Saturday, November 19, 2005

On sports and movies

I like sports. I like movies. I don't think I'd like sports about movies, but I do like movies about sports, though I'm more often than not disappointed by them. Perhaps I'm being a purist, but I can't stand how sports get twisted out of shape in movies. I don't care if it makes for better storyline or makes the audience buy more Gatorade. If you only saw movies about it, you'd think modern sport had nothing but shots to the top corner, haymakers and last second Hail Marys. Poppycock.

Here are some notable offenders and my ideas on how to make them better.

Rocky I, II, heck, all of them. Truth be told, I haven't seen all of them, but if the rest of the series is anything like what I have seen, I wonder if Sly Stallone has ever actually watched a boxing match. If heavyweight boxers squared off, lowered their guard and hit each other in the face repeatedly, we'd never get out of the first round. These movies would have us believe that boxing technique never progressed beyond that demonstrated by bare-knuckled, handlebar-mustachioed men playing you-hit-me-I-hit-you-till-one-of-us-falls-down in the 1800s. Modern boxing is not ro-sham-bo, Sly. There are things called feints, defense, footwork, combinations and strategy. Heck, people know how to duck, Sly.

My remake: Rocky is not pure power, guts and indomitable American spirit, but a patient, tactical master. He studies his opponents strengths and weaknesses, and wins matches on points by tiring out opponents, keeping them outside or staying inside, working the body and so on. Garbled dialogue and robot servants are kept to a minimum.

Bend it like Beckham. Everybody raves about this movie, and I just don't know why. Before I address its depiction of the beautiful game, let me hurl some other insults.

1) At bare-bones, its plot is the same as My Big Fat Greek Wedding: protagonist of an ethnic descent wishes to do something untraditional, her family opposes it on cultural grounds, she goes ahead and does it anyway and lives happily ever after. It's supposed to display the protagonist's growth as an independent person, but it characterizes the objecting family and their whole culture as static and unbudgeable, like those plywood cut-outs of opponents huddled together covering their genitals you use as a fake wall when practicing free kicks.

2) Keira Knightley. What is so great about her? Everybody seems to be in love with her these days, and apparently she was recently voted the UK's sexiest woman or something similar. From Jules in this movie to the pagan sexpot Guinevere in the sagging cesspool King Arthur to a flat, undeserving-target-of-infatuation character whose name I can't be bothered to look up in Love Actually, I've never thought much of her. A quick google of "Domino review" yields words like 'incoherent mess,' 'downright annoying,' 'fractitiously vapid action film' and 'boobs,' so it would seem she has yet to carry a movie on her back like, say, Cate Blanchett can.

3) David Beckham. Yes, he is a master of the curving free kick, and yes, his name and face are renowned world over. But there are other free kickers and personalities out there. How about Place it like Ian Harte or Drive it like Roberto Carlos or Sneak it by like Thierry Henry? Also, I must confess a bias here. Beckham used to play for Manchester United. I am a diehard Arsenal fan, ergo I must despise David Beckham.

4) I just visited the movie's official website to check character names and was immediately greeted with the loud thump of a boot connecting with a ball. I didn't realize my speakers were turned up so high and it fucking startled me.

The soccer in the movie is a ridiculous goalfest. In every second scene Jules or Jess effortlessly dribble through six defenders and the goalkeeper in plays that would make the highlight reel on Sportsworld. The game scores end up like 6-5, 6-3 and so on. This is frigging soccer, not the new NHL. Scoreless draws are common. 3-nil is a one-sided thrashing. Spectacular displays of ball control wizardry that weave through six hapless defenders are enacted by a guy named Pele and pretty much no one else. Certainly not David Beckham, nor Jules, nor Jess. As a final scornful sidenote, the heart throb coach Joe, played by Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, was supposedly forced to give up his potential as a player due to a knee injury...yet we see him pulling dipsy-doodles and tricks with the ball that many uninjured players can never get right. I accuse this movie of lying to me.

