Skip to content

Hey ladies, come see “Moneyball” because of that dreamy Brad Pitt!

Sep 20, 2011, 11:02 AM EDT

moneyball poster

Fact: there are a lot of women who would actually want to see “Moneyball” because of the story and couldn’t give a damn about Brad Pitt.  Fact: there are a lot of men who would actually want to see “Moneyball” because they think Brad Pitt is a hunk and, you know, screw baseball.

Someone marketing the flick, however, must think they’re playing the percentages. Via Caryn Rose’s 45rpm@jukeboxgraduate, here’s an ad showing up on Facebook today:

source:

Sometimes I think we’re in the 21st century.  Then I’m confronted with so much evidence to the contrary.

By the way, I’m Twitter friends with Caryn, and because I’m grateful for the find — which I wasn’t aware was her find when I posted this — I will direct you all to the site about her recently-published novel, called “B-Sides and Broken Hearts.” Think “Hi-Fidelity” from a woman’s point of view.

  1. Jonny 5 - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:09 AM

    “Sometimes I think we’re in the 21st century. Then I’m confronted with so much evidence to the contrary.”

    Did someone tell you the 21st century wouldn’t be sexist or something? I mean, you can’t blame them for playing the card that sells the most can you? “Sex” The day that this ceases to be exploited is the day that the human race becomes extinct. Probably to be replaced by bunny rabbits who hump a lot more than we do. Or so I hear.

    • presidentmiraflores - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:25 AM

      Yeah, we’re not a race, actually. We’re a species. But otherwise thumbs up.

      • Bill - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

        Pedantic pedant is pedantic.

  2. Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:10 AM

    I don’t get your point here at all Craig. Are you saying it is wrong to market the movie to women as a way to see Brad on the big screen? Do you really think that any more than 2% of the female population are going to see this movie for any other reason than Brad Pitt or placating their boyfriends/husbands who want to see it?

    • shaggylocks - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:16 AM

      Off the top of my head I can think of three women (my fiance among them) who read and loved Moneyball, and who would be excited about this movie even if Steve Buscemi were cast in the lead role. Either I’m an extremely lucky guy, or there’s something off with your percentage calculations.

      • Bill - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:26 AM

        Jason Giambi hit three home runs in one game this year. So it’s safe to say that he hits home runs in the majority of his at-bats, right? Come on. Argument by anecdote is as dumb in marketing as it is in baseball. This may, in fact, be an ineffective way to market this movie to women, but the mere existence of some baseball-fan females is not proof for that claim. I really fail to see what is so outlandishly unrealistic about this marketing strategy, anyway. Sometimes reality doesn’t conform to our aspirations.

      • Craig Calcaterra - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM

        “I really fail to see what is so outlandishly unrealistic about this marketing strategy, anyway. Sometimes reality doesn’t conform to our aspirations.”

        That’s really all I’m saying. I know I am usually all snarky and disaffected on the blog, but sometimes I get bummed out when my aspirations aren’t meant. I don’t have a ton of them. And I realize that advertising is the last place I should be looking to have them fulfilled, but sometimes you just see stuff that bums you out, and this ad bummed me out.

      • Bill - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:42 AM

        I think I feel you, Craig. Marketing is a great field to be in if you’re a misanthrope.

    • tjwilliams - Sep 20, 2011 at 3:40 PM

      I was watching Lifetime Sunday night and, during one of their original shows they aired a scene from Moneyball and it was just Brad Pitt sharing a bowl of ice cream with his daughter while she frets about him losing his job. This movie is being targeted to women in a very specific way: “Come watch Brad Pitt be dreamy.”

  3. shaggylocks - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:14 AM

    Dammit! My girlfriend tricked me into seeing this movie by telling me it was about baseball, but then I get there and BRAD FRICKIN’ PITT is in it! I’ve been had, I tell you!

  4. kellyb9 - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:14 AM

    I’m pretty sure my fiancee wants to see it because it’s about baseball… maybe I just lucked out though.

  5. halladaysbiceps - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:17 AM

    They should have named the movie “Moneyshot”.

    • Craig Calcaterra - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:19 AM

      Best bicepts comment ever.

      • channingtaintum - Sep 22, 2011 at 4:29 PM

        Hey Craig, even Adam Dunn gets a hit from time to time.

