Bad News Bears (2005) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
119 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Rock 'n roll update--not all that different, but dispiriting...
moonspinner5529 December 2005
Unskilled, belligerent group of young boys on a losing Little League baseball team get an alcoholic coach who eventually cleans up their act--and his own. Any film-buff well acquainted with the 1976 Michael Ritchie film "The Bad News Bears" will watch this remake in a perpetual state of deprivation. For every new ingredient added (a kid in a wheelchair, Hooters waitresses on the sidelines, a skateband interlude), there's a classic sequence dropped, funny lines omitted, a bracing sense of importance missing, and uncharismatic, non-plussed child actors who walk through their roles colorlessly. Of course, Billy Bob Thornton is a terrific substitute for Walter Matthau, but Matthau didn't carry the original film all by himself, and Thornton isn't fully in-character anyway (he's just breezing through). The whole early morning feel of Southern California Little League is missing, and the urgency of the original is gone, too (those kids had something riding on these games). Director Richard Linklater obviously was fond of the 1976 version, but he knows the notes without hearing the music; he supplies updated comedic touches without seeing the relevancy, and his tone and narrative are doggedly straightforward (except for the strange opening sequence, which immediately gets the picture off on the wrong foot). A sad botch. *1/2 from ****
43 out of 61 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Please - just see the original
jennrugg13 February 2007
I'm a fan of Billy Bob - but he ain't no Walter Matthau. Every character is just plain flat - with nothing to act off of. You don't really care about anyone in the movie. Linklater is a much better director and you are better off watching any other movie that either he or Billy Bob has made. A waste of money all around in my opinion. Just go and watch the original - you won't regret it. (They won't let me make my comment unless I have 10 lines of text - but I have nothing else to say. Guess I'll just have to keep typing until they let this go through. Opps not enough yet - how about this time. Still not enough - I think this will make it)
26 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
No news is good news
Ronald_Mexico7 February 2006
When filmmakers get the idea to remake a classic movie, often it's because he or she feels that something was missing from the original. They feel that, by placing their unique stamp on the new film, they can satisfy unanswered questions, plot points, etc, while maintaining the basic dignity and character of the original.

So...based on that theory, Billy Bob Thornton's rationale for the remake of "The Bad News Bears" was that the original had too many letters in the title (in a bold and highly daring move reminiscent of Ed Wood at his finest, Thornton decided to drop "The", changing it simply to "Bad News Bears"), not enough swearing...and a kid in a wheelchair. Oh, and he changes enemy Yankee pitcher's last name from "Turner" to "Bullok" for reasons unbeknownst to anyone but himself. With revolutionary alterations such as these, don't be surprised if you pick up the rental box half a dozen times while watching the movie to make absolutely sure that you have indeed rented the correct film.

Basically, the plot can be summed up as "Bad Santa coaches a group of misfit kids". Yawn. We've seen this role, this performance, from Billy Bob Thornton one too many times. Thornton wants to bowl us over with the 'shocking' vulgarity of youth, but a trip to "Hooters" and Tanner teaching a boy in a wheelchair to curse both turn out to be so lightweight that it is likely that only the Reverend Jerry Falwell would take offense.

At best, the casting was marginal, and at worst, the audience is forced to wonder if the director actually auditioned the kids or merely closed his eyes and chanted 'Eenie, Meenie, Mynie, Mo" while holding a stack of acting resumes. Sammi Kane Kraft (as Amanda) was a great baseball player with limited acting ability, and Timmy Deters was only modestly successful in trying to recreate the role of Tanner Boyle. Tyler Patrick Jones as Timmy Lupus was far and away the most talented of what basically amounted to a mediocre cast of child actors, but he was utterly wasted in this film and was limited to a few one-liners that must have ended up on the cutting room floor from "Bad Santa". Naturally, Thornton is no match for the venerable Walter Matthau as Buttermaker. Whereas Matthau was irascible and cantankerous in a lovable 'Grandpa's dipping in the cider again' kind of way, Thornton's version of Buttermaker is creepy enough to make us think of adequate background checks and the stupidity of parents who would willingly leave their children alone with him.

Per his film tradition in his post "Sling Blade" days, Thornton goes out of his way to remove any heartfelt sentiment from the plot, and thus the friendship between Timmy Lupus and Tanner Boyle never materializes. That adds to what is perhaps the most irritating part of the film: the introduction of a new player (Tony Gentile as Matthew Hooper). It is an unnecessary plot device, possibly added only because the always classy Thornton had some good 'kid in wheelchair' jokes that he was just itching to use, and adds a touch of surrealism to a movie that should be imminently grounded in realism. In fact, Thornton changes one of the most touching moments of the original movie by handing it to Hooper (a character who, let's face it, has no redeeming qualities other than the fact that he's in a wheelchair) in one highly unrealistic scene; he thereby successfully strips even more of the heart away from the original film. Which, judging from Thornton's film-making history, was probably exactly what he intended to do.