My remake: The game is tighter, with stifling Chelsea-esque 4-5-1 formations and constant battles for possession in the middle third of the field. Jess can remain a star striker, but by scoring key goals in 1-nil victories, which she does by accurate passing and teamplay, with the occasional well-placed shot, though most certainly no selfish, odds-defying lone runs through the entire other team. Jules isn't a striker, but a tenacious, balanced defender given the task of shutting down the other team's dominant offensive weapon, Girl In Blue Shirt #5. Because defenders are heroes, too. Coach Joe's playing career was ended by a tackle so vicious that he lost both his legs, and now he feverishly puts his players through chesting and heading drills and nothing else, insisting that these skills form the essence of soccer. The movie-going audience appreciates that soccer is a complex, many-layered game in which a nifty tackle or penetrating cross-field switch of the ball are to be applauded like a subtle wine; goals are to be met with ecstatic hooting, hollering, back-slapping and clothes-tearing, like the biggest, best undergraduate bender ever.

Onward.

The Mighty Ducks. Oh wait, it's a series. I'm certain they're all awful, even though I only saw the original. Luckily I saw it years ago and I have forgotten a lot, as I'm sure I'd be writing into next week otherwise. But even as a twelve year-old, albeit one with a voluminous knowledge of hockey, the movie rubbed me in a smarmy, glitzy, Hollywood way. Let's start with its lasting legacy---no, not the actual NHL team---the flying V. Hockey is a game of space and movement. You very rarely see two or more teammates very close together unless they're battling opponents for the puck along the boards. Once the puck is gained, they quickly spread out for passing options, making use of space and letting the puck do the work, as they say. This is largely because in hockey there is bodychecking; two or more opponents standing close together can be smashed together, relieved of the singular puck, scored on and laughed at. So, given that the puck need only be carried by one player at a time, and the other team's job gets a lot easier if you line up like bowling pins, the flying V formation is not some revolutionary strategy but a stupid gimmick.

'But wait,' you say,'the V's brilliancy lies in the fact that the ducks can drop the puck back and push it forward within the formation, making it impossible for the defenders to know who to check.' True, in hockey only the puck carrier or the player making a play for the puck can receive physical contact from an opponent. Even before the post-lockout crackdown on interference, players could not randomly check, trip, board or hook each other while the puck was nowhere nearby. But that's exactly what happens in the movie! The flying V is left alone, but you never see a player in open ice without him being bowled-over a second later and if the camera is on the puck carrier the background is littered with collision upon collision. I wager that this, hockey's seemingly unregulated bullrushing, is one of the gimmicks the Disney execs latched onto in the boardroom brainstorm.

Michael Eisner: How we gonna sell this movie?

Lackey 1: Get this: hockey is played on ice. Ice hockey! Ain't that wacky?!

Michael Eisner: Yeah, and so is figure skating. Do kids bug Mom for the figure skating action figure at McDonald's? No. You're fired. To Lackey 2: What you got for me?

Lackey 2: Sir, in hockey apparently you can do this thing called "bodycheck." As far as I can tell, you can ram right into a guy as hard as you want, anytime you want. Kids like smashing things.

Michael Eisner: You're right. And the players wear all that armor, like warriors . We'll sell the frickin' dolls with spikes coming out of their shoulders and blood coming out of their mouths. Now this flick needs a name. Ice hockey, ice, ice---don't stop me, I'm free-basing here---what says ice? water---stream, lake, pond---pond!---ice---pond---duck---duckling! Ugly duckling!---The Ugly Ducklings! Nah, shit, shit---The Shitty Ducklings---nah, no good, kids wouldn't get the irony, gotta drive it home to the brats---The Super Ducklings, The Awesome Ducklings---The Mighty Ducks! Hot damn, did it all on my own. What the hell are you doing here? You're fired.

Lastly, I'm sure hockey is played in Iceland, but they're not exactly a world power in the sport. Yet the movie would have you believe they are feared dominators, with nations like Canada and Russia mere also-rans. Also, in the conveniently-ignored real world, Iceland's national colour is not bad-guy black. I guess Iceland was just too irresistible to pass up. Oh well, at least one of Lackey 1's ideas stuck.