  6. sportsdrenched.com - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:18 AM

    I don’t get the point either. Target marketing is what it is. Men and women are wired differently. Just because there are small exceptions to a rule doesn’t mean marketing people are going to target them.

    If anything I bet there are more women who would be offended that they don’t have a “guy” to take to the movie, than there are women who want to see it because it’s a baseball movie.

    • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:08 PM

      “Men and women are wired differently”—well, maybe; problem is, we live in a society that drenches us in gender stereotypes so completely from the moment we’re born, we can’t tell anymore what’s “wiring” and what’s simply conditioning. I suspect there’s a great deal more of the latter at play, and a great deal less of the former, than you might expect.

      • paperlions - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM

        Actually, studies on innate sex-specific tendencies and preferences show that it is wired a lot more than people like to think (and that conditioning may be slightly reinforcing, but is mostly irrelevant). People like to think that they like what they like because of who they are and they are unique blah blah blah, when if fact, people like what they like mostly because of millions of years of selective pressure….and because our species plays a team sport with division of labor, many selection pressures are sex-specific.

  7. Craig Calcaterra - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:22 AM

    I’m not knocking the potential effectiveness of the pitch. I realize that people are what they are and that this niche marketing likely works. I’m simply voicing my depression at the fact that it does and that it’s necessary. Chicks with big boobs in beer commercials probably work too. It doesn’t make me feel great about humanity that it works.

    Call me crazy, but I’d like to think sometimes that we are more than grubby apes susceptible to base stimuli. I’m probably wrong to think that, but we’re all allowed a little idealism from time to time, aren’t we?

    • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:26 AM

      Craig, I see what you are saying about Idealism, but the fact is that there just aren’t a whole lot of women who are into baseball enough to actually want to go see a movie about it…let alone a movie about stats…let alone a movie with the fat guy from Superbad(who isn’t even fat anymore). Now, if it is a Brad Pitt movie about baseball stats with the fat guy from Superbad(who isn’t even fat anymore)……..

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:42 AM

        “There just aren’t a whole lot of women who are interested enough in baseball to actually want to go see a movie about it”? Chris, I’m sorry, but you’re just plain wrong. Perhaps you haven’t met us, but we’re everywhere….and we don’t wear pink baseball caps.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:51 AM

        When I say whole lot I mean less than 2% of the population of women…and that is being very conservative. Yeah, I am not surprised that on hardballtalk.com there are women who are interested in baseball enough to see Moneyball. I’m talking about most women…like my wife, my 4 sisters in law, my 4 cousins, my mother, my mother in law, 5 of my co-workers. Of all the women I know, there isn’t a single one of them who would go out and see Moneyball with their friends. On the other hand, just about every woman I know read “The Help” and saw the movie.

      • Francisco (FC) - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:00 PM

        “….and we don’t wear pink baseball caps.”

        But my wife LIKES pink baseball caps. (Then again she likes everything pink so…)

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:09 PM

        Yeah FC, I mean I hope I’m not degrading women by pointing out the obvious here. I’m not trying to do that. It’s just obvious that a movie like Moneyball, with ZERO love interests and ZERO “chick-flickiness” in it, is not going to be too popular with the finer sex. Now, movies like The Natural and Field of Dreams were different because they had human interest stories.

        Moneyball is a movie about a sports concept. And a movie about a sports concept is not going to bring in the females like Sex and the City does. That’s why we see Bean’s kid in the previews…I bet she is in the movie like 1% of the time. I bet 95% of the show is Beane and Fat Kid from Superbad and Art Howe dude and guys together doing guy stuff like talking about and playing baseball. For the majority of women, that isn’t appealing. But Brad Pitt certainly is…except for my mom. She doesn’t think he is aging well. LOL. If I look like him when I am 47 I’ll be pretty happy.

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

        For the record, I would rather make out with Brian Wilson than watch “The Help.” Ugh.

