Eight Men Out (1988) Poster

(1988)

User Reviews

Review this title
104 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Interesting Film for all Baseball Fans
snazel13 April 2007
Eight Men Out provides a "Reader's Digest" version of the complicated events surrounding the 1919 World Series.

If you forgive the fact the film has to simplify certain aspects of the conspiracy in order to make the film easier to digest, then you will find that Eight Men Out is a worthy film and in the category of "baseball movies" it's one of the best.

There are anachronisms in the film here and there, the worst of which is Buck Weaver's question asking which of the lawyers was the "Babe Ruth" of law. Sure Babe Ruth was coming into his own by 1920, but most ballplayers in that era would not have place Ruth in the class of Cobb, Tris Speaker or Walter Johnson. For baseball fans, this line in particular really comes off as shallow, especially since the rest of the film really tries to capture the "dead-ball" era. For the most part though, this film feels and sounds a lot like America right after World War I ends, a fascinating time and place.

Studs Terkel steals the show in my estimation. His character in the film is not far from whom he is in real life and his authenticity is undeniable. John Sayles is a little stiff by comparison and his singing in the railway car (which according to legend did actually happen), is rather difficult to bear. None the less, his direction makes up for his foibles as an actor.

Straitharn is another gem in this movie, and once again this actor seems to get right to the soul of the characters he is given to play. Eddie Cicotte's dilemmas are written all over Straitharn's face in every scene, he's also given some of the best dialog in the film. Cusack plays his part well, despite the fact that many of his scenes are reduced to clichés. Cusack's best moments are when he is frustrated about his inclusion in the conspiracy trial, despite the fact he gave his all to try and win the series. His outbursts in the courtroom seem perfect, as if drawn from the trial transcripts themselves.

Joe Jackson is given unfair treatment. If "Field of Dreams" mythologizes Jackson to point of hyperbole, "Eight Men Out" plays up his illiteracy with too much of a heavy hand. Joe Jackson wasn't stupid, indeed if you read his last major interview before he died, he speaks about the "Black Sox" with great alacrity and clarity. He was not as ignorant as this film would have you believe. One day someone will produce a film about Joe Jackson, that will portray him accurately, but Eight Men Out is not that film.

Although their roles are very minor, Kid Gleason and Ray Schalk are really well played and written. These two went through a very difficult time during the series, and this is well demonstrated. One minor beef is that Nemo Leibold, Shano Collins and other players outside of the conspiracy are never touched upon at all. This is understandable to a degree given the relatively short length of the film, despite the complexity of the subject matter.

The baseball scenes themselves are well done. The bats, balls, gloves and uniforms look like the equipment of that era and the ballparks are successful mock ups for the most part. There are even a couple of nifty athletic displays in the outfield that must have taken several takes to pull off.

Overall, this is my second favorite baseball movie, next to "Bull Durham". Its a little light on some of the details of the conspiracy, but it makes up for it in other areas. It has some great music, some great sets, some solid acting and overall seems genuine and fair to all the major players in the conspiracy.

Eight Men Out isn't perfect, but it isn't as flawed as Roger Ebert would have you believe. If you a fan of baseball in fact, I'd say its mandatory viewing.
23 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
the antidote to Field of Dreams
mjneu5915 November 2010
When the team that couldn't be beat threw the World Series in 1919 they did more than deliberately lose a few baseball games; they corrupted the National Pastime and ushered the sport out of its age of innocence. Writer director John Sayles succeeds in showing exactly how and why eight players on the best team in baseball set in motion what had to be one of the most poorly conceived, organized and executed conspiracies in the whole history of graft, and in his usual role as a champion of the working class portrays the guilty players as victims of money-grubbing corporate exploitation (represented both by team management and organized crime).

But it's all the cynical wheeling and dealing behind the Black Sox scandal which make the film so fascinating. The story might have been unbelievable if it wasn't entirely true, but like any aspect of real life the details are messy and inconclusive. Most of the film recounts the mechanics of the fix; events during the subsequent exposure and trial are telescoped too quickly into the final forty minutes or so, which makes sense: in any conspiracy the crime is always more interesting than the punishment.

It helps to be at least slightly familiar with the huge cast of characters involved: players, gamblers, reporters and so forth. A few scenes have been added for dramatic unity, and others were abbreviated to maintain a consistent pace, but all the facts are there, and Sayles manages to pull them all together in an entertaining history lesson from our collective adolescence, re-creating that fateful moment when the boys of summer grew up for good.
14 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Good Movie, GREAT BOOK
tobybarlowny21 April 2006
This is one of the greatest sports stories ever told, the real story about how and WHY they fixed the World Series. Eliot Asinof's book should be read by anyone interested in history, and Sayles does an admirable job of tying it all together into a script (Sayles even cast Asinof in the movie, and then cast him again in Sunshine State.) It's a story that anyone interested in a history of America, a history of labor and management, a history of the greatest game will definitely enjoy. After reading it, the Shoeless Joe character from "Field of Dreams" suddenly has a resonance which that particular film could never explain (though it is nicely explained in the source for that film "Shoeless Joe") Also worth reading is "The Glory of Their Times" an oral history of early baseball.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the better sports-related movies
mlevans5 January 2002
This was a much more difficult Joe Jackson story to tell than `Field of Dreams.'

Sports movies are never easy to do and making one that reaches beyond the bounds of sports fans is especially challenging. While `Eight Men Out' may not quite grab the non-sports enthusiast as well as `Field of Dreams,' `Hoosiers' or `A League of Their Own,' (my own nominations for the three best sports-related movies of all-time), it DOES more than hold its own among the top third of the ever-growing list of baseball movies.

This is largely because it is not really a BASEBALL movie. Like the aforementioned films, it is a movie about people who happen to PLAY baseball. Based on the Eliot Asinof novel, the movie is, by and large, historically accurate. It also seems to be fairly even-handed in dishing out guilt. Yes, the players played for skinflint Charles `Old Roman' Comiskey, yes they were easy prey for the gambling element, yes they were lacking in education and common sense … yet they are not portrayed as innocent victims, either.

I have been a huge David Strathairn fan ever since `Eight Men Out.' His sensitive portrayal of star pitcher Eddie Cicotte was pivotal to the movie's success. Asinof correctly focused on Cicotte as the pivotal figure in the World Series fix. `Eddie's the key!' more than one character exclaimed. Other players, approached with the idea of throwing the series, reacted with shock when finding out the highly-respected Cicotte was involved. This was certainly no easy choice for Cicotte, a man of some integrity and conscience, but a pitcher nearing the end of his salad days and a man bitter at his mistreatment by Comiskey. Strathairn plays the intelligent, stressed character under the gun as well as any actor of his generation.

The rest of the cast is fine, too, with despicable Chick Gandil (Michael Rooker) and Swede Risberg (Don Harvey) playing the odds and pressuring teammates to go along. James Read is excellent as henpecked southern pitcher Claude `Lefty' Williams, probably the second most respected player on the team. Of course Buck Weaver (John Cusack) is a huge figure, considering the gamblers' pitch, then opting to pass when the money isn't immediately forthcoming.

The movie isn't shy about its version of good guys & bad guys. Gandil, Risberg & Swede's buddy Fred McMullin (Perry Lang) are the villains, while Williams, Weaver, Joe Jackson (D.B. Sweeney) and Manager Kid Gleason (John Mahoney) are victims. Hall of Famer Eddie Collins (Bill Irwin) and no-nonsense catcher (and controversial Hall of Famer) Ray Schalk (Gordon Clapp) are frustrated on-lookers, while Dickie Kerr (Jace Alexander) is the wide-eyed & naïve rookie. All turn in fine work and I find myself loving the taciturn Schalk, the kind of catcher every manager wants. Most interesting is the movie's portrayal of Shoeless Joe, who is interpreted as being mildly retarded, rather than just illiterate.

The baseball scenes are quite realistic, as are the ballpark backdrops. I first saw it the year after visiting Old Comiskey Park (the year before it was torn down) and felt right at home on the movie set – even the turnstiles looked authentic.

In closing, I can't honestly say that someone with NO knowledge or interest in baseball would flip over this film. Yet, one doesn't have to be a bleacher bum to enjoy it – and not knowing the outcome may actually make it MORE fun for the neophyte! Overall, a fine movie.
50 out of 52 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Solid sports drama
Maziun16 November 2013
I've never been a fan of baseball. The only movies about baseball that could interest me were comedies ("Major league" , "Dullham bulls") . Until I've seen "Field of dreams" and this one. Then I realized that you could make a serious movie with baseball in it.

"Eight men out" is a story about corruption. The movie never takes any side , it allows us to choose our own interpretation of whole story. It seems that everyone here has some sins – the players , the club owners, the journalists and frauds.

The movie has cast full of stars – John Cusack ("Say anything"), Christopher Lloyd ("Back to the future") , Charlie Sheen (TV series "Two and half men") , Michael Rooker ("Cliffhanger") . It's entertaining even for someone who doesn't know a thing about baseball (like me). It's quite long movie (almost 2 hours) , yet never a moment is wasted . The atmosphere of the post - I world war America is top notch , especially the music .