My remake: is an unmake. This movie, this whole series, is never made. Disney leaves hockey alone, the NHL never expands further south than Washington and the Montreal Canadiens win the Cup every year. Americans come to understand and revere The Hockey Sweater as the only story of childhood and hockey needing to be told.

Million Dollar Baby: Stands head and shoulders above the other movies here. I don't have near as much to complain about; I liked the movie a lot, and found the moments of cringe-inducing departures from sporting reality were few and far between. I'm no cynical, Bronx-accented, fedora-wearing, cigar-chewing ring obsessive named Turnbuckle Ted, but it looks to me like Hillary Swank really learned how to box in making this movie. The training scenes are convincing and her body is honed, silky, smooth---ahem. She looks to be in good shape. Her progress through the ranks in a flurry of Round One knockouts is not too common, but Mike Tyson was once so meteoric, and at least her opponents relent when dealt multiple blows to the face, unlike the apparently steel-skulled (or rubber-armed) boxers in the Rocky movies.

Now, before I present my criticism, I don't want to give the movie away. If you haven't seen Million Dollar Baby go watch it, then come back and read the rest.

I was disappointed by the title match, particularly by how we're expected to swallow the idea that the titleholder, Billie 'the Blue Bear,' played by Lucia Rijker, can get away with blatant cheating and receive no more than a warning from the referee. She grabs Maggie's head, elbows her and ultimately cold-clocks her after the bell; the ref either doesn't see or gives her a 'next time you'll lose a point' warning...like eight times. This is supposed to be a world title match, yet they must have hired a WWE referee, as he is apparently too distracted by the antics of managers or unruly fans to focus on the fighters. Given the match's significance, you'd also think that it would be recorded, that some sort of authority would be reviewing it after the fact and that they would see that Billie clearly sucker punches Maggie after the bell has rung to end the round...yet we later find out that Billie is declared the winner, as though she had not broken the rules at all. My complaints regarding the other movies produced little more than a rolling of the eyes when I saw them, as those movies are shite and I didn't truly expect accurate athletic portrayal in bad movies. But with Million Dollar Baby I was into the movie from the get-go and thought Maggie's development was convincing---thus my disappointment was ever the more profound when it relied on silliness to make its crucial turn.

My remake: Goddamn it, make Billie a more subtle cheater. Hell, just make Billie and Maggie extremely evenly-matched. There's loads of opportunity for permanent injury in boxing; falling on the corner stool after an illegal poke isn't necessary. And if that plot device must be retained, disqualify Billie in the end and take the belt away. With Maggie confined to a hospital bed and satisfied that she gave her all, I don't think it would make a huge difference.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dude, this post was awesome! I was laughing my ass off the whole time. I especially love your depiction of coach Joe sans legs...you're Michael Eisner bit was hilarious too! Good job! Keep 'em coming!

Anonymous said...

If Coach Joe has no legs, they're forced to deal with a leading man/love affair involving a person of differing ability. The studios will never agree to it.
I had to skip the Million Dollar Baby bit because I still haven't seen that one. James is hiding it from me because he says he's seen me cry watching Law & Order and he can't even imagine what would happen here. I take it the movie doesn't end happily?

P.S. Do you have any good poems hanging around that you'd like to send me? I'm adding stuff by Maritime writers to my MySpace (currently consisting of poems from my third and FINAL comp list-to be done Dec.12th-Hallelujah) and, even though you're now an "Upper Canadian" I'd like to add some of your stuff (just kidding-about the Upper Canadian bit not about wanting the poems).

Ryan said...

Jumpin's, got some replyin' to do.

Stevie G: I knew you'd like that post, as I'm sure you have felt the same way about sports in movies for quite some time. Purists unite, I say. And I had you in mind when I was writing about Michael Eisner laying the dismissals down on the lackeys...you always seem to appreciate the humour in harsh, random acts of power. :)

Nancy: Not only a love affair involving a person of differing ability (wow, that has to be the pinnacle of PC terms) but it's also with a person of ethnicity! You're darn right the studios would never agree to it.

Yes, Million Dollar Baby is a very sad movie and I would put money on it that you would cry. But it's also very good, so I think it's worth the tears, unless you have some sort of condition in which your tear ducts are full of acid. Other sad movies: Hotel Rwanda, Anne of Green Gables, My Life Without Me.

