Sure, it's only the Golden Globes. But the nominations are out, and "Moneyball" did pretty, pretty, pretty well.
The film was among the six nominees for best picture, actors Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill both got nods, and so did screenwriters Aaron Sorkin and Steve Zaillian.
They're all well-deserved, I'm sure. Well, almost sure. I've seen 24 movies this year, but I'm sure there were 24 more with excellent performances by one actor or another in a supporting role. Which isn't to suggest that Jonah Hill wasn't excellent in Moneyball. And it's nice to see recognition of a fine comic performance.
CBSSports.com's Matt Snyder:
Personally, I liked the movie. I know what happened in 2002 and who was on the team. But when I went to see the movie, I knew I wasn't viewing a documentary and instead a Hollywood production meant to entertain. They obviously had to take liberties and create storylines, because the book itself isn't movie-friendly. To each his own, but I loved the movie from an entertainment standpoint. Evidently I wasn't alone, as the four Golden Globe nominations are quite a feat.
Me too. Earlier in his piece, Snyder laments all the baseball people who reportedly hate the movie because there's virtually no mention of Barry Zito, Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder, Eric Chavez and Miguel Tejada.
With all due respect, the hell with those people. The book wasn't about those players, and neither was the movie.
Look, I'm not saying movies purporting to treat real people and real events shouldn't make some effort to tell the truth. I am both enamored and dismissive of Oliver Stone's JFK, which tells a million lies so beautifully. Moneyball tells very few lies; rather, it simply omits a few truths in the service of telling other, far more interesting truths.
I'm okay with that. A lot of movie-goers have been okay with it. The Golden Globes are okay with it. And I suspect that when the time comes, the Academy Awards will be pretty okay with it, too.