A good movie worth a chance . Recommended for sports fans. I give it 7/10.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Great Eight
active18yos19 January 2005
Although I generally agree with Roger Ebert's reviews, I just can't understand how he was annoyed enough with this movie to give it a measly two stars. He claims that there wasn't enough exposition. I found everything explained satisfactorily, even for the non-fan or baseball history buff. And it is period-piece film-making at its finest. I cannot imagine a better telling of this story. And the baseball action is excellent. One factual error, though: Bucky Weaver (John Cusack) would never mention Babe Ruth as better (or even comparable) to Cobb, Speaker and Wheat in 1919 or 1920. It shocks me that Sayles kept that line. USA Today heralded "Eight Men Out" as the greatest baseball movie ever, and though there is some fine company, I find it hard to disagree.
46 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Remembering the Black Sox
EmperorNortonII13 August 2002
To this day, baseball has been a huge part of Americana. And nothing has given the sport a black eye like the World Series scandal of 1919. John Sayles presents the historic swindle in "Eight Men Out." A lot of emotions are on display, as the Chicago White Sox players struggle with the moral dilemmas of the love of the game and being role models to the youth of Chicago, or their desperation caused by tight-fisted White Sox owner Charles Comiskey. Back then, many people of Chicago were ready to forgive their hometown heroes. And even now, you can't help but feel sympathy for the wronged players.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the most under-apreciated films of the last 25 years
llltdesq20 July 2001
This is probably the best film to be completely ignored by every major award in film in the last 25 years. For all that its about baseball players, it is NOT a baseball movie. The Black Sox scandal and its effect on baseball transcended baseball. The ensemble cast does a marvelous job, particularly Straithairn and Sweeney, who plays "Shoeless" Joe Jackson, one of the more tragic figures of the whole mess. In spite of taking money to throw the Series, Jackson went out and batted .375 for the Series. The Chicago payers in on the payoff (and one poor soul who didn't go along, but was approached) were banned from baseball for life. No less an authority than Ted Williams believes Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame. But I digress. The film goes into the motivations of the players, who were playing for a pittance and had no say over where they played. Thus they were perfect targets for the fix in the first place. Excellent and gripping film about human reactions to stress and temptation. Most recommended.
61 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A good movie
gazzo-29 June 2009
Quite good, authentic, gets a little too complex later on..., 25 August 2002 (This comment was deleted by IMDb based on an abuse report filed by another user) I always have liked this one. Sayles takes a complex and important part of our country's sporting past and tries to make sense of it. I admire the casting, the baseball parts are authentic looking, and you gotta enjoy seeing old John Anderson as Kenesaw Mtn Landis. Dead on.

In reality, Charlie Sheen looks a lot more like Chick Gandil than Rooker does, but that is okay. Both guys were fine in their roles. Sweeney takes some of the 'Field of Dreams' mystique outta the Joe Jax role, simply plays him as a gifted hitter who was a dumb hick outside the field. Buck Weaver-as played by Cusack-sympathetic as well, nicely done.

All of them in fact-familiar faces, be it Harvey or Straitharn(kinda Bill Bixby looking isn't he?) or 'Ray Schalk', 'Lefty Williams', etc. The usual great Sayles ensemble. I also like seeing Clifton James in here too as 'the Old Roman'. 'Live and Let Die', anyone? What doesn't work? Some of the guys look too much alike, and if yer not a baseball fan you won't know Risberg from Mullen. And the whole business between Christopher Lloyd, the varied gamblers and the law, well-it was difficult to follow that too.

It looks like: Comiskey paid off the Gamblers to keep their association outta the public eye. At least that is shown. And to target the players only.

Comiskey paid for the lawyers repping the players, 'secretly'.

The Gamblers bought off the jury to keep the players from being convicted and gamblers possibly being drug into trial further.

The players didn't have reps when signing the confessions and were tricked, esp. Joe Jax.

The Commissioner was gonna tar and feather the 8 no matter how the jury went to make an example for everyone to see.

Kenesaw Landis was a corrupt racist who helped make sure the black players were kept outta the game during his lifetime(thru '44)...

The Gamblers/mob guys got away with it, even though they were the ones who set it up, profited from it, paid for it, etc. Comiskey was a cheap SOB who deserved what he got too. Disgraceful.

It all looks like a set up, doesn't it? No matter what happened, the players were not going to get out unscathed.

Very good flick. ***1/2 outta ****
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Dear God, I love this movie!
marcslope16 October 2000
John Sayles is always, always honest with his audiences, never resorting to cheap tricks or unwarranted sentiment; and this period drama about the "Black Sox" scandal of 1919 may be his finest hour. Incredibly handsome and lavish-looking for a low-budget indie, it's a meticulous re-creation of the first huge scandal in American professional sports, and the beginning of the loss of innocence in pro baseball (and American popular culture by extension). If that makes it sound a bit dry, let it be said that the characterizations are vivid, the characters multilayered, the costumes gorgeous, and the staging of the baseball games unusually convincing. (Ever notice how movie stars can't really fake pro-athlete moves? Watch John Cusack charge an outfield fly, or Charlie Sheen slide into third--they had me convinced.) In a uniformly excellent cast, David Strathairn's morally tortured star pitcher is especially impressive, as is John Mahoney's manager, alternately loving and despising his players, his eroding trust etched on his expressive face. And what a wonderful touch having Studs Terkel play a cynical sportswriter: He's the essence of Chicago style.

