Review of Eight Men Out

Eight Men Out (1988)
6/10
Painfully mediocre John Sayles film
11 February 2002
Of the many John Sayles films I've seen, which include the two or three made before 1988 and all those made after, Eight Men Out is the weakest by an enormous margin. His direction is quite good at times, and the cinematography is exemplary, especially the lighting, but everything else is subpar. The script is rather poor. The film unfolds in three sequences: 1) the setup, involving all the bets that are made and, of course, character introductions, 2) the World Series, and 3) the consequent scandal and trial. The first part is somewhat confusing, which is mainly due to the fact that the characters are so poorly developed. The players are introduced in a hackneyed sequence where the team owner lists them and their attributes, which plays over one of the team's last season games. Because of this, we only really get to know the majority of the players only peripherally. What is really disappointing is that most of the actors who play players are bad, even good actors. David Strathairn, an actor who only ever seems to appear in Sayles' films, is the only one who gives a good performance. John Cusack is bad in the first two acts, but has some good scenes in the third. Also, the crooks, those who arrange the fix and the bets, are especially poorly introduced. I recognized some of the actors from other Sayles films (the two strikebreakers from the excellent Matewan play two of the key gamblers), and other character actors from other films. None of them are good, though they all had been good (or would be good) in other films. The second act, the World Series, provides the best scenes in the film. However, well, if you're in my boat and don't really care for baseball in the first place, it gets boring. In fact, I don't even think baseball fans will like these scenes too much. There is too much editing, and not enough playing. I have a thought that if the film had been longer, expanded a bit, it would have worked better. The third act is okay, but feels anticlimactic after a semi-exciting second part. The last scene is especially tacky. 5/10.
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed