--- title: "Moneyball" year: 2011 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/moneyball" fi1m_id: "moneyball" imdb_id: "tt1210166" tmdb_id: 60308 wikidata_id: "Q221820" fi1m_score: 83 critics_score: 74 critics_reviews: 15 published: "2026-09-15" updated: "2026-10-06T10:36:48.793308+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Moneyball (2011) Directed by Bennett Miller · 2h 14m · MPA PG-13 · Drama, Sport ## Identity Moneyball - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/moneyball - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** moneyball - **IMDb ID:** tt1210166 - **TMDB ID:** 60308 - **Wikidata ID:** Q221820 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1210166/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/60308, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q221820 **Fi1m score: 83** · Critics 74 from 15 reviews *In a sentence:* Nobody needs to hit a ball when Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill have a meeting to finish > Bennett Miller makes baseball management absorbing, with Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill giving the statistical debates wit and warmth. The resistance to their ideas is sometimes too neatly drawn, but the conversations are worth the evening. ## Synopsis Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) runs a baseball team that cannot compete financially with its rivals. With statistical adviser Peter Brand (Jonah Hill), he looks for a different way to judge players, using numbers to challenge the game’s accepted wisdom. Their approach brings them into conflict with people who trust the established methods. Beane tries to make an unconventional idea work in a sport attached to tradition. Bennett Miller directs a drama centred on baseball management, with Philip Seymour Hoffman as Art Howe and Chris Pratt as Scott Hatteberg. ## Review *Moneyball* makes a persuasive case for spending a sports film in the office. Bennett Miller is interested in the people who decide what a player is worth, and how hard they find it to admit that their methods might be wrong. We recommend it warmly, with a reservation about how readily it favours its reformers. Billy Beane, played by Brad Pitt, wants a financially disadvantaged baseball team to compete by assessing players differently. Jonah Hill plays Peter Brand, the statistical adviser who offers a way to do it. The pleasure is in watching those two work together. Pitt gives Beane enough charm to make his certainty attractive, while allowing us to see how wearing it could be for anyone employed by him. Hill’s quieter performance keeps their conversations from becoming a contest in clever lines. We laughed at their exchanges because Beane’s confidence and Brand’s caution make the practical business of changing minds so awkward. Neither actor needs to insist on the joke, and Miller gives them room to let it arrive. Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian’s screenplay makes the numbers comprehensible without requiring an interest in baseball. We can follow what Beane and Brand are proposing, what it threatens and why people resist it. That clarity lets the conversations acquire some of the suspense usually reserved for a match. Christopher Tellefsen’s editing is most effective here, giving the exchanges enough pace to keep their explanations from feeling like a lecture. At 134 minutes, though, the film leaves more time around its central dispute than all of its characters can use. Wally Pfister’s cinematography makes the people in those management scenes worth studying even while they are listening. Jess Gonchor’s production design makes the front-office setting convincing as a place where people actually work. Neither contribution distracts us from the uncomfortable business being discussed. Mychael Danna’s music gives the drama warmth, although the film is moving enough when it simply attends to Pitt and Hill. Such restraint is welcome in a sports story already offering plenty of encouragement to back the outsiders. The trouble is that Sorkin and Zaillian make the established thinking too convenient a target. The resistance is broad enough that Beane and Brand do not always seem to be facing opponents capable of answering back. Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Art Howe and Chris Pratt’s Scott Hatteberg make welcome impressions, but their performances leave us wanting more room for the people around Beane. The film could afford to let someone else be persuasive for a little longer, without making its central idea difficult to understand. As an underdog sports drama, it keeps enough familiar pleasures to make its talk-heavy approach welcoming. The affection for baseball remains clear, even while the characters argue for measuring it differently. Pitt makes Beane’s need to prove himself matter, which stops the film becoming smug about the people who have not caught up. We care about what this man has invested in being right, beyond the success of his method. The film is most persuasive when it lets the conversations take their time. Beane and Brand have to persuade other people to take a professional risk, and Pitt and Hill make that sound difficult even when the screenplay has cleared their way. No prior interest in baseball is required, but a little patience with management will help. *Fi1m score 83, published 15 September 2026.