Some of the facts of the story are necessarily simplified or omitted to keep the movie under two hours, but there's not a moment of dishonesty or "Field of Dreams"-type goo. By the time the kid is looking Joe Jackson in the eye and pleading, "Say it ain't so," you'll probably be sniffling.

A high-water mark in the career of a great, versatile, underappreciated moviemaker.
51 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The game's seedy underbelly
Mr-Fusion5 May 2017
Costner had a line in "Field of Dreams" about Shoeless Joe Jackson as one of the guys who threw the '19 World Series; and when I was growing up (at the height of my baseball fandom), that line was the extent of what I'd known about the scandal. It's such a small piece of dialogue and it's meant to reflect those tarred players in no uncertain terms.

"Eight Men Out" has a different agenda, depicting Jackson and the other seven not just as gods in America's favorite pastime, but also working stiffs; guys who pulled in the numbers on the field while the suits in the backrooms counted all the money. It makes a little more sense that these men weren't greedy so much as undervalued. And they still got the short end of the stick even after the deal was made; Buck Weaver most of all, who never got a say during the trial.

It's an attractive movie (warm light, period detail) though not an ostentatious one; even the show-stoppng catches are done with a matter-of-fact deference.

And it's a great story.

7/10
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Beautiful, Devastating. The Finest Baseball Film Ever Made.
darko252524 July 2002
When people talk about their favorite baseball movies, you always hear the same titles being tossed around. Bull Durham, Field of Dreams, and of course, these are terrific movies. But I don't think any one movie has so perfectly caputured the game, the public's love and obsession with it, and how fragile and vulnerable the men whos play it can be. John Sayles movie, from Eliot Asinof's impeccably researched book, so perfectly caputres America in 1919, and paints the Black Sox scandal as a tragedy, whereby men capable of great things are brought down to the level of theives and gangsters by something as simple as greed, and as awful as revenge. What sets this movie apart, to me, is the cast. There is an athleticism about this cast. Charlie Sheen had a scholarship to play ball at Kansas State, and is well known for his passion for baseball. D.B. Sweeney, who is simply remarkable as Shoeless Joe Jackson, the illiterate hitting machine, whose tragedy also spawned the novel Shoeless Joe by W.P. Kinsella, which served as the source for Field of Dreams, played minor league ball before a motorcycle accident ended his career. They look and play like ballplayers. In far too many films there is something horribly fake about the baseball aspect. Some capture baseball scenes perfectly, and simply haven't the emotional, real life depth that a movie needs, while others capture plenty on the emotional side but fall short in terms of the realism on the field. This movie is a rare GEM that captures both so well. The acting is terrific. Sweeny, as said, does a fantastic job, as do John Mahoney as the team's manager, and the terrific character player Michael Rooker (who oddly is only good in movies where he isn't highly billed...for example, don't see Jean Claude Van Damme and Michael Rooker in Replicant...) as Chick Gandil, the first baseman whose shady connections initiate the whole gambling scenario. But the standout performance has to be John Cusack as third-baseman Buck Weaver. His being drawn into the scandal's backlash is by far the most devastating part of this film, as he is the moral center of the film, torn between his love of his teammates, and his loyalty to the integrity of a game he loves, and never got over the loss of. Simply Remarkable.
37 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Painfully mediocre John Sayles film
zetes11 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
1/10
Terribly boring and clichéd.
bllitsey-641799 September 2022
How can so many people think this is a great movie? I couldn't make it past the 30 minute mark. The script is full of cliches and there's upbeat Dixieland jazz playing in the background of most scenes. This music was distracting, annoying, and threw the serious tone completely off. Also, the scenes were poorly constructed with tons of quick exposition in the form of conversations between people, but with almost no character development. I like baseball, I used to watch almost every Atlanta Braves game and I love Bull Durham, Field of Dreams, The Natural, etc. But this was a major disappointment.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
When the world was corrupt.
rmax3048236 July 2004
I especially enjoyed Studs Terkel and John Sayles as the two sportswriters, Fullerton and Lardner. They're very droll. They act as a kind of Greek chorus, making cynical wisecracks, keeping the audience clued in on what's supposed to be going on. As the White Sox play out yet another crooked game, Sayles said to Terkel, "Nothing but fast balls." "Nice, sloow ones," adds Terkel. It gets better. Terkel writes a column for the Chicago paper accusing gamblers of corrupting the game of baseball and Sayles is reading it aloud. "Writers are tainting the game," or something, says Sayles. "Keep reading," says Terkel. "The game would be better off without the long-nosed, thick-lipped Eastern element preying on our boys in the field." Terkels smiles around his cigar and says, "Makes you proud to be a sportswriter, doesn't it?"