Sure, I'll send you a poem or two. Though I was contemplating burning them all to deny my Maritime heritage and solidify my Upper Canadian status...haha, I jest, such a jester am I.

Now things get hairy, as I start replying to comments from other posts.

Craig: As I said at your blog, no problem for the pep talk, and I'm glad Milwaukee was just a bump in the road. I just might take you up on the offer and send you some fiction one of these days. Now, I hate to rely on over-used expressions, but man, 'fuck-a-roo-roo'...I can think of nothing better to say than 'laughing out loud,' quite literally. Though I won't acronymize it, as there is no lolling involved.

John: Hey buddy, I'm glad you found my blog and took the time to read my previous posts. I know I'm long-winded, so I doubly appreciate the effort.

Habs and Leafs...you are definitely a more charitable man than I in that your love of the Leafs does not automatically include hatred of the Habs. I'm sorry man, but I just can't help myself. It's like the Leafs are some sort of horrible perversion---you take away the red in the tricolore and you're left with this nasty blue and white team you can't help but despise as a shadow of the real thing. Okay, that's a bit much, but I just can't stop myself from rooting against the Leafs, even if they're not playing the Habs. Perhaps I upset the cosmos a bit by doing so...I took too much pleasure in the 8-0 spanking the Sens gave them, and now the Habs are suddenly losing to cellardwellers like New Jersey and Washington...and perhaps tonight Atlanta, whom the Leafs have batted around like a younger brother in a game of "Stop Hitting Yourself". However, I hasten to defend myself on my Habs stance during their dark years; I did not give up on them. I still watched them when I could and every October renewed my hope that Juha Lind or Johan Witehall or Jason Dawe would carry them back into the playoffs. I even watched a few games when they were already mathematically eliminated, just to get pissed off. However, during these dark years I had a few other things competing for my attention---you have to understand, it was my first time away from home, in this new parent-free thing called university and I had finally shaken my high school persona of that guy with long hair who's really good at sports but too shy to talk to pretty girls. So on a Saturday night I usually allowed myself to watch a period and a half and make sure the Habs were on their way to certain defeat before heading out to more happy places. The Habs' resurgence has coincided rather conveniently with my transition to oldmanhood, as clubbing it on Saturdays is no longer a top priority (in fact, I don't even know where the clubs in KW are). Though I will say that around 10pm, after the game is over, I do often think "Okay, what do I do now?"

On cities...actually, apart from the hockey team, the traffic and some of the attitudes, I quite like Toronto. There really is a ton of things to do there, especially if you've got money to burn. A big part of me would love to live there in a high rise. I love Montreal even more and have often thought that I'm denying myself fulfillment by not living there. My affinity for the place and the hockey team sometimes makes decisions for me: this Sunday I went to the Argos and Alouettes game at the SkyDome. I'm only a casual CFL fan and the people I was with were pro-Argos, so you would think I would get swept up in the hometown fervour (it was deafening) and cheer for Toronto...but I just couldn't help myself from quietly rooting for the Alouettes, being from Montreal and conveniently the same colours as the Habs. And I was quietly ecstatic when they came from behind to win it. So you're right, what the hell am I doing in KW when my heart is in Montreal? Shauna might say "So your heart is in Montreal, is it?" Maybe I'll try to convince her that we can insert a few years in Habsland between finishing here and moving back to PEI to start a farm. It'll be a tough sell, though, as she doesn't share the same love of both the big city and the big country that I do, and after feeling the subtle scorn the France French have for those who can't speak la belle langue, she's pretty averse to ever living in Quebec.

It's funny and unfortunate that this weekend you'll be short trip from where I live...as I'll be a short trip from where you live. Going to Ottawa, Friday to Sunday.

Anonymous said...

Ryan,
What are you going to do with the latest Christmas release--Cinderella Man (actually, I liked it but I imagine it's ripe for parody). Just wrote a response to your comment on my MySpace (I left it just above yours) and I think it does my wit proud. Which is to say, it may be mildly amusing. Maybe. The bar really isn't set too high here! Ha!