The trick in a movie with a title like Love of the Game is to, by the end of the movie, redefine 'game' so that it refers not so much to sports but to the main character's life situation. Thus winning or losing the game means a little more. It's a common enough trick, from Rocky to Happy Gilmore to Varsity Blues. Or, talking Kevin Costner, Tin Cup. Which is to say Love of the Game is, as the title also suggests, a love story, or, more specifically, a love triangle--aging superstar Billy Chapel (Costner), freelance writer Jane Aubrey (Kelly Preston), and America's favorite already-romanticized (Field of Dreams) past-time. None of this is unexpected. What is a surprise, though--for those who didn't read Michael Shaara's novel--is how Love of the Game isn't structured over the length of a season, as with Bull Durham, but instead uses the last game of Billy Chapel's season as a springboard into everything that's gone before. Meaning yes, the bulk of the movie happens in the movie's past. It's all flashbacks, occasioned by pained expressions from the dugout, reached through soft dissolves, all that, which has the effect of gradually making this 'last' game more and more important. Or, of making us realize how important it is. Which is all good and fine. The problem with non-linear approaches like this, however, is that--unless every flashback is both a surprise and absolutely necessary narrative exposition, qua Tarrantino--it can get old real fast. As in repetitive. As in every scar and every comment has an explanation. In Love of the Game, they're all explained, which is a little bit of overkill. And you can tell when the explanations are coming, too, which doesn't help any, and doesn't do anything to subtract from the occasionally nauseous levels of nostalgia already circulating. But then it a movie about baseball. And it is Kevin Costner. And it is--in spite of all this 'ghosts of Christmas past' feel--a dramatically sound movie: the 'story of them' (Billy Chapel and Jane Aubrey) is a strong little story, with no real bad guys, lots of bad luck, all the things we've liked since When Harry Met Sally, Forget Paris, all those. And this 'story of them' does catch up with the present-story very nicely (see: without intruding), in a way that gives us no real choice but to care, to--as with any date-movie--beg for the happy ending. However, unlike most date movies, Love of the Game doesn't wholly give itself away until the closing frames. But of course Billy and Jane aren't the only two characters here in search of restoration. Everyone in the movie wants to be redeemed, and, like dominos, they more or less are, which is a little too picture-perfect for comfort. Which isn't to say you're not happy for the minor characters when they get 'redeemed,' it just feels a little cheap immediately afterwards. Perhaps it's meant to be all about the moment, though, in which case it's a success. The thing is, though, there are so many moments, better than two hours of them. Which would be fine is Love of the Game were epic in scope, like, say, Dances with Wolves, Waterworld, orThe Postman, but it's not. Or, it tries hard to be more sweeping than it is. Meaning it's a little inflated. And this simply because every picture in it has a story. But so be it. It is satisfying in other ways. There is a definite Unforgiven-feel, of the aging hero proving himself in high style, which America so loves. And there is a seriously magical moment when director Sam Raimi cues Bob Seger when Bob Seger is exactly what's needed, which manages to keep us from dismissing the rest of the movie, on the off-chance that there might be another magical moment like that, more chances to cry. Love of the Game is full of them. (c) 1999 Stephen Graham Jones
for more like this, check out http://www.cinemuck.com
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews