puts the audience in the rather uncomfortable position to have to accept what is being fed to them, even if it doesn’t add up. For example, David Strathairn, as Eddie Cicotte, is throwing what look 40 mile per hour meatballs that I’m supposed to believe are unhiytable pitches enough to allow him to win 29 games in a season. It’s the sports filmmakers burden – how real do the sequences have to be? I would argue as real as possible, particularly if it’s supposed to be showing the best of an era, which the “Black Sox” were repeatedly said to be.
Eight Men Out (1988)
Director: John Sayles
Cast: John Cusack, Christopher Lloyd, John Mahoney, Charlie Sheen
Eight Men Out is an strangely romantic movie about the periphery of baseball much more than the game itself. Often beautifully shot, with detailed sets and wardrobe that make one feel like he is looking in on a fine piece of art, it is a spectacle. At the same time, there is a great deal of unevenness that makes it a hard film to really sink into. The performances of the actors are, by and large, very solid. None of them have enough time on screen to make a deep impression on the audience, though John Cusack probably comes the closest with his portrayal of Buck Weaver. The actual play of the game on screen, which is often a hallmark of how “realistic” a sports movie is believed to be, is pretty shoddy. The actors were likely chosen for their ability to act, first, which is understandable – but still puts the audience in the rather uncomfortable position to have to accept what is being fed to them, even if it doesn’t add up. For example, David Strathairn, as Eddie Cicotte, is throwing what look 40 mile per hour meatballs that I’m supposed to believe are unhiytable pitches enough to allow him to win 29 games in a season. It’s the sports filmmakers burden – how real do the sequences have to be? I would argue as real as possible, particularly if it’s supposed to be showing the best of an era, which the “Black Sox” were repeatedly said to be.
The obvious point through all of this is that Eight Men Out
is not about baseball so much as the scandal of this particular team. It’s
about corruption. It’s about power. It’s about authority and who ultimately
holds it. Cusack’s soap box moment with the neighborhood kids near the end of
the film where he talks about the beauty of the game and how he still feels it
as a kid is one of the stronger moments in the film for baseball purists. What
he says speaks to the simplicity of the game, the part of it most fans (or at
least this one) wishes could be the focus. That’s not to knock this film’s
subject matter as it was very important and, in some ways, strengthens the
importance of baseball in America’s history. History, in fact, is probably the
biggest thing baseball has going for it against the other major sports. So even
when the history isn’t perceived as positive, it’s still an opportunity for the
game to be seen for what we wish it were and it sometimes still is.
No comments:
Post a Comment