Battle of the Sexes
- 2017
- Tous publics
- 2h 1min
La véritable histoire du match de tennis de 1973 entre le numéro un mondial Billie Jean King et l'ancien champion magouilleur Bobby Riggs.La véritable histoire du match de tennis de 1973 entre le numéro un mondial Billie Jean King et l'ancien champion magouilleur Bobby Riggs.La véritable histoire du match de tennis de 1973 entre le numéro un mondial Billie Jean King et l'ancien champion magouilleur Bobby Riggs.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 3 victoires et 24 nominations au total
Avis à la une
A light, fluffy, sweet treat, Battle of the Sexes is assuredly a crowd-pleasing movie. But much like cotton candy-the movie offers very little to digest.
Overall, the movie will win over most viewers with its familiar feel-good true story angle. If you liked 2016's Hidden Figures, chances are that this is a movie for you.
It strives for and ultimately achieves the classic feel-good movie moments. Hero activist beats chauvinist pig. Good triumphs over evil. Or something like that. There is no deeper exploration. There is no hard-hitting, brutal honesty. The examinations are superficial and dive no deeper than the surface.
Basically, movie is too simple. But sexism and the problems that it causes are complicated. In the movie, everything is spelled out in a painfully obvious way. It condescends to make sure that everyone understands. The sexist characters come out in shameless and laughably overt ways. The good person defeats the bad person and everyone cheers. It's a fairy tale ending, hooray! But none of that is realistic.
Sexist and discriminatory people in power don't publicly profess their feelings in such blunt ways. So, when the movie scenes portray characters as loud and proud sexists, I can only roll my eyes. I know the movie uses these exaggerated characters and moments to make the situation abundantly clear to the audience. I just prefer a bit of subtlety.
Instead, the movie handles the delicate, nuanced topics of sexism and repression of homosexuality with the blunt force of a lumberjack with a giant axe. Wrong professional and wrong tool. We needed a surgeon with medical instruments.
The movie still has its upside. Steve Carell and Emma Stone are charming and wonderful, which is an amazing feat considering the character that Carell plays. Bobby Riggs (Carell) flaunts his chauvinism in such a flamboyant manner that showmanship is clearly his primary focus. This is one detail that the movie gets right, thanks largely to Carell. Riggs doesn't actually believe the gross, archaic things he says about women. It's an act. He says them to attract interest in the upcoming Man vs. Woman tennis match with Billie Jean King (Stone).
The storytelling is clear, even if not always smooth. The combination of King's life-changing romance along with the battle of the sexes tennis match fit awkwardly. Though, I'm sure those two things also fit awkwardly in King's life at the time, so I accept the somewhat clumsy clash of the two storylines. Again, if you liked Hidden Figures, you will like Battle of the Sexes. It's uplifting and sends a valuable and inspiring message to young girls everywhere. On that basis, I applaud the movie. Despite its flaws, it's still a story worthy of knowing.
It strives for and ultimately achieves the classic feel-good movie moments. Hero activist beats chauvinist pig. Good triumphs over evil. Or something like that. There is no deeper exploration. There is no hard-hitting, brutal honesty. The examinations are superficial and dive no deeper than the surface.
Basically, movie is too simple. But sexism and the problems that it causes are complicated. In the movie, everything is spelled out in a painfully obvious way. It condescends to make sure that everyone understands. The sexist characters come out in shameless and laughably overt ways. The good person defeats the bad person and everyone cheers. It's a fairy tale ending, hooray! But none of that is realistic.
Sexist and discriminatory people in power don't publicly profess their feelings in such blunt ways. So, when the movie scenes portray characters as loud and proud sexists, I can only roll my eyes. I know the movie uses these exaggerated characters and moments to make the situation abundantly clear to the audience. I just prefer a bit of subtlety.
Instead, the movie handles the delicate, nuanced topics of sexism and repression of homosexuality with the blunt force of a lumberjack with a giant axe. Wrong professional and wrong tool. We needed a surgeon with medical instruments.
The movie still has its upside. Steve Carell and Emma Stone are charming and wonderful, which is an amazing feat considering the character that Carell plays. Bobby Riggs (Carell) flaunts his chauvinism in such a flamboyant manner that showmanship is clearly his primary focus. This is one detail that the movie gets right, thanks largely to Carell. Riggs doesn't actually believe the gross, archaic things he says about women. It's an act. He says them to attract interest in the upcoming Man vs. Woman tennis match with Billie Jean King (Stone).
The storytelling is clear, even if not always smooth. The combination of King's life-changing romance along with the battle of the sexes tennis match fit awkwardly. Though, I'm sure those two things also fit awkwardly in King's life at the time, so I accept the somewhat clumsy clash of the two storylines. Again, if you liked Hidden Figures, you will like Battle of the Sexes. It's uplifting and sends a valuable and inspiring message to young girls everywhere. On that basis, I applaud the movie. Despite its flaws, it's still a story worthy of knowing.
This is a very interesting movie especially because of the real life subject. The movie has taken a few minor liberties to the original story but it is still extremely eye-opening. The struggle for women is real and the hustle even tougher. The direction has a lot of heart and pretty no non-sense.
The themes presented in this film are still relevant and have merit. With that said, I want to add that ever since Ibsen wrote "A Doll's House," it's very rare to get a film (or play for that matter) that is charged with the theme of gender equality and presents it in a way that truly resonates. What do I mean? In films that aim to give a message or present an issues, such as when the writer wants to say something about the relevant society, more often than not, the writer portrays those characters in simple categorizations of good and bad. That may work in a superhero film, but in a piece of realism, where character development and relationships are key elements to the storytelling, simple good and bad just won't do. That's my issue with this film. The screenplay simplifies a few integral characters too much, in favor of hoisting up its protagonist.
To get this out of the way, the performances are fantastic. Emma Stone and Steve Carell lead the cast well, and the cast doesn't have a weak link in it. In particular, a lot of credit has to be given to Steve Carell. He took a character that was underwritten and perhaps even misrepresented and makes him sympathetic and someone to root for. Andrea Riseborough also delivers a very affecting performance and really gives us some great scene work with Emma Stone.
The directing is swift, well paced and well filmed. Kudos to the cinematographer who really has a wonderful grasp on stillness to promote an essential moment and exerts great uses of soft and hard focus to portray dramatic moments and internalize character feelings. The editing also deserves a shout out for some wonderful pacing and really effectively switching between the grainy, 70s like cinematography and more clear cinematography.
Now, back to the screenplay. What made and still makes "A Doll's House" the ultimate gender-equality script is that every character can be sympathized with. We learn more about the human condition and evils of society, rather than placing blame and anger on individual groups. There are only two men that can be rooted for without hesitation and that's our protagonist's husband and father. Every other guy is completely unlikable and has no arc, and Steve Carell's character can be questioned. Carell's character, who is a vital part of this story, isn't written very well or thoroughly. It's always hard to have two protagonists in a film, especially at a reasonable and well paced time. Carell's character is both an antagonist and protagonist or, at least attempts to be so. Carell's character opposes Emma Stone's. It's a man versus women ordeal and their tennis match is the crisis and climax of the film. But, here's the issue. Carell's character is NOT the antagonist. It's society! So why is Carell's character's standing within the realm of the film so questionable? Why doesn't he get his own arc? Every major character in "A Doll's House" takes a journey. That's what makes us empathize with them and come away disliking their society, and not the products of that society. The same would work with this film. But instead, there is a co- protagonist / antagonist that is not written for people to care about or even empathize with. He gets no arc, no change. He's unaffected. He may as well have been a smaller part.