The rest of the movie is pretty good too, although I sometimes get the characters and their motives a little mixed up. The baseball scenes are very well done. I say this, being no big fan of the sport myself. Charlie Sheen (a true aficionado) looks like he's heaving a heavy bat as he clunks out a hit, not a rubber prop. I admired too the way the series games swung back and forth as the players on the take tried to figure out if they were playing for the money or for themselves. It's tough to throw a game because part of one's self always wants to do what one does best -- in this case, play baseball well. The German ethologists call it "Funktionslust." In the end, despite some indecision, they do however lose.

The movie isn't kind to the gamblers or to the owners. Comisky was incredibly cheap and greedy. The script gives this as one of the reasons why the players agreed to throw the game. As Strathairn says when someone offers him a part payment, "I don't care about the money." He's throwing the games to foul up Comisky who has just denied him a promised bonus because Strathairn, playing the pitcher Cicotte, has only played 29 games instead of the 30 they'd agreed upon. Comisky has made him sit on the bench for the last few games so he wouldn't cross the bonus threshold. (Question: Given that Comisky cheated Cicotte of the contracted bonus, was Cicotte morally justified in throwing the games?)

The movie isn't nice to the gamblers either. Not only don't they pay off but they treat the players with contempt. Arnold Rothstein ("A.R.") treats EVERYBODY rudely. He never says hello when he enters a room, never says good-bye when leaving, and never smiles.

I kind of liked this. Sayles may not be a master but his films are always highly individualized. I cannot visualize him directing "Die Hard With A Sardonic Grin."
20 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Great Eight, with a seven rating
sam_smithreview28 April 2016
If you forgive the fact the film has to simplify certain aspects of the conspiracy in order to make the film easier to digest, then you will find that Eight Men Out is a worthy film and in the category of "baseball movies" it's one of the better ones out there.

There are anachronisms in the film here and there, the worst of which is Buck Weaver's question asking which of the lawyers was the "Babe Ruth" of law. Sure Babe Ruth was coming into his own by 1920, but most ballplayers in that era would not have place Ruth in the class of Cobb, Tris Speaker or Walter Johnson. For baseball fans, this line in particular really comes off as shallow, especially since the rest of the film really tries to capture the "dead-ball" era. For the most part though, this film feels and sounds a lot like America right after World War I ends, a fascinating time and place.

Studs Terkel steals the show in my estimation. His character in the film is not far from whom he is in real life and his authenticity is undeniable. John Sayles is a little stiff by comparison and his singing in the railway car (which according to legend did actually happen), is rather difficult to bear. None the less, his direction makes up for his foibles as an actor.

Straitharn is another gem in this movie, and once again this actor seems to get right to the soul of the characters he is given to play. Eddie Cicotte's dilemmas are written all over Straitharn's face in every scene, he's also given some of the best dialog in the film. Cusack plays his part well, despite the fact that many of his scenes are reduced to clichés. Cusack's best moments are when he is frustrated about his inclusion in the conspiracy trial, despite the fact he gave his all to try and win the series. His outbursts in the courtroom seem perfect, as if drawn from the trial transcripts themselves.

Joe Jackson is given unfair treatment. If "Field of Dreams" mythologizes Jackson to point of hyperbole, "Eight Men Out" plays up his illiteracy with too much of a heavy hand. Joe Jackson wasn't stupid, indeed if you read his last major interview before he died, he speaks about the "Black Sox" with great alacrity and clarity. He was not as ignorant as this film would have you believe. One day someone will produce a film about Joe Jackson, that will portray him accurately, but Eight Men Out is not that film.

Although their roles are very minor, Kid Gleason and Ray Schalk are really well played and written. These two went through a very difficult time during the series, and this is well demonstrated. One minor beef is that Nemo Leibold, Shano Collins and other players outside of the conspiracy are never touched upon at all. This is understandable to a degree given the relatively short length of the film, despite the complexity of the subject matter.

The baseball scenes themselves are well done. The bats, balls, gloves and uniforms look like the equipment of that era and the ballparks are successful mock ups for the most part. There are even a couple of nifty athletic displays in the outfield that must have taken several takes to pull off.