        Look, I don’t think anyone is arguing that the “Moneyball” team shouldn’t be playing the stats to find the most effective and dollar-wise marketing strategy. (That’s the whole point of moneyball!) But consider this—I’ve got baseball stuff ALL over my Facebook page, and I’ve yet to see a single “Moneyball” ad pop up. Ads like the one posted above are fast and cheap to produce (we’re not talking about an expensive TV commercial here), and they’re created in vast quantities to target a panoply of ridiculously specific demographics. Why hasn’t their crack PR team come up with one to speak to female baseball fans? Because they either don’t believe we exist, or they don’t care. And that’s idiotic, because I’m pretty sure that even if your “2%” number were correct, which it isn’t, that’s still a whole lot of people who would probably reward Hollywood’s rare acknowledgment of our presence by buying a movie ticket.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:47 PM

        But that is exactly the point fearless…they aren’t marketing to female baseball fans…they are marketing to females. And more females like looking at Brad Pitt than looking at a baseball game…I know you have to agree with me on that one, right?

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM

        I’m saying that they are marketing to stereotypical females to the TOTAL EXCLUSION of female baseball fans. And that’s just bad strategy.

    • presidentmiraflores - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:27 AM

      BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:28 AM

      Chicks with big boobs in beer commercials probably work

      Oh come on, way too easy :)

    • sportsdrenched.com - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:35 AM

      “Call me crazy, but I’d like to think sometimes that we are more than grubby apes susceptible to base stimuli.”

      We are.

      Don’t mis-understand this to think that I’m not aware of problems between genders in the work place. Certainly there is some work to do. However, in just the last 20 years there have been major strides in that respect.

      To some extent humans can control the primal urges, but at some point our natural primal wiring will take over, even if it’s only breifly.

      Which is why I think you’re asking too much for our evolution to extend to our entertainment.

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:19 PM

        I would argue that Craig, as a member of the media, is PART of “our entertainment,” and I for one am glad he’s used his platform to voice a desire for a less sexist world.

        Of course it’ll be “asking too much” if everybody stops asking.

    • Francisco (FC) - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

      Strangely enough while I can watch all the chicks you throw at me in commercials not one of them has compelled me to buy their brand of whatever they’re selling. I guess I recognize that one thing has nothing to do with the other and I just sit back and appreciate the 30 or so seconds of pandering to my gender.

      • paperlions - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

        “Strangely enough while I can watch all the chicks you throw at me in commercials not one of them has compelled me to buy their brand of whatever they’re selling.”

        …that you are aware of…

      • Francisco (FC) - Sep 20, 2011 at 8:42 PM

        Believe me I’m aware, in point of fact I rarely watch regular TV, I usually mute the commercials.

    • nightman13 - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM

      98% of humans are grubby apes susceptible to base stimuli. The other 2% of us walk around in this world with the same expression on our faces as a kindergarten teacher with 50 kids in her class.

    • 24missed - Sep 20, 2011 at 7:11 PM

      I guess I don’t get the problem with marketing toward women. If they attend the movie, at least you might increase their knowledge and interest in baseball.

  8. halladaysbiceps - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:35 AM

    I think you guys know my feelings on the whole Sabermetric philosophy. With that being said, believe it or not, I am excited to see this movie when it comes out on Friday. I have a couple of free tickets I got last Christmas to the movies that I will use. My girlfriend has agreed to go see it, even though she has no interest or a clue about baseball. I was explaining to her last night about the whole Moneyball/Sabermetric thing and she seemed to be interested.

    From the previews, it looks like it’s going to be good. Something tells be that Brad Pitt will put alot of snark into his role as Billy Beane.

    • trevorb06 - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:01 PM

      You do realize that you didn’t need to get your hand a ticket… right?
      :-P
      I’m joshing, I just had to zing that in there.

      • halladaysbiceps - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM

        Starting shit again, I see. Why don’t you change your login back to “halladayslabia” and screw with me some more, a-hole.

  9. fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM

    As usual, Craig, you’re right on the money(ball). As a woman who knows and cares more about baseball than virtually any of the men in my life, I’m irritated beyond belief at the assumption—manifested not just in this ad, but all over the place—that women can’t possibly be expected to appreciate the game unless it includes hot guys and lots of home runs.

    Sure, we can shrug our shoulders and say “But that’s what works!”, but 1) I’ll join Craig on the idealists’ couch, and 2) any decent marketing pro should have been able to come up with an ad that targeted women viewers and played on Brad Pitt’s attractiveness* without explicitly dividing the sexes into camps and addressing women in stupid, patronizing language. “Ladies, tell your guys….”? Barf. This ad may woo a handful of women who were too stupid to figure out on their own that they found Brad Pitt dreamy, but it will drive away a whole bunch of others (like me and several dozen of my friends) who aren’t interested in giving our money to businesses that treat us like idiots incapable of understanding sports.