Why is this an issue? Because Emma Stone's character is a catalyst. She's the driving force and vehicle used within the film to represent the affects of an unjust era and to showcase the positive effects that a change in this society would have. Unfortunately, because Carell's character and the real antagonists (the sexists who sit atop the societal ladder) don't change, because we only see them as unlikable, this story turns into something simple and ultimately un-fulfilling. Stone's character merely wins the battle within the film and we come away knowing that and are momentarily happy. However, that soon goes away, which makes this entertaining dramedy perhaps a little forgettable. Had the writing been more substantial and caring to all its characters, and forgiving to all its characters and condemned society instead, we'd come away with a more profound understanding of where issues lie and are issued from. That's a memorable film. I suppose the cinematic world is still chasing Ibsen.
I give this film 3 out of 5 stars for its entertainment value and performances and recommend it for ages 13 to 18. Reviewed by Willie J., KIDS FIRST! Film Critic.
To get this out of the way, the performances are fantastic. Emma Stone and Steve Carell lead the cast well, and the cast doesn't have a weak link in it. In particular, a lot of credit has to be given to Steve Carell. He took a character that was underwritten and perhaps even misrepresented and makes him sympathetic and someone to root for. Andrea Riseborough also delivers a very affecting performance and really gives us some great scene work with Emma Stone.
The directing is swift, well paced and well filmed. Kudos to the cinematographer who really has a wonderful grasp on stillness to promote an essential moment and exerts great uses of soft and hard focus to portray dramatic moments and internalize character feelings. The editing also deserves a shout out for some wonderful pacing and really effectively switching between the grainy, 70s like cinematography and more clear cinematography.
Now, back to the screenplay. What made and still makes "A Doll's House" the ultimate gender-equality script is that every character can be sympathized with. We learn more about the human condition and evils of society, rather than placing blame and anger on individual groups. There are only two men that can be rooted for without hesitation and that's our protagonist's husband and father. Every other guy is completely unlikable and has no arc, and Steve Carell's character can be questioned. Carell's character, who is a vital part of this story, isn't written very well or thoroughly. It's always hard to have two protagonists in a film, especially at a reasonable and well paced time. Carell's character is both an antagonist and protagonist or, at least attempts to be so. Carell's character opposes Emma Stone's. It's a man versus women ordeal and their tennis match is the crisis and climax of the film. But, here's the issue. Carell's character is NOT the antagonist. It's society! So why is Carell's character's standing within the realm of the film so questionable? Why doesn't he get his own arc? Every major character in "A Doll's House" takes a journey. That's what makes us empathize with them and come away disliking their society, and not the products of that society. The same would work with this film. But instead, there is a co- protagonist / antagonist that is not written for people to care about or even empathize with. He gets no arc, no change. He's unaffected. He may as well have been a smaller part.
Why is this an issue? Because Emma Stone's character is a catalyst. She's the driving force and vehicle used within the film to represent the affects of an unjust era and to showcase the positive effects that a change in this society would have. Unfortunately, because Carell's character and the real antagonists (the sexists who sit atop the societal ladder) don't change, because we only see them as unlikable, this story turns into something simple and ultimately un-fulfilling. Stone's character merely wins the battle within the film and we come away knowing that and are momentarily happy. However, that soon goes away, which makes this entertaining dramedy perhaps a little forgettable. Had the writing been more substantial and caring to all its characters, and forgiving to all its characters and condemned society instead, we'd come away with a more profound understanding of where issues lie and are issued from. That's a memorable film. I suppose the cinematic world is still chasing Ibsen.
I give this film 3 out of 5 stars for its entertainment value and performances and recommend it for ages 13 to 18. Reviewed by Willie J., KIDS FIRST! Film Critic.
There is no doubt that the event on which "Battle of the Sexes" is based on was a monumental moment in sports and cultural history. The exhibition tennis match between Bobby Riggs & Billie Jean King was in part a circus, but also (in large part) a key moment in the taking of women athletes seriously on the national stage. While this film eventually arrives at that point, I felt like it took far too long for it to "get to the point", so to speak.
For a basic plot summary, this film tells the story of the run-up to the Battle of the Sexes match. Riggs (Steve Carell) is a male chauvinist through and through (or at least plays the role of one), while King (Emma Stone) is perhaps the premiere women's tennis player of her era. While King struggles with her confusing sexuality and Riggs falls on hard times with his own wife, this sets the wheels in motion for a match that will be more than just an exhibition, as it seemingly carries with it the weight of the Women's Liberation movement of the 1970s.
