Review: Moneyball

This movie… was horrible.

Baseball, naturally, is the most boring spectator sport, so making a movie about it… horrible decision.

I mean, in football and soccer and basketball, you have constant motion. Even in Hockey, you get to watch people beat each other with sticks.

What’s more boring than baseball? Economics.

So, let’s make a movie with baseball AND economics.

Sure, I adore Brad Pitt, but that does not constitute making a really crappy movie.

So, don’t go see this movie. Go see…. that movie with Wolverine and the Rock-em-Sock-em robots. Go see… The Lion King in 3D.

Go see… The Smurfs even.

But here’s a good math equation for Jonah Hill: Moneyball= Yawn-inducing bore-fest.

Oh, and Philip Seymour Hoffman is in it. So, that was nice.


3 thoughts on “Review: Moneyball

  1. I find it hilarious that you consider baseball boring and attempt to support this by asserting that football has “constant motion.” You’re obviously expecting us to consider the 45 minutes spent standing around talking/arguing about each 12-second play “motion.” Baseball is a thinker’s game (which explains its declining popularity).

    Oh, haven’t seen the film. ;D

    1. Honestly, I am not a sports expert, so most sports are boring to me. But baseball seems awfully boring to me, running around in circles. Then again, I’ve only ever seen local college games, and as least often as possible. When I say football, I mean FOOTBALL. Like, not American Football, but what everyone considers football. That I find pretty exciting.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s