    Thanks for posting this.

    * If he’s your cup of tea. I still think of him as the greasy robber in the cowboy hat from “Thelma and Louise.”

    • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:46 AM

      I guess when you put it that way, I see where both you and Craig are coming from more clearly. I’ll give you an example of reverse sexism and how I got roped into seeing a movie that I hated, and still hate to this day…Jerry Maguire. When that movie was over, I left the theater with my girlfriend at the time saying “I can’t believe I just watched a chick-flick masked as a football movie!!!!!” I felt like I was cheated. “You had me at hello” always makes me angry thinking about how much I felt hoodwinked with that movie. That movie was 95% chick flick and 5% guy movie and the previews made it sound like this movie about a football agent who was struggling to keep his clients…blah blah. It was a chick flick about Tom Cruise hooking up with Renee Zellweiger and her kid with a little football and agent stuff sprinkled in from time to time.

      • halladaysbiceps - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM

        I agree with you Chris. I remember in the previews for Jerry Maguire that it was advertised as a sports movie. Also, Renee Zellweiger’s kid in Jerry Maguire was a pretty goofy, too.

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:24 PM

        Ha! And good point—it’ll be interesting to see, first of all, whether non-baseball-loving women are indeed lured to “Moneyball” by Brad Pitt, and whether those women leave the theater feeling as though they got what they came for. If they really don’t know anything about baseball, I can’t imagine they’re going to want to sit through two hours of front-office strategy just to see Brad. They’re better off getting “Legends of the Fall” on Netflix.

    • Jonny 5 - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:38 PM

      Although I respect your opinion, this ad really isn’t going to stop you from seeing the movie is it (because you’re really a fan of the sport already)? And it will probably be able to lure more women who probably only want to see it (or endure it for their man) because of Brad Pitt. So it’s really a win / win.
      I’m not condoning the sexist nature, I’m just expressing that sometimes people expect too much from other people. Which are only animals with a highly developed brain. Food, shelter, sex. That’s still the order of things as far as I know. It’s a shame, sure, but we haven’t developed so much that we’ve been able to reprogram that which is programmed from puberty within our dna. Even if the world probably would be a better place. More boring, but better.

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:40 PM

        I would simply argue that the only reason we’re “expecting too much” is because not enough has been expected in the past. If we don’t talk about these things, they’ll never change.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:56 PM

        J5, I guess the difference between Craig/fearless and me(not sure about your first impression of the ad) is that when they saw it, it screamed “sexism” and when I saw it I thought “Wow, that’s a pretty effective ad to bring women into the theater” The only thing I take offense at is if people think that makes me sexist or a bad person because I don’t immediately see the sexist side of things. Otherwise, live and let live…react how you react…that’s why we have pie and cake.

      • sportsdrenched.com - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:13 PM

        How about this fearlessleader? A topic among my freinds and I, and seperatly with my wife, is how much more the men of my generation are involved in the raising of our children. My Dad, my friends Dad had destict roles of going to work at taking care of the mechanical things around the house, and that was it. Most of my freinds and I are much more involved in our childrens lives than our fathers were. We think that’s a generational trend. At least locally. We want to be more involved in our childrens lives than our Dad’s were. Another part of it is our partners expect that more than their mothers did. But it still goes back to out three basic needs. Food, Shelter (happy home life), Sex (happy partner).

        Gender equality will continue to get better. But if you peel away enough layers you still come down to the wiring.

      • Jonny 5 - Sep 20, 2011 at 4:06 PM

        “I would simply argue that the only reason we’re “expecting too much” is because not enough has been expected in the past. If we don’t talk about these things, they’ll never change.”

        You’re not going to argue it with me. You’re probably right. I like to think that I’m conditioned to expect less from people than others do. And it’s based on the reality I have grown to know.

    • paperlions - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

      That is the thing though….you don’t market to people that are going to buy the product anyway. There is no reason to market to women that are baseball fans because you will see their movie anyway….marketing is designed to get people that otherwise would not purchase the product to do so….and for the majority of women, Brad Pitt is probably the most attractive asset associated with the film…and good marketing always targets the majority.