Let me be clear about one thing: This isn't a "bad" movie by any stretch. Great acting performances are given, and the final 30 minutes are fully riveting. I completely understood and appreciated the message that was being conveyed.
That being said, the entire film is predicated on the notion that the setup (e.g. the first 70-80 minutes or so) of both lead figures will lead to more dramatic payoff in the end. For me, that didn't happen (in fact, it actually had the opposite effect). I'm not sure that King's sexual leanings needed to be a focal point of the story, and in Riggs' case his relationship with his wife (played by Elisabeth Shue) should have been developed even more. Because neither of these things really get on track, at least the first half of the film felt slow and stodgy to me.
Once the match is set and the buildup/execution of it begins, though, the film really shines. I only have video footage to go on here (I was not alive for the real thing), but Stone is sometimes a dead-ringer for King on the court. Carell's antics as Riggs were also accurate from what I have read/heard.
So, while being a solid film, I cannot give "Battle of the Sexes" more than just above-average marks for the lackluster opening acts. I felt like a different lens was needed (or the execution of the chosen lens needed to be better) in order to make the movie truly riveting in the end instead of "just" somewhat inspirational. It never got to that "next level" for me (aside from the material about the actual match itself).
For a basic plot summary, this film tells the story of the run-up to the Battle of the Sexes match. Riggs (Steve Carell) is a male chauvinist through and through (or at least plays the role of one), while King (Emma Stone) is perhaps the premiere women's tennis player of her era. While King struggles with her confusing sexuality and Riggs falls on hard times with his own wife, this sets the wheels in motion for a match that will be more than just an exhibition, as it seemingly carries with it the weight of the Women's Liberation movement of the 1970s.
Let me be clear about one thing: This isn't a "bad" movie by any stretch. Great acting performances are given, and the final 30 minutes are fully riveting. I completely understood and appreciated the message that was being conveyed.
That being said, the entire film is predicated on the notion that the setup (e.g. the first 70-80 minutes or so) of both lead figures will lead to more dramatic payoff in the end. For me, that didn't happen (in fact, it actually had the opposite effect). I'm not sure that King's sexual leanings needed to be a focal point of the story, and in Riggs' case his relationship with his wife (played by Elisabeth Shue) should have been developed even more. Because neither of these things really get on track, at least the first half of the film felt slow and stodgy to me.
Once the match is set and the buildup/execution of it begins, though, the film really shines. I only have video footage to go on here (I was not alive for the real thing), but Stone is sometimes a dead-ringer for King on the court. Carell's antics as Riggs were also accurate from what I have read/heard.
So, while being a solid film, I cannot give "Battle of the Sexes" more than just above-average marks for the lackluster opening acts. I felt like a different lens was needed (or the execution of the chosen lens needed to be better) in order to make the movie truly riveting in the end instead of "just" somewhat inspirational. It never got to that "next level" for me (aside from the material about the actual match itself).
Whilst Emma Stone puts down her marker for a possible third Oscar nomination the film as a whole left me slightly cold. But then, when did you last see a GREAT tennis movie. That's right. You didn't.
But this potentially offered more because it appeared multi layered and could have been more nuanced than it is.
It tackles two themes simultaneously. First, Billie Jean King's lesbian relationship with her hairdresser Marilyn Barnett (Andrea Riseborough) that eventually ended in controversy as she was publicly outed by her lover when they split in 1981. Throughout King remained married to her first love Larry (played sympathetically but a little limply by Austin Stowell). This is handled very tastefully and, for me, was the better part of the whole.
Second, and the source of the title, the movie explores sexism in the women's tennis game that led to her breaking away from the WTA and its sexist president, Jack Kramer (in an unconvincing performance by Bill Pullman), and taking on a challenge billed as THE BATTLE OF THE SEXES with 55 year old ex tennis champion and self proclaimed Male Chauvinist, Bobby Riggs (Steve Carrell).
I disliked Carell's part greatly, not because he didn't perform it well but that it is written to make him out to be a complete idiot (which no doubt he was). He becomes a character of himself quickly and I neither liked nor disliked him (I was annoyed by him though). It all makes for a strange mix of comedy, politics, sexuality and revolt.
And the revolt was all too gentlemanly for me - despite the subject matter and the ire it must have stirred nobody really ever loses the plot and so the film lacks edge and dramatic tension.
What's more, it's 30 minutes too long and the overwrought soundtrack (Nicholas Britell - it really is a shocker) is over-pervasive and just plain annoying.
Emma Stone rarely puts a foot wrong in my view and at times you really do think BJK is on screen. That part, and the general 70's styling of the movie, is excellent but it's ponderously directed and although the final shoot out between BJK and Riggs has an element of tension we all know the outcome and Britell's pomp and circumstance was gradually doing my nut in.
Just because you loved Little Miss Sunshine it does not follow that you will love this.
But this potentially offered more because it appeared multi layered and could have been more nuanced than it is.
It tackles two themes simultaneously. First, Billie Jean King's lesbian relationship with her hairdresser Marilyn Barnett (Andrea Riseborough) that eventually ended in controversy as she was publicly outed by her lover when they split in 1981. Throughout King remained married to her first love Larry (played sympathetically but a little limply by Austin Stowell). This is handled very tastefully and, for me, was the better part of the whole.
Second, and the source of the title, the movie explores sexism in the women's tennis game that led to her breaking away from the WTA and its sexist president, Jack Kramer (in an unconvincing performance by Bill Pullman), and taking on a challenge billed as THE BATTLE OF THE SEXES with 55 year old ex tennis champion and self proclaimed Male Chauvinist, Bobby Riggs (Steve Carrell).
I disliked Carell's part greatly, not because he didn't perform it well but that it is written to make him out to be a complete idiot (which no doubt he was). He becomes a character of himself quickly and I neither liked nor disliked him (I was annoyed by him though). It all makes for a strange mix of comedy, politics, sexuality and revolt.
And the revolt was all too gentlemanly for me - despite the subject matter and the ire it must have stirred nobody really ever loses the plot and so the film lacks edge and dramatic tension.
What's more, it's 30 minutes too long and the overwrought soundtrack (Nicholas Britell - it really is a shocker) is over-pervasive and just plain annoying.
Emma Stone rarely puts a foot wrong in my view and at times you really do think BJK is on screen. That part, and the general 70's styling of the movie, is excellent but it's ponderously directed and although the final shoot out between BJK and Riggs has an element of tension we all know the outcome and Britell's pomp and circumstance was gradually doing my nut in.
Just because you loved Little Miss Sunshine it does not follow that you will love this.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn 1973, Billie Jean King was 29 and Bobby Riggs was 55. At the time of filming, Emma Stone was 28 and Steve Carell was 54.
- GaffesWhen Marilyn leaves the hair salon for Houston, she's shown foiling a client's hair. Foiling was not patented until 1977, so it should have been a frosting cap.
- Citations
Billie Jean King: I'm not saying women are better. I've never said that. I'm saying we deserve some respect.
- Crédits fousThe Fox Searchlight Pictures and TSG Entertainment logos are redone in period-appropriate styles.
- ConnexionsEdited from Tennis Battle of the Sexes: Billie Jean King vs Bobby Riggs (1973)
- Bandes originalesMovie House Theme
Written and Performed by Nicholas Britell
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Battle of the Sexes?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- La batalla de los sexos
- Lieux de tournage
- Westin Bonaventure Hotel & Suites - 404 S. Figueroa Street, Downtown, Los Angeles, Californie, États-Unis(Hotel where Marylin & Larry run into each other in the elevator)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 25 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 12 638 526 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 518 332 $US
- 24 sept. 2017
- Montant brut mondial
- 18 598 607 $US
- Durée2 heures 1 minute
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What is the streaming release date of Battle of the Sexes (2017) in Canada?
Répondre