The Movie Diorama Hundreds of sports films, hundreds of them. Pretty sure Hollywood has tackled every type of sport, including Baseball several times over. Why should this one be any different? Well, this is the true story of the Oakland Athletics to which their General Manager at the time used a new technique of deciding a team: the Moneyball model. Using statistics and logic to pick the most effective players at the cheapest price, therefore building the ultimate economical team. Such a model could change the Baseball industry and negate years of traditional intuition. This is not so much about changing Baseball, but a personal journey for Billy Beane. He himself was chosen to play professionally, ditching his chances of further education. It didn't work out, and so he desired to change the system and defy the industry as a personal vendetta against them. Completely unconventional, having a computer system pick the most suitable players as opposed to listening to veterans who have something that algorithms do not: experience. Thoroughly enjoyed this film, and I can say I have no interest in Baseball (not particularly huge in the UK). A screenplay by Aaron Sorkin was destined to keep me captivated. Every script he writes is filled with sharp, concise dialogue that keeps you hooked on the characters. Brad Pitt looked effortlessly natural, owned every scene he was in. Jonah Hill...get ready guys...I actually liked. Finally!? A film I like him in. Cool, calm and calculated, was perfect at playing a graduate economist. Bennett Miller's direction was clean with a great mixture of old footage of Baseball games with the reconstructed acting. There's a scene towards the end where the result of a game relies on Chris Pratt hitting the ball. When he does...silence. I felt the tingles, was beautifully executed. Whilst the sport of Baseball does not interest me in the slightest, I loved the focus on the team building and thought it was brilliantly acted by everyone.

TonyMontana96 (Originally reviewed: 24/02/2017) Brad Pitt is one of my favourite actors; and I have seen many great performances from him; and his role as Billy Beane in Moneyball is perhaps a contender for second best after his portrayal of Tyler Durden in Fight Club of course. I do not follow baseball but I found the entire story a breath of fresh air; each scene is invigorating, the acting compelling and the plot always compelling. The supporting performances are very good too; Jonah Hill (Peter) is stunning as Beane's Analyst/assistant; he disappears into character and stays likable throughout. There were many good performances in the picture and here's a few more among it; Philip Seymour Hoffman (Art the coach), Robin Wright (Sharon), Kerris Dorsey (Casey Beane) and Chris Pratt (Scott/player) who was surprisingly decent for a change.Steve Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin's screenplay is excellent, the film is exceptionally well written, Bennet Miller's direction is very good and the film never drags; I felt immersed in the story, fully engaged within every scene and always compelled to find out the outcome. There's a tremendous scene where Pitt's character refuses to watch his own team play; and without saying anything; his emotions are transparent, noticeable and show that this is a man who just wants to win for a change; There's quite a few complex scenes like this where you just see Billy Beane sitting there and reflecting on things and there far from dull; there simply brilliant. Moneyball is a great sports drama and one with two Oscar worthy performances from Pitt and Hill and one that is without a doubt one of the best films of 2011.

patrick powell I'm a Brit and know b*gger all about baseball. Perhaps that's why I found this film to be duller than watching paint dry. On the other hand even if you know about baseball, you might also find this film dull, dull, dull.I like Brad Pitt and have enjoyed many of his films. I find he always brings a certain something to every role he plays, and he brought it to this one, too. Sadly, it wasn't enough to save this film.When I wasn't baffled by all the baseball talk, I was bored. And even when I wasn't baffled by all the baseball talk - there were one or two jargon-free scenes - I was still bored. To be frank, I considered switching off and writing this review halfway through, but I persevered. Well, I know think I need not have bothered: the review would have been the same.If you think you might like this, by all means give it a whirl, but don't blame me if you don't and like me feel bored out of your tiny mind. Gets a five because it isn't exactly bad, but that's it.

maheshakavarapu Moneyball is based on a real story of a manager, also a former professional baseball player, Billy Breane(Brad Pitt) and the journey of his team, Oakland A's, in the season of 2002. The movie depicts the circumstances under which the teams makes a transition from being underdogs to becoming all-American record holders, a success attributed, at least as portrayed in this movie or the book on which it is based or often by the general public, to Billy's unorthodox and unusual methods of putting price on players based on numbers and statistics. Although the movie is based on baseball, it doesn't often depict out-of-the- park home runs, sacrifices, stolen bases nor any such adrenaline fueled scenes. Rather, the movie proceeds in a silent ambiance taking its audience much closer and intimate to the dialogues. The movie centers around Billy, making the role of Brad Pitt crucial in judging the quality of the movie, which, I feel, is indeed very fine, because, to mention a few, of his facial expressions and lines which perfectly fit to the situations. Jonah Hill takes a non-comedian role, which is kind of rare yet done greatly, of a statistician, Peter Brand, assisting in Billy's managerial decision matters. Besides, the movie also presents several philosophical insights to its audience through a life journey of a manager, and the frustrations, complications, and joyous moments involved with the job, which are never better said than watched.For the audience loving baseball, the movie may not reach the expectations, as it focuses not much on the game, rather more on the team's managerial issues. Consequently, the audience interested in management may find the movie quite interesting. The same applies to those audience who come from a background of statistics or IT, who would like the role played by Hill. In my personal opinion, I would describe the movie, although I'm not a big fan of baseball, yet in the very lines of the movie as, "How can you not be romantic about baseball?"- it's a metaphor.