Eight Men Out isn't perfect, but it isn't as flawed as Roger Ebert would have you believe. If you a fan of baseball in fact, I'd say its mandatory viewing.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Commy's Chicago Chiselers
bkoganbing24 October 2008
One of the best baseball films ever made was about the sport's darkest hour, the fixing of the 1919 World Series. Eight of the heavily favored members of the Chicago White Sox threw the World Series as a result of payoffs and bigger promises of payoffs to gambling interests. In the background of those interests was the notorious Arnold Rothstein who was never brought to trial. The eight players were the Eight Men Out, banned for life by the newly appointed Commissioner of Baseball, Kenesaw Mountain Landis played here most impressively by John Anderson. Anderson even looks like Landis.

The whole unvarnished truth is laid out there, owner Charles Comiskey a pioneer owner in the American League who treated his players like field hands as he assiduously courted the press and through them the fans. A little more generous with the profits this story might never have occurred. Clifton James plays the greedy and rapacious Comiskey. The incident where Eddie Cicotte is not started so that Comiskey can save on a promised bonus if he pitched and won 30 games has come down in legend. Cicotte and Lefty Williams played by David Strathairn and James Read were the key to the conspiracy. They lost the five games in that best five out of nine series to the Reds to throw the series. The bad play in the field by the others insured the result.

Two things that are not mentioned in the film, but are very important; viewers ought to know. The best pitcher the White Sox had was Hall of Famer Urban 'Red' Faber who had led the team to a World Series win in 1917, the last one they would have until 2005. Faber came up injured and was disabled and was not available to pitch in the 1919 series. Had he stayed honest and not been injured, the result might have been different.

Eddie Collins the second baseman was played here by Bill Irwin and what's not mentioned here is that Collins started out with Connie Mack's Philadelphia Athletics, part of his fabled $100,000.00 infield. When Mack broke up his team and sold off the players in 1941-1915, Collins got a guaranteed salary of $15,000.00, way above what his teammates were getting. Collins was one of Mack's favorites and he got that salary guaranteed for him by Comiskey before parting with him. That caused a lot of the jealousy you see portrayed in Eight Men Out.

The real ringleaders were shortstop Swede Risberg and first baseman Chick Gandil as is shown here. They roped the others in. They're played by Don Harvey and Michael Rooker.

The two that come down to us as the biggest tragedies are John Cusack as Buck Weaver and D.B. Sweeney as Shoeless Joe Jackson. Weaver knew about the fix, but would not rat out his teammates, hoping they'd come around and play on the square. He was treated as if he were a conspirator himself and suffered the same banishment.

As for Shoeless Joe Jackson, his lifetime average of .356 and the fact that he is one of the select group of .400 hitters would put him in the Hall of Fame. During the teen years he was overshadowed by Ty Cobb in the American League, but in the Twenties might have come into his own. He showed signs of adapting to the lively ball era that Babe Ruth was just inaugurating.

He was also illiterate and was easily manipulated into the fix. Despite that his play like Weaver's was outstanding in that series, he hit the only home run recorded by either side in that next to last series of the dead ball era. What you see with D.B. Sweeney is exactly how poor Jackson was.

Baseball like other sports is a business and some of those businessmen are greedy indeed. Sad that it was the players who paid the ultimate price to clean up the sport in the mind of the public. Eight Men Out captures the era and mood of the times and even non-sports fans will enjoy this film immensely.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Corruption is still there in professional sports. It's just more complex now.
mark.waltz30 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
It has been just over 100 years since this real life scandal took place in professional baseball, and while it has been pretty much forgotten, there was definitely an impact made because of what occurred. There had been movies made about Lou Gehrig, Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb, and their lives are well remembered as well as their accomplishments. But this doesn't just deal with one player. It deals with an entire team, the 1919 Chicago White Sox.

The scandal mixes organized crime in with the financial mistreatment of the team which leads them to make a deal with the devil, Arnold Rothstein (Michael Lerner in a great part), fraud involving the World Series. Owner Clifton James may be unaware of the fraud, but he's equally as responsible because his greediness prompted teammates to purposely throw the series against the Cincinnati Reds. One of the teammates, John Cusack, is uninvolved in the fraud, but is made guilty simply because he's a teammate and evidence points at him that he is guilty.