    • Matt D. - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM

      “If he’s your cup of tea. I still think of him as the greasy robber in the cowboy hat from ‘Thelma and Louise.'”

      But he was an attractive greasy robber.

      That aside, I completely agree with your point about the patronizing language. Regardless of how one feels about the advertising strategy, the way this ad is written is downright insulting.

    • spudchukar - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM

      So chicks don’t like the Long Ball?

      • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 4:22 PM

        Spudchukar—my fellow Cardinal fan—I love the long ball, especially the line-drive to right-center off the bat of Albert Pujols. But when a team’s offense is entirely power-dependent, the game is boring. Give this chick a running game—stolen bases, well-executed hit-and-runs, an occasional squeeze play—if you really want to see her happy!

  10. trevorb06 - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:52 AM

    Do you think that worked for Inglorious Bastards?

    • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:58 AM

      Yeah, I think that movie did OK…and its audience was around 43% female. Not terrible. I’m betting Moneyball’s audience is 43% female tops…and probably less.

      http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=inglouriousbasterds.htm

      • trevorb06 - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM

        I thought you hated stats?

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:11 PM

        Nope, I just hate the ones that are subjective. Ones that are objective and appeal to common sense are very useful.

      • paperlions - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM

        So that must rule out ERA, AVG, pitcher Wins, saves, and RBI. Good for you!
        :-)

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM

        Well paper, I know you are just messing with me, but I’ll propose that there is nothing at all subjective about the actual # of Wins, Saves and RBI a player gets. You may say they are not relevant, and that’s your call. But there isn’t anything “subjective” about them. There are rules that are very clear and straightforward.

        Now, if you want to say that the 1 or 2 unearned runs a year a pitcher may get because of a faulty scoring decision is subjective enough…or the hit as opposed to an error that affects the BA makes batting average subjective, then that’s your call. But to me, they aren’t nearly as subjective as the defensive stats out there right now.

      • paperlions - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:51 PM

        The rules that define what an earned run, a save, a pitcher win, batting average, and RBI are all arbitrary….some more than others (like Avg. and ERA, two disastrously arbitrarily defined stats).

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 2:03 PM

        Earned run and batting average depend on a sportswriter’s whim I agree, although not really often enough to quibble with, but OK.

        How is the clear rule defining a Win, Save or RBI arbitrary? You may disagree with the rules, but they are as plain as day. There’s nothing to argue with when a guy gets the win. Maybe you don’t like HOW he got it, but under the RULES of baseball, he got it. Period.

        Now, when they do defensive stats, they click a button to show how the defender may have been able to get to a ball…even if he was positioned from the bench…doesn’t matter. It affects his range. Or if the 3b is great and steals balls from the SS, it affects the SS’s defensive rating. It is way too subjective…arbitrary…in its APPLICATION, NOT in its RULES.

  11. offseasonblues - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:00 PM

    This movie is such a win-win for us girls who really do love baseball and really do pay attention to stats (wOBA is my fav). Loved the book, can’t wait to see the movie.

  12. cur68 - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:49 PM

    When someone complains about something about 95% of the people around them offer advice or tell them why they shouldn’t complain. If they are lucky one or two will say, “Yep. That sucks.”

    What’s funny is that this one’s pretty simple; a big company playing to male/female stereotypes does in fact suck.

  13. Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Sep 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

    Boobs.

  14. sportschick71 - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:16 PM

    I was just telling my husband that I need to go see this. And not for Brad Pitt (actually, I try to avoid movies that he is in). I want to see it for the story. Plenty of women want to see it just for that.

    • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM

      And plenty of men read Playboy for the articles too :)

      • sportschick71 - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:50 PM

        Maybe you are just hanging around the wrong type of women, which would lead to your 2% theory. My mother, 2 best friends, and 2 sisters-in-law also want to see the movie…regardless of who is in it. The eye-candy is just a bonus.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:57 PM

        Well, your household is obviously way more sports-oriented than most other households. And again, I’m not saying that women aren’t into sports. I hope I’m not even implying that. Maybe I need to clear up my definition of a baseball fan. It isn’t a Phillies fan watching his/her team. Or a Red Sox fan watching his/her team. It is watching a Royals/Orioles game in mid-August. Or watching a Cubs/Pirates game in Septembr over the season premiere of America’s Next Top Model. See, I am a Phillies fan, but I am NOT a baseball fan. I’d watch the Phillies, Red Sox and Yankees and that’s it. I didn’t watch a pitch of the 2010 World Series.

