swdan

It's funny to see people criticize this movie for being "unrealistic." That this is a common theme among detractors leads me to believe that Gallo is operating on a level that certain people can only find absurd.

I'm not sure whether I think people who don't enjoy "Buffalo '66" are stupid, or just emotionally cold, or perhaps, most likely, lacking taste. This is definitely one of the best movies I've ever seen, and I really feel a little bit sad that not everyone can enjoy it. It just seems painfully obvious to me that, literally, not one second of the film is wasted. The events of the "plot" are totally irrelevant. Gallo has introduced an old dramatic technique to the--let's not kid ourselves-- relatively new medium of cinema: catharsis.

It's difficult to make a movie about football (soccer) that will satisfy one's appetite for interesting match scenes as well as a desire for a worthwhile plot. 'A Shot at Glory' certainly does not pull this off, but it is an attempt worth watching in any case.

The plot is rather mediocre, but at least it is somewhat linked to the fortunes of the team itself. Nosy American owner (Keaton) buys team, threatens to move it to Ireland if aging coach (Duvall) can't win the Scottish Cup. The second strand of the plot involves the former Golden Boot winner (McCoist) brought in by the owner, who is the somewhat estranged son-in-law of the coach. The third element, of course, is the performance of the team itself. There is certainly some awful dialog in the film, but it quickly passes from memory once the matches begin.

In comparison to 'Bend It Like Beckham' and 'Mean Machine,' the two football-related films 'A Shot at Glory' can easily be weighed against, the film at hand establishes itself as the clear choice in terms of the realism of the matches. The experience of watching each match is rather like watching a cinematic version of Championship Manager -- there is very little continuity between moves, but it somehow seems to make sense.

At the end of the day, 'A Shot at Glory' is well worth watching if you are looking for a well-executed football movie. The plot may be formulaic, but the match scenes put many others to shame.

I saw this film on a plane, which perhaps gives some indication of its overall quality. However, it has its moments of clarity from time to time.

The main problem with the film, though, is the horrible casting decision of selecting Amanda Bynes to portray a "free spirit." This presents a huge stumbling blook to the audience -- how are we supposed to believe that such a doe-eyed girl is a street-savvy New Yorker? Her hair is too straight, her wardrobe too designer to be a really down-to-earth girl. (Also, she's got bank! How else could she have skipped town, on Virgin no less [I wonder how much they paid for that snippet], without getting any money from her mother?) Hearing lines 'you were born to stand out' describing Bynes' character provokes laughter... As if any girl who wears a Kangol hat now and again is cosmopolitan!

Apart from that minor (I jest) flaw, the movie isn't terrible. A few of the characters are mildly interesting, enough to keep me somewhat attentive. The film could certainly stand to do without the cheesy "I yam who I yam" moralizing, but, in the end, the film was entertaining, I stayed awake, and I guess that just about says enough.