A good featured cast includes such familiar actors as Charlie Sheen, Christopher Lloyd, Barbara Garrick, D. B. Sweeney and John Mahoney. The film gets more interesting as it really gets into the major plot, but there's a lot of seller. The impact what happens is shown as to how it affects each of the players, particularly Cusack. Of course baseball historians are going to be the most interested in this, but it's also good from a historical standpoint as well. Just a little too long for my taste. A good 20 minutes could have been cut out.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
My favorite baseball movie
RNMorton12 January 2001
Everything's right in this period piece on baseball's darkest moment. Film eschews standard Hollywood overkill and presents things as they actually happened [you won't see Shoeless Joe talking like a Harvard grad in this one]; also avoids taking sides between greedy players and greedy owner, and lets you decide who screwed who. Fantastic atmosphere. Cusack as Buck Weaver, on the fringes of the scandal, and David Strathairn, as ace pitcher Eddie Cicotte, lead a cast which is solid through the whole lineup.
22 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not a Baseball Movie
caspian197827 October 2004
Yes, this is a movie about the 1919 Chicago White Sox and the "conspiracy" that they were paid to throw the world series. Still, this is not a movie about baseball. While only 1/3 of the movie is spent on the baseball field, the other 2/3 is spent behind closed doors or the court room. Eight Men Out is a great movie about Respect and the Power and Influence of Money. A terrific job in capturing the early 20th century feel. With the wardrobe, old fashion cars and the attitude, the movie hits a home run with convincing the audience that it is a true period piece. Shoeless Joe Jackson is portrayed more real than the legend the world has made him to be. He is an average "jock" unable to read or write and is made to look to be as loyal as a loving dog. This does the movie a great bit of justice, showcasing the eight men on the team as typical hard working ball players who just wanted the respect and the pay check they deserved. The people who sat in the stands and read the newspapers made them legends.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Famous and Infamous 1919 BLACK SOX SCANDAL Given Life And Humanity By Film Maverick, Director John Sayles .
redryan6420 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Big League Baseball, be it National League or Americn League. Just what is it? What makes us Watch it on TV, listen to its Radio Broadcasts, Pack the Ball Parks, Buy the Daily Paper just to read the Box Scores and Curse Out those damn, self-opinionated Sports Columnists! Well, if you'd have asked me, I think those Ball Players are nothing but a pack of Spoiled Brat, Over-paid Millionaires, who get the luxury of living the life of Riley, remaining Boys, all their lives (or at least until the end of their playing days), just Playing Ball! And, Oh Lord, how lucky can a guy be!

Though the United States of America has no 'Offical' or State Religion*, for 6 months a year we do devoutly live and die with our team, whatever that team may be. In my own case, it is The Chicago White Sox, the subject of this little dissertation.

While there is no doubt that the player of the World War I/Roaring 20's Era made no salaries that compared to their counterparts in this modern age of ours, we have to take all factors into consideration. They did far better than their every day, working stiffs counterparts. Most any Baseball guy made much more in his half year than any household did for a whole year.

What kept the ball players in control was what was called the "Reserve Clause". What it meant was that no matter how long a period of time a contract had in its duration, the management could keep a player as long as they pleased. The Reserve Clause was in essence a legal instrument designed to have this 'just one more year' automatic amendment on every contract. Of course, this was all subject to the whim of the Owners, who could unilaterally terminate the agreement.** So it is to this year of 1919 that Director Sayles brings us.It is the year after the 'War to end all Wars', The Great World War I was over. We observe the excitement of 2 brothers*** gleefully running through the streets of the Bridgeport Neighborhood on Chicago's South Side, the older brother having gotten enough money for the two of them to get bleacher tickets to the White Sox game. The bleacher tix cost $0.25 each, and it was made by "hawking papers!" We get the kids' view of this game and learn of even children have a little larceny in their hearts from a little con game they pull in order to get some candy money.

The action soon moves around the Ball Park to the Press Box,to the Suite of Owner,Charles Comiskey(Clifton James) and finally to two Grifter Types in "Sleepy" Bill Burns(Christopher Lloyd) and Billy Maharg(Richard Edson)who are discussing which players would be willing participants in rigging the outcome of the upcoming World Series that The Sox would be in as winner of The American League Pennant.

As the game progresses, the 2 conspirators evaluate players as they bat or make some defensive play. One by one the put them down for a 'yes', 'no' or a 'maybe'.

Later all the team is gathered at some local Pub for celebrating their clinching the Amrican League Pennant. Here a Bostonian Gambler, Sport Sullivan ( Kevin Tighe)is busy bending the ear of Sox 1st Baseman('Chick' Gandill)about throwing the Series for money. Gandill is also pitched the same idea by Maharg and ex-pitcher Burns.

So unbeknownst to each other, 2 different fixes are in, making it a double-bubble pay day to the 8 conspiring ballplayers. That is if everything goes as planned.

Both 'Sport' Sullivan and the Burns/Maharg think of financing the operation with backing of The Big Guy of Gambling, New York Gambling Czar, Arnold Rothstein (Michael Learner).

The story moves through one double cross after another and the extremes the Underworld would go trough to insure that the players see the fix to the end.

The Book and Movie of EIGHT MEN OUT both take a sympathetic view of some of the players, like:29 Game Winning Pitcher Eddie Cicotte(David Stratharin). But real "Not Guilty" verdicts are lobbied for 3rd Baseman 'Buck'Weaver(John Cusack) and especially Outfielder "Shoeless" Joe Jackson(D.B.Sweeney).

