The will to win

There are many ways to enjoy Moneyball.
At first glance the plot is fairly unoriginal: the typical underdog team goes through a phase of pain and disillusions to unexpectedly reach the top thanks to an innovative and risky gamble. But fortunately for the viewer, the film revisits this over-used theme in a slightly more subtle fashion.

Inspired by a true story, the film focuses on Billy Beans (Brad Pitt), a former Major League Baseball player who tries to redeem himself as manager of the Oakland Athletics baseball in the early 2000.

Not only does he works in a tough sport business environment but he also needs to exorcise his demons: when he was a youngster, he chose a sporting career - and failed at it - over a promising College education.

Unable to get the financial back up to compete with the best clubs and forced to trade his best three players, Beans is condemned to gamble or die. To achieve his goal, he is helped by a young economics graduate (Jonah Hill) who incarnates this other Billy he could have been, provided he had chosen a different path.

His readiness to do anything to win is equal to none: fits of anger, stubbornness, obsession with performance... Billy is as competitive as any professional sportsman can be and treats his staff and players like assets.

The system can't be changed so Billy decides to play it rough, starts replacing man by statistics and fires/trades at will.
Errors are paid cash. In such a risky gamble, there is no room for the weak. A quick meeting coldly brings the bad news to the player who must accept his fate and quickly leave. New team, new life. Career may be broken in the process but the ruthless management is all powerful.

When Hattenberg, the resuscitated batsman picked by Billy against his advisors' approval, is asked to come onto the pitch to save the days in the final match, he manages to make the difference in a typical Hollywoodian style (music, slow motion, exulting, crowd...) thus exorcising Billy's failed career at the same time. But it won't be enough as the film denies the dream to be fulfilled. The season's over and despite an impressive victory streak Beans failed... statistically. If the underdog can achieves a lot he just can't win in a unfair system.

In the end Moneyball is less an inspirational movie about underdogs struggling to compete with the bests than a tale about our obsession for winning.


Directed by Bennett Miller, Based on Moneyball by Michael Lewis
Starring Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill, Philip Seymour Hoffman

Weapons and clowns

Balada triste de trompeta is in some way a remake of Muerto de Risa, probably the best film of Alex de la Iglesia. In a nutshell, the film deals with two clowns fighting over a an aerialist girl. The pair ends up unleashing mayhem around them in a nihilistic final. In the background the spanish civil war and Francoism are looming and confer to the film it's dark tone.

Fans of Alex de la iglesia will recognise his trademark, a blend of gory violence, dark humour and nostalgia. The spanish director could be the lost European brother of Robert Rodriguez but a more talented one, as his visual prowess never surpasses his storytelling and character building, the prime element of his films.



Most of his films usually end in well-known Spanish sites (Madrid's roofs, Kio Towers, the Almeria desert....) In La balada Triste, the infamous Valle de los Caídos becomes the scenery for the ultimate showdown.

Alike The Hurt Locker who got surprisingly awarded at the Oscar, Balada triste de trompeta is a quality film that probably did not deserve all the praise given at the Mostra (maybe the fact that Tarantino was at the helm of this year's edition may have influenced that decision). But on the good side, it will allow people to look back at Iglesias's filmography and discover his little known gems (La communidad, Muerto de risa y Crimen ferpecto).

Under the layer of cheesiness

It's evident, Christmas time would not be the same without It's a Wonderful Life on TV. This tale has it all: a pure hero named George Bailey, an evil character named Henry Potter (your typical greedy, heartless, crippled, fat banker who smokes cigars) and of course a happy ending. But IWL is in many respects an odd tale which has a special flavor in times of economical recession.

Today's re-interpretation of the film is interesting. For instance, during the meeting when occurs the vote to decide who will be the new head of the Bailey Building and Loan Association, Potter's seemingly selfish philosophy of not lending to those who can't afford to reimburse is opposed to Bailey's unlimited generosity, the latter believing strongly that anyone should be entitled to a loan, regardless of its financial situation. In our subprime era, Bailey's economical stance sounds a tad passé. On the other hand Potter would have a point in light of the reckless mortgage incentives that wrecked our economy.
The film wants to champion a "human capitalism" populated by unselfish people able to sacrifice themselves for the good of the community.
This economical optimism is well apparent in the abundance of dollar bills shown throughout the film. Money is the blood that runs through the vein of this Christmas flick. If it was to be remade nowadays surely the "mountain of cash" of the ending would be deemed indecent.

Another interesting thing is the journey to mental breakdown of the main character, patiently built with a succession of highs and lows that progressively leads Bailey up to suicidal thoughts. The mental erosion of the main hero and his change of nature as he struggles to keep his integrity and his dreams alive are so grim that it would deter most producers from investing a cent if the film was being done for the first time today. At the peak of his anger, James Stewart's portrayal of George Bailey is almost disturbing in the way the hero treats his kids for instance. This realistic approach of depression in a film with quite a few lighthearted moments (the ball scene, the angel's joviality, the overall positive tone of the film...) gives to the story its emotional depth.

All these elements are what makes It's a Wonderful Life such an unusual drama film. Part "Xmass cheese-cake", part tragedy, part twilight zone episode, it could have been a complete failure. Far from that it has become a timeless classic.

Behind the tragedy

While better know in the western world for his vengeance trilogy, Park Chan-Wook should be praised for a less known film called JSA.

Joint Security Area is a political thriller set in the Korean Demilitarized Zone where soldiers of each side end up fraternizing before things turn bad in some kind of greek style tragedy.
Directed with brillance (non-linear storytelling full of intricacies, sophisticated framing and photography...) the film not only entertains but it also makes the audience pondering on the whole point of the North/South dichotomy. It depicts a world from which women are excluded, where the sense of honor and patriotism have rendered people enemies.

If Park Chan-Wook's discourse is cheesy at time ("we are all brother after all, let's love each other"), the director sums up in this Joint Security Area the ridiculousness of conflicts where fleeting ideologies create a state of war and imaginary barriers to separate men, epitomised in the "your shadow is on my side" line in a rare funny moment of the film. JSA depicts a tragedy in which human beings have traded their freedom of thought and individualism with allegiance thus becoming slave of the homeland's will.

Ten years after the release of the film, South and North Koreas may be on the brink of war. JSA reminds us that political conflicts and their procession of bravado and chivalry usually hide a situation which is in some respects incredibly pointless.

Billy Wilder the prophet

Even before the end of the San José mine accident where 33 men lived 70 days trapped 700 metres deep, fictions and documentaries based on this near disaster were already in preproductions throughout the world.

It seems greedy producers have forgotten that the film had already been shot... 60 years ago! Re watching "Ace in the hole" today feels strange. The 1951 Billy Wilder's satyr deals with a fictional mining incident taking place in New Mexico. The story revolves around a ruthless journalist played by Kirk Douglas who decides to exploit the fate of a trapped miner to create a media buzz and get his career back on track.

In the real Chilean incident, media were probably not the prime suspect. Yes their coverage was exaggerated and sensational but on the positive side, they probably helped accelerate the rescue process by putting the fate of the 33 miners on the international map. No the real "bad guy" this time would be best portrayed by a politician. If a remake of "Ace in the Hole" had to be done today, how about having Sebastian Pinera or Laurence Golborne interpreted by Michael "Gekko" Douglas? Both politicians clearly used the unfolding drama to increase their popularity and distract the audience's attention from other sensitive topics while avoiding answering the real question, the one about working conditions in the Chilean mines. Who's responsible? Miners knew the site was dangerous but had to risk their life for financial reasons. The statistics speak for themselves: on average 34 miners die each year in Chile (In China it goes up to a thousands for the same reason). Their story is hardly televised.

Fortunately the Chilean incident ended well. But the reality-TV shows broadcasted on our news channels has a bitter taste. Let's hope the forthcoming screen adaptions won't just be about patriotism and bravery.