In short, there are undoubtedly worse remakes out there ("War of the Worlds" and "Bewitched" come to mind), but not many. If you're thinking of renting this film because you're desperate for some true seventies banality, allow me to suggest that you save the money and instead try catching either the rerun of "Alice" where Flo says "Kiss my grits" for the eighteenth time or the action-packed episode of "My Three Sons" where Fred MacMurray lights his pipe. If you choose to rent the film anyway...well, don't say I didn't give you any other viable options.
51 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Who are they making this for?
RWells0920 July 2005
I just want to know exactly who Mr. Linklater was trying to appeal to in this movie. Not only is the kids' sport genre tired, they are geared primarily for children most of the time. But with Billy Bob Thorton (who I thought was hilarious in "Bad Santa"), one would guess they are trying to bring in the older audiences.

The movie feels like it has split personalities. There is a ton of swearing and adult humor that would definitely NOT appeal to parents of younger children, but many of the jokes just weren't funny to me because they were aimed at the younger children.

The movie is not terrible, but its not good either. It is simply a forgettable movie, which is a shame because I think Richard Linklater is a great director and Billy Bob Thorton seems like a natural when it comes to comedic timing.
24 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Horrible, just horrible
gianstefano_20007 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
If this had been the original, it never would have been remade. Here are my observations of where they went wrong: The original was well acted and believable. The remake was an over the top farce with some of the worst acting I've seen in a major motion picture in along time.

In the original, Kelly and Amanda looked 12. In the remake, they looked 17. Watch them walking with the other Bears, they are about a foot taller.

The Coach Turner character in the first was clearly defined. He was an over aggressive sports dad pushing his son and team relentlessly, eventually melting down and hitting his son in public. The audience was never given a feel for the new Turner, except that he was somewhat wimpy, but unreal as far as any person anyone has ever met.

They removed the scene of Turner hitting his son, then telling his wife that it was because Joey could have killed Engelbert. In reality, Turner was p'd off because his son disobeyed him. In the remake, Turner seems genuinely concerned for Engelbert.

There was almost no character development in the remake. When I saw the first, I felt like I knew the major characters. In the remake, we learned very little. For instance, Lupas in the original was a painfully shy kid who would prefer to be left completely unnoticed. In the remake, he was just a weird kid who had trouble catching.

The emotion was totally gone. The scene where Joey wouldn't throw the ball to put Engelbert out to get back at his father; the scene where Lupas begs not to be put in and Buttermaker tells him he didn't come into this life to watch from the bench; the scene where Lupas finally catches the ball to get the Bears out of the inning; the scene where Kelly gets thrown out at the plate; I could go on forever.

There seem to be strippers in the remake for no apparent reason. The Buttermaker character is supposed to be a sad loner type. To think that Buttermaker is dating strippers take a lot of the sympathy away from him.

Ultimately, there was no magic in the second one. And quite frankly no reason to remake this movie. It occurred to me that the producers of the remake didn't quite get the point of the first one. Or they are insulting teenagers by not believing they are smart enough to get it.

I thought that changing the sponsor to a strip club was funny. And having the representative who sued the league be a woman was a nice update. Other than that, I see nothing where this movie adds to what I already saw. And I didn't even list half of what was worse about it.

If you honestly thought the new version was better, can I ask specifically what you thought was flawed about the original and how the remake did it better?
16 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Further redundant proof that movies, among other things, were better in the Seventies.
FilmSnobby27 July 2005
Along with others who were born in the late Sixties, I felt that seeing the new *Bad News Bears* was somehow mandatory, if only to indulge in the guilty pleasure of nostalgia. We all knew it would suck, didn't we? -- but we had to see it anyway.

Let it be said at once that Billy Bob Thornton as Coach Buttermaker is quite a come-down from the immortal Walter Matthau in the same role. Since the script of this new version is quite identical to the original, much of the degradation displayed here must be put at the feet of Thornton, a notorious ad-libber. None of us, young or old, need to be subjected to exclamations such as "You guys look like the last s--t I took." Or to hear copious references to Greg Kinnear's family jewels.

But whether through the script or through Thornton's egregious improvising, director Richard Linklater reveals a complete lack of control. Evidently, the best that he feels he can do with this material is to allow it to subside deeper into crassness than the original. The whole enterprise becomes a dreary exercise in upping the ante: Matthau's Buttermaker was a pool cleaner; Thornton's Buttermaker is a rat-exterminator . . . in the '76 version, the Bears are sponsored by Chico's Bail Bonds; in the 2005 version, they're sponsored by a strip-club. Get the idea? What had been a gritty, rather incisive look at everyday Americana has become merely an exercise in crudity. This degeneration of standards can legitimately be argued away as the eternal complaint of the old, but the feeling persists that the original *Bad News Bears* was still made for KIDS, despite the more realistic dialog, situations, and characters. (And Matthau was never a scene-stealer; Tatum O'Neal shone just as brightly as he did. And rightly so.) The Little Leaguers in this film are sadly subordinate to the leering Coach -- guess who the intended audience is? (Hint: not kids.)