        A movie like Moneyball is for baseball fans…or A’s fans…or Brad Pitt fans…or extreme movie fans. That’s about it. Anyone else is doing their significant other a favor…trading off to see something they want to see down the road. So if the marketers can get some females to get their boyfriends to go see the latest Brad Pitt movie with them, then they will promote that concept no matter how many female baseball fans, or Craigs, think it is sexist.

      • sportschick71 - Sep 20, 2011 at 2:17 PM

        I see your point. And I know my household is different than most. Growing up we took family vacations that consisted of stopping at every baseball field possible along the way. I just get offended when people think/assume that women don’t like sports other than the fact that they get to watch the cute guys run around in their tight pants.
        By your definition I can call myself a baseball and football fan. I’ll watch any game, of either sport, over any other show on TV. Being from Ohio, I had to learn early that my favorite teams would most likely let me down and if I wanted to enjoy watching the World Series or Super Bowl I’d have to deal with watching someone else bask in the glory.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Sep 20, 2011 at 2:31 PM

        As far as football goes, I am with you. I can watch almost any game, college or pro, at any time. But not baseball. Like I said above about Moneyball…it’s just a movie about a concept. It’s not a love story or a human interest story…like Field of Dreams or the Natural. I don’t see a lot of women…or even men for that matter…going to see it. Personally, I think the movie is going to tank. It may lead out of the gate week 1, but I don’t think it will gross more than $50 million domestic.

    • sportschick71 - Sep 20, 2011 at 3:15 PM

      Don’t take this the wrong way, but I hope you are wrong. It would be nice to see a concept movie do well for a change. I for one am over the love story, chick flick movies. I know they keep viewers’ interest but by now once you’ve seen one you’ve seen them all.

  15. Reggie's Bush - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:29 PM

    If I may…

    I just did a quick read of comments while at work (maybe skimming would be better) so forgive me if I didn’t see this point addressed.

    Fearless, you want to see the movie anyway right? Wouldn’t most baseball fans want to see a baseball movie? What advantage would the movie have by marketing to people they have already sold? It’s not specifically that they dont care if female baseball fans exist – it’s more of them not winning extra revenue.

    You know who probably won’t want to see this movie? Perhaps females who hate sports, if they win some of those women – extra $ in their pockets.

    Also, chicks with big boobs in beer commercials are awesome. Dont think they work though, I’m not a big fan of the watery beers known as Bud Light, Miller Light or Coors Light.

    • Gamera the Brave - Sep 20, 2011 at 1:45 PM

      Don’t forget the St. Pauli Girl!

    • fearlessleader - Sep 20, 2011 at 4:15 PM

      I want to see the movie a whole lot less now that its marketing team has insulted me. Possibly enough to wait for it on Netflix rather than rushing to the theater as I’d intended. Yeah, I know, a very small drop in a very big bucket—but I’m happier with my life when I’m not donating my consumer dollars to entities that treat me like an idiot.

      • Reggie's Bush - Sep 20, 2011 at 11:17 PM

        Are you just taking it way too seriously? Did they specifically say hey “fearlessleader” you’re just a girly girl and couldnt possibly like baseball as a sport – maybe just to see guy’s butts while rounding the bases.

        Are you lumping all girls who do not like baseball enough to see this movie, but would watch it to see Brad Pitt (i.e. who that ad was supposedly targeting) – idiots? Sounds just as bad, I’m sure they’d be offended at you as well.

  16. emmaspan - Sep 20, 2011 at 3:28 PM

    “Tell your guy it’s a baseball movie!” I don’t know. He’s been pretty suspicious ever since I told him that about DINOCROC VS. SUPERGATOR.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Do the Angels have any weaknesses?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (3707)
  2. A. Rizzo (2476)
  3. R. Castillo (2365)
  4. B. Belt (2172)
  5. A. Pujols (2057)
  1. H. Ryu (2012)
  2. C. Young (1991)
  3. J. Hamilton (1921)
  4. C. Davis (1825)
  5. E. Gattis (1788)