The cast is superb and work together like a Theateratrical Reperatory Company. The only Actor,other than John Cusack, who can be called a "Movie Star"would be Charlie Sheen, who works well with the rest,proving to be a real trooper.The others not yet mentioned but still worthy of mention are Don Harvey, Gordon Clapp,John Mahoney,James Read,Perry Lang,Jace Alexander,Bill Irwin and Michael Mantell. Special notice must be given for the performances given by John Anderson as Judge Kennisaw Mountain Landis, Director John Sayles as Ring Lardner and Chicago's own Rennaisance Man Studs Terkel as Chicago Herald-Examiner Sports Writer, Hugh Fullerton.

Sayles took special care in creating a true period piece.The costuming, and the sets are near perfect, with parts of Indianapolis subbing for Chicago. Also the Old Ball Park made a good stand-in for Comiskey Park.

This is one truly Underrated Film, of Chicasgo, of Baseball and of the Human Condition.

* Someone once said that in order to understand Americans and their Country, they should learn Baeball. Motion Seconded!!

** Slavery & any other Involuntary Servitude was supposed to have been outlawed following our Civil War, yet it took until 1976 and civil litigation by people like Curt Flood and Andy Messersmith to include Baseball.

*** Seeing these 2 kids running down the street in their rag-tag hand me downs makes me think of my own Uncle John R.Ryan(born 1913)and our Dad, Clem Ryan(born 1914)who were almost old enough to have been there at that time. They lived not far away (in the Canaryville neighborhood, just South of Bridgeport)and must have had a thousand stories about Sox Park-including Old Man Comiskey letting all the kids around the Ball Park into the Game after a few Innings!!
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good film but...
angelicvampyre22 July 2002
...there is a little bit too much going on. The film attempts to present the events of the "Black Sox" scandal from the perspective everyone involved when (IMO) it would have been better to focus a little more on the players themselves - I found myself wanting to see more, to understand their side of things a little better.

That said, the cast were excellent, I thought John Cusack in particular was outstanding as Buck Weaver. Of all the players, he was the one I felt most badly for at the end - a geuninely nice guy who didn't betray his friends & paid a high price for it.

Rating: 7/10
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Great account of baseball's troubled past.
SmileysWorld26 April 2002
We were a young,innocent nation in 1919,though we did have our troubles. Luckily,we had a relatively new game of baseball to take us away from those troubles.Surely,nothing bad could happen to such a great game,or so we thought.It seems that eight players took bribes to deliberately lose the 1919 World Series,and we did not take it very well.How could they?How could they betray our trust and our fanship this way? This film,which incidentally never has gotten the full credit it has deserved over the years,brilliantly brings to life this scandal which gave our nation one big black eye.It is a must see for any true fan of baseball. Baseball indeed has a mostly colorful history,but there was a time when that color was black.Over the years,the wounds have healed,but the scars remain.A truly brilliant and underrated film.
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Sports movies are generally not a genre I like all that much, but this one was rather good.
Aaron13758 March 2010
I saw this movie when I was in college, I think it was shown during my victimless crimes class as we were on the topic of gambling. This film was rather entertaining for a historical sports movie, though I basically knew how it was going to end. The story shows the White Sox at the beginning of the film clinching a berth in the World Series. A guy congratulates them and they proceed to ask about the bonus they were promised if they got to the series. Well apparently the owner of the Sox at the time was a tightwad and the only bonus they got was a few bottles of champagne. Well this gets a few of the players really angry, so angry in fact that they are willing to take money to throw the series and let Cincinati win it all. Very interesting movie, a good cast of characters in this one too. It even had John Mahoney who plays Fraiser's dad in it and he was great as he had nothing to do with the fix, but you could tell he knew something was up as his top pitchers seemed to be throwing like crap. The movie also says a lot about the time as who could really see any of today's major leaguers throwing a game for the scant amount of money the mob was going to give to the guys here. Seems sad in the end that the players involved, albeit underpaid, would rather be known as crooks and losers for a few extra dollars than be known as world champions.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
a major disappointment
richard-17877 October 2013
I found this movie to be a major disappointment.

Perhaps because it did a poor job of differentiating all the characters. I found it difficult to keep track of who was in on the take and who was not. Too many of the Sox looked too much alike to me.

Perhaps because there were not sharply defined, clearly developed characters.

It's a sad story, and this movie didn't do anything to make me feel for any of the characters who compromised themselves, even though some of them were played by very fine actors, such as Strathairn, who has shown in other movies - such as "Good Night and Good Luck" - what he can do with a well-written part. At two hours, it should have done more developing a few of the characters, and forgotten about some of the financial dealings.

Keeping track of those financial transactions was also too complicated.

Not a movie I would ever want to have to sit through again.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed