Bad News Bears (2005)

—Overview
—Photos
—About this Film
—Spiritual Connections

I recently wrote a review where I had nothing but kudos for the remake of a classic, The Longest Yard. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same about the Bad News Bears. Maybe if I had never seen the original 1976 version of the Bad News Bears I would have enjoyed this current release a bit more. But that is not the case.

About the only similarity between the original 1976 and the 2005 versions is the overall plot. A self acclaimed drunk and loser, whose claim to fame is that he once stepped onto a major league field, is hired to coach a team of misfits and the athletically challenged. The story follows the coach, as much a misfit as the kids he is coaching, and the team he grows to love as they rise from the cellar to become a competitor. But this is where the similarity ends. The main focus of the movie is not about the team’s turn around, as much as it is about the many relationships and the evolution of these relationships during this one Little League season.

Well, at least that is what you get out of the 1976 version. And this is the big difference between the two. In the 1976 version a lot of time is spent on character development and the relationship of the characters. How the events of the baseball season impact these relationships and the characters themselves. Walter Matthau as Coach Morris Buttermaker and his estranged daughter Amanda Whurlitzer (played by Tatum O’Neal) gave excellent performances and you really got to know and feel for these characters. The Director, Michael Ritchie, focused on these characters and their relationship, giving you a glimpse as to why Buttermaker was who he was and how hard it was for he and his daughter to reconnect. And when they do, you feel like you were there for the painful and loving effort that it required.

While Billy Bob Thornton was able to convince you that Buttermaker was a drunken, go nowhere, has-been baseball player, there was little depth to the character. And I was totally thrown off, even though I knew it was coming, when he all of sudden becomes “the coach�. It was like one minute he is this unrecoverable scumbag and then the next he is the experienced coach, driven to whip his team into shape. Why did he make this change? There was no buildup—he just changes? Not very convincing and not very entertaining. And the relationship between Buttermaker and his alienated daughter, while highlighted as it was in the earlier release, it was not emphasized in this remake. In the current release, if that part of the film had been left on the editing floor, it probably wouldn’t have made much of a difference to this newest version. By comparison this was essential to the earlier version and is what really made the earlier version a classic. This difference is carried through with all the rest of the characters. Other than an off-handed mention about his father, we have no idea why the character Kelly Leak is such a rebel. And the relationship between Kelly and Amanda is almost inconsequential in this newest release—where it was a critical component of the original movie.

And what about Timmy Lupis, Tanner Boyle, and the rest of the team? In the original you got to know these characters and why, finally, when they came together it was such a wondrous thing. It seems like the only purpose in the current version for the rest of the team is to provide an outlet for obscenities, flipping off each other, and someone for Buttermaker to cuss at. The earlier release, when it first came out, was considered a bit edgy (a young girl like Amanda talking about sexual things, kids being exposed to the excesses of the original drunken Buttermaker). But this new release isn’t edgy—it’s just a flourish of profanity, racism, and sexual innuendo; from beginning to end; in a hope that if you provide enough shock value, some people will find it funny. I don't mind if a film requires these components to provide atmosphere or emphasis to the storyline, but when the purpose is just to fill in (most of the film) or used as for shock value (and even then not very successfully), then I am artistically offended.

And it was funny at times. There were some scenes that made you laugh and some interactions that made you think. But these were few and far between. I did like Sammi Kane Kraft, who plays Buttermaker’s daughter (Amanda) in the 2005 version. Though it probably was not a stretch for her to play the role as she is a Little League pitcher in real life. I would like to see her in a different role where she is given the opportunity to demonstrate her acting abilities. Because the Bad News Bears was not one of these.

Even though the film has been dissected to remove the factors that made the original such a success, the overall Message in the Movie remains. We see this Message in Buttermaker’s salvation as he develops an affinity for the Bad News Bear players (though, like I said earlier, this transformation is sudden and without any real substance). Also, though lightly touched on, is the reconciliation with his daughter. A similarity to the returning prodigal son story, but in reverse. The father, who has been away from the family returns, and after some trepidation on the daughter’s part, accepted back – even after everything he has done wrong. We are shown how the change in the father impacts the daughter. The same applies in our own lives. How we interact with others can make a major difference in their lives and the reverse is true. Our relationships have a profound impact on how we see the world and others around us. Lastly, we see fellowship exemplified as individuals come together to form a team, especially in the relationship between Tanner and Lupis (though this is again lightly touched on in the 2005 release).

With all the great movies out this Summer, I would put this one on the backburner until it comes out on DVD and you have seen everything else you want to see. Better yet, go rent the 1976 version and really enjoy the film as it was meant to be.

—Overview
—Photos
—About this Film
—Spiritual Connections