By the way -- speaking of come-downs -- the iconic role of bad-boy Kelly Leak as portrayed by the super-iconic Jackie Earl Haley has been utterly neutered, here. The new Kelly is played by some incipient Calvin Klein model pretending to be a skate-punk. Pee-yew, man. Hey Jackie Earl, wherever you are: your status as the preeminent prepubescent bad-ass is, like, totally safe.

1 star out of 10.
28 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
If you liked Bad Santa, you'll like this
thundarrthebarbarian27 July 2005
Okay, sometimes I go for a mindless film. This movie was pretty mindless but I expected it to be. It was foul mouthed and showed the kids trying to beat the snot out of each other. After "Bad Santa", I really didn't expect any less.

Someone else commented that there were long pauses left in for laughing. I'm not sure where he lives, but the people in my theater were all laughing their butts off most of the movie. Maybe it's an age difference - this was a mostly 20-something crowd enjoying this film.

Under no circumstances would I want my children seeing this film until they're at least 15, though. It IS an adult film and I don't think that kids need another movie to get bad ideas from. An R rating would have suited the film better, especially if it meant raunchier scenes.

All in all I enjoyed myself. It's not a film for everyone, that's for sure - but if you enjoyed "Bad Santa", you'll probably like this film.
25 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Funny, but for Older Children/Young Adults
fenkazl19 July 2005
First, let me say that it's been years since I saw the original and not being a baseball/softball player myself, I couldn't remember a thing about it. I thought this movie was funny and had some good messages promoting "team concepts", even though it was hidden sometimes under crude language, sexual innuendo and other subjects not appropriate for very young children. I am a Billy Bob Thorton fan and I thought he played the part well and was exactly the guy for the role. You generally wouldn't expect to see him in a PG-rated movie anyway. I just want families with young children to keep this in mind when choosing a film for all to see. A few families walked out after the first few minutes that contained some language not appropriate for their young children. The child actors in the movie are great and make the picture enjoyable to watch. The other benefit to this film, again for the appropriate aged audience is that it is about two hours long so you feel like you get your money's worth!
30 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Billy Bob can win your heart!
Sylviastel9 June 2008
I love Billy Bob Thornton in Bad Santa and the Bad News Bears remake to 2005 after a 29 years since the original film. The film has changed to modify today's world where computers rule the world which I said at 10 years old to an skeptical neighbor and where even a handicapped wheelchair-bound boy can play baseball. Thornton plays Buttermaker, the major league baseball player who turns coach rather than get a jail sentence. The mother of one his players is played by the divine Marcia Gay Harden. I think the kid from Bad Santa also has a role as does Greg Kinnear who plays a competitive coach. I love watching the kids learn the sport by killing insects since Buttermaker is an exterminator and they sponsored by a strip club. They start getting better in the beginning. They are lovable losers who face ridicule and humiliation every day at school. Suddenly, they get help with a girl pitcher and a guy who's a rebel.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not nearly as good as the original
bobbobwhite4 August 2005
Billy Bob is no Walter Matthau and this tepid remake of the 70's semi-classic comedy with the terrific Tatum O'Neal is also not nearly as good as the original in any way.

Billy Bob could have slept his way through this dud(maybe he did), as his flaky, drunk, cursing, sleazy, womanizing Buttermaker coach role was just the way he is in real life. The filmmaker obviously hired him for his Bad Santa "presence" and surely not for anything else, as his trashy bad boy act is wearing pretty thin these days as he "plays" it in every film he is in. Maybe filmmakers just love it, but it is really getting old and worn, especially in this film that got no spark at all from his lead character. It just was just plain flat all the way to the end.

The only thing that made me stay to the end was the kids, as their typical rowdy and funny antics were by far the best thing in this movie. Marcia Gay Harden was sabotaged by a dumb part as a hypocritical super-mom, and Greg Kinnear was way too bland and fair-minded for his All-American dad role as an opposing coach of the best team. He played exactly like Pat Boone would have played it, with not nearly enough yin, "win at all costs" opposition to the yang Billy Bob part. Vic Morrow, with his great underlying but veiled "kill or be killed" menace, was so much better in the original it is beyond comparison.

Finally, there was no essential dramatic tension anywhere in the story, even in the final championship game. No good film will ever be made without it. Blah, boring, dull, vapid, banal, ho many more pejoratives are there for this sorry loser that should have never been made?