* ## What the critics say Most critics find Moneyball an intelligent, engaging sports drama that makes baseball statistics compelling without relying on much on-field action. Praise centres on Brad Pitt’s restrained performance as Billy Beane, with several reviews also valuing his exchanges with Jonah Hill. The sharp script and Bennett Miller’s measured direction receive much of the credit for turning recruitment decisions and resistance to change into involving drama. For its admirers, the appeal extends beyond an interest in baseball. The reservations concern familiar underdog plotting, thin characterisation and a tendency to overstate the wisdom of its statistical approach. The spread is fairly wide, though even less enthusiastic reviews generally find something to admire in Pitt. Screen Daily finds the staging elegant but the film monotonous and less thoughtful than it appears. Slant Magazine offers the strongest dissent, arguing that conventional storytelling and broad character strokes blunt its account of unconventional thinking. ## Straight answers **Is Moneyball worth watching?** *Moneyball* is worth watching for anyone who can enjoy a sports drama spent almost entirely in meetings, and we scored it 83. Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill make the arguments about how to value baseball players witty and warm, and no knowledge of the game is needed. The film does make its opponents too easy to beat, and at 134 minutes it runs a little long. **How long is Moneyball, and what is it rated?** *Moneyball* runs 2h 14m and is rated PG-13 by the MPA in the US. It is a drama and sport film. **Where can I watch Moneyball in the US?** *Moneyball* is streaming on Disney+ in the US, and it is also available to rent from Amazon Prime Video and Apple TV from $3.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service. **How violent or frightening is Moneyball, and is it suitable for children?** *Moneyball* is a 12A drama about baseball management, and it contains no violence or frightening material that we noticed. The drama is in offices and conversations about statistics and money, so younger children are more likely to be bored than upset. Teenagers with some patience for talk about work should be fine with it. **How does Moneyball compare to High Flying Bird?** *Moneyball* is the warmer and more welcoming of the two, while [*High Flying Bird*](https://film.one/film/high-flying-bird) is quicker, denser and colder. Both spend their time on the business of sport rather than the playing of it, but Bennett Miller gives Pitt and Hill room to be charming, where Steven Soderbergh keeps his agent talking at speed for ninety minutes. Start with *Moneyball* if you want to care about the people; choose the other if you want the sharper argument. **What should I watch after Moneyball?** After *Moneyball*, try [*High Flying Bird*](https://film.one/film/high-flying-bird) (2019, Fi1m 78): More sporting business behind closed doors, with sharp talk and contested loyalties. Then [*Ikiru*](https://film.one/film/ikiru) (1952, Fi1m 92): A man questions what his job is for, with quietly moving results; and [*The Social Network*](https://film.one/film/the-social-network) (2010, Fi1m 91): Quick minds and difficult colleagues make another absorbing drama out of professional ambition. ### Reviews we read (16) - **Little White Lies**, Dan Stewart (2/5/4): The critic finds it gripping drama despite the premise, praising the script and Pitt's subtle performance as key to its success as the best film about statistics. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/moneyball) - **The New York Times**, Manohla Dargis (90/100, inferred): The critic calls it an exuberant fictionalized look at how Billy Beane transformed a poor team into serious competition by ignoring traditional baseball wisdom in favor of statistics. She highlights the sharp script and how director Bennett Miller turns dry material into a pleasurable Hollywood diversion, with strong praise for Brad Pitt's performance. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/movies/brad-pitt-in-moneyball-by-bennett-miller.html) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (85/100, inferred): The critic praises Brad Pitt's fine performance as Billy Beane and the film's intelligent, exciting take on the story of data-driven baseball management. He singles out the superb scenes between the manager and his young statistical adviser, along with the strong script by Zaillian and Sorkin. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/nov/27/moneyball-review-brad-pitt-baseball) - **The AV Club**, Scott Tobias (B+): Miller’s shrewd adaptation turns the stats-driven tale into an engaging sports movie for number-crunchers, with intelligent direction, crackling Sorkin dialogue, and performances full of revolutionary fervor. It persuades as a rousing egghead triumph despite some unacknowledged ironies in the on-field success. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/moneyball-1798169676) - **Los Angeles Times**, Kenneth Turan (80/100, inferred): The critic describes it as a thoughtful, entertaining, and surprising sports movie that prioritizes a man's quixotic quest to revolutionize baseball over conventional victory narratives. He singles out Brad Pitt's low-key star power in the lead role and Bennett Miller's restrained storytelling style that allows actors to flourish. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-sep-23-la-et-moneyball-20110923-story.html) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, Kirk Honeycutt (75/100, inferred): The film succeeds as a rewarding, workmanlike underdog drama focused on unconventional front-office tactics rather than on-field action, with strong chemistry between Pitt and Hill and effective supporting turns from Hoffman and Pratt. It lacks the knockout impact of The Social Network but pulls a timeless story from inside baseball. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/moneyball-234745/) - **The New Yorker**, David Denby (70/100, inferred): The critic praises the film as one of the most soulful baseball movies for confronting the game's anguish and highlights Brad Pitt's convincing portrayal of the tormented, revolutionary Beane. He notes Bennett Miller's perceptive direction of character dynamics but questions the over-celebration of sabermetrics and the irony of sacred passion devoted to cold numbers. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/03/playing-the-numbers) - **Time Out**, Tom Huddleston (3/5): Praises the breezy approach, Sorkin's script and cast performances for a pleasurable watch, but complains of unfocused characters and a muted ending. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/moneyball) - **Screen Daily** (50/100, inferred): Notes Pitt's dignified performance and elegant staging but criticizes the film as too one-tone and not as thoughtful as it seems. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/moneyball/5031811.article) - **Slant Magazine** (40/100, inferred): The film flattens its intermittently smart story of thinking differently into formulaic narrative, with broad character strokes and a dutiful big-game sequence that creates tonal whiplash. Pitt’s solid performance and some strong late scenes are undercut by musty humanizing elements and a bet-hedging approach to its subject. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/moneyball/) - **Empire**, Olly Richards: The critic praises the film as an uplifting and exciting sports movie despite lacking on-field action, highlighting its focus on innovative thinking, second chances, and strong performances especially from Brad Pitt. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/moneyball-review/) - **The Wrap** (85/100, inferred): The critic finds the film riveting despite not caring about sports, calling it a witty and captivating look at thinking outside the box in business. They single out director Bennett Miller for keeping the story percolating with organic elements like family life and conflicts, and praise Brad Pitt's perfectly calibrated performance. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/moneyball-knocks-it-out-park-31196/) - **Digital Spy**, Simon Reynolds (80/100, inferred): It's a wonderful surprise, a movie about people shunning sporting romance that somehow manages to still embrace it. Pitt delivers a top-form performance and Miller directs with restraint. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a343374/moneyball-review/) - **/Film**, Germain Lussier (8/10): The critic sees the film as a character study about standing up for an unconventional idea against tradition, crediting Brad Pitt's confident and heartfelt lead performance along with strong support from Jonah Hill. It notes the talky script and some factual liberties taken with the true story but finds the core message resonant. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/517678/moneyball-review-brad-pitt-hits-triple-wall/) - **The Skinny**, Becky Bartlett (4/5): Follows the familiar underdog sports formula but is shot with style, features archive footage that makes it involving and easy to follow, and makes one root for the misfit team. [Read](https://www.theskinny.co.uk/film/new-releases/moneyball) - **Den of Geek**, Ron Hogan (3/5): The critic finds it a very good sports movie that's entertaining and turns stats into fun, but wishes it was as good as it thinks it is, criticizing some indulgence and length. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/moneyball-review/) ## Details - **Director:** Bennett Miller - **Director:** Bennett Miller - **Screenplay:** Aaron Sorkin, Steven Zaillian - **Story:** Stan Chervin - **Cinematography:** Wally Pfister - **Editor:** Christopher Tellefsen - **Music:** Mychael Danna - **Production design:** Jess Gonchor - **Costume design:** Kasia Walicka Maimone - **Producer:** Michael De Luca, Rachael Horovitz, Brad Pitt - **Cast:** Brad Pitt as Billy Beane; Jonah Hill as Peter Brand; Philip Seymour Hoffman as Art Howe; Robin Wright as Sharon; Chris Pratt as Scott Hatteberg; Stephen Bishop as David Justice; Reed Diamond as Mark Shapiro; Brent Jennings as Ron Washington - **Runtime:** 2h 14m - **Certificate (MPA):** PG-13 - **Release (the US):** 23 September 2011 - **Genres:** Drama, Sport - **Also in:** [Best Picture winners](https://film.one/collections/oscar-best-picture.md) (Nominee, 2011); [Golden Globe Best Drama winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-globe-drama.md) (Nominee, 2011) - **Budget:** $50 million - **Box office:** $110 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1R-LwHbld4 ## Where to watch in the US - Disney+: add-on, uhd - Amazon Prime Video: rent $3.99, uhd - Apple TV: rent $3.99, hd - Amazon Prime Video: buy $14.99, uhd - Apple TV: buy $14.99, hd *Checked 2026-09-15.* Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, ID, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, SI, SK, TH, TR, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Academy Awards 2012: Best Actor (nominated); Best Film Editing (nominated); Best Picture (nominated); Best Sound (nominated); Best Supporting Actor (nominated); Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay (nominated) ## If you liked this - *The Man in the White Suit* (1951): An ingenious employee discovers how quickly established interests can agree to dislike him. - *High Flying Bird* (2019), Fi1m 78: More sporting business behind closed doors, with sharp talk and contested loyalties. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/high-flying-bird.md) - *Ikiru* (1952), Fi1m 92: A man questions what his job is for, with quietly moving results. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/ikiru.md) - *The Social Network* (2010), Fi1m 91: Quick minds and difficult colleagues make another absorbing drama out of professional ambition. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-social-network.md) - *The Lunchbox* (2013), Fi1m 75: A quieter choice, with restrained acting and unexpected feeling around ordinary working lives. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-lunchbox.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/moneyball