See the original instead. Save money and have a way better time.
15 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
If you've seen the original don't waste your time here.
a320jbg13 August 2005
The original "Bad News Bears" was a hit because it was funny and even a bit shocking for it's time. Unfortunately this remake is not funny or original and only shocking in how bad it is.

The original movie had enough character development that you could relate to each of the kids and the adults. This remake does not take the time for character development and instead seems to rely on the viewers knowledge of the previous movie. The kids characters made the first movie interesting but this one chooses to ignore that fact and tries to focus on Buttermaker (Thornton). Tanner Boyle, Lupus, and Engelberg were main characters originally but are uninteresting and one dimensional in this version. While I'm sure these kids are fine actors they aren't given much of a chance to act in this film.

There is no originality in this new version. I assume a couple of very small changes, such as changing the team sponsor, were thrown in so the writers, producers and directors could claim they had not just blatantly ripped off the old movie.

Billy Bob Thornton turns in the same old performance we have seen from him before. When he is given a part that challenges him, Billy Bob seems to rise to the occasion. It is clear this part does not challenge him and his acting can only be described as "the usual."

Jeffrey Davies plays Kelly Leak and Sammi Kane Kraft is Amanda Whurlitzer. Their characters are downplayed to the point that it would be easy to forget they were even in the movie. Again, character development is non-existent and the two actors are not given anything to work with.

If you have not seen the original movie then this might not be a complete waste of your time. It is such a copy of the original movie, although not a good copy, that you might find some humor. Most, if not all, of the politically incorrect humor from the first version has been eliminated in an apparent effort to not offend.

In short, go and rent the 1976 version and enjoy the original for what it is. If you are a die hard Billy Bob Thornton fan and absolutely must see this film then wait for it on DVD and save yourself the trip to a theater.
16 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Quality film, if mildly recycled w/ "Bad Santa" materials
Hallelujah28910 April 2019
"Bad News Bears" (2005) is a likable film about a lousy dad who becomes a decent baseball coach and it can be lewd but there's a genuine caring in it and a willingness to let kids be kids in all their cussing and beating each other up and not caring that much about being polite. I liked it. No complaints from me. Didn't see or know about the original "Bad News Bears" (1976). Maybe this was an average remake, but by no means terrible. Probably better than most remakes these days anyway.

Many older reviews call this adaptation "Bad News Bears" soulless and over-sweary, but I wouldn't go that far. If you are a fan of Billy Bob Thornton's "Bad Santa" character you'll appreciate the scent of desperation and alchohol his "Bad News Bears" character has, as well as his appreciation for hookers and predilection for both swearing at and fathering forgotten kids. There's many tropes that are familiar between "Bad News Bears" and "Bad Santa." There's even a cameo from one of the "Bad Santa" characters. I wouldn't necessarily call "Bad News Bears" PG-13 but it is a lot more PG-13 than "Bad Santa."

"Bad News Bears" even includes several pep talks about winning and not learning to be a total quitter. And for once, the moral message doesn't fall flat. Billy Bob Thornton does have a way of never sounding like he's taking the high road and that's a good thing when it comes to talking straight to kids. I would still want to recommend "Bad News Bears" to a 13 year old who isn't too sheltered because there's some sex references every now and again.

On top of this, "Bad News Bears" boasts some great cast. In addition to Billy Bob Thornton there is Greg Kinnear as the try-hard rival coach, and Marcia Gay Harden as an uptight lawyer mom of one of the baseball players who likes to win. The child actors who play Billy Bob Thornton's ragtag baseball team are believable and rather refreshing-none are overly sweet or doormats. They strike a good balance.

Overall decent film with worthy acting moments from most actors, even if both Billy Bob Thornton and Marcia Gay Harden are somewhat typecast (Thornton as the alcoholic derelict and Harden as the uptight businesswoman). A little bit of a rehash, but enjoyable anyways.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I feel dirty
Edwinjhill20 November 2005
This movie had no reason to get made. I loved 'School Of Rock' and went to see it because Richard Linklater directed it, but it looks like it was shot in a day and the acting from the kids is horrible. Billy Bob Thornton looks half-comatose throughout the film. Some reviews say this movie is edgier than the original. That is in no way true. This one seems to want to have a heart to it, which ruins the film. Very disappointed throughout. I saw this at the dollar theater and felt like I should ask for my money back. The whole film has an improved feel to it, almost like there was no script whatsoever. There is hardly any music underscoring also, which makes the pacing of the film entirely too slow. Highly unrecommended.
11 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not Good News
bob-rutzel21 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
A former major league baseball player agrees to coach baseball for a team of 12-year olds.

I think this is a setup. More on that later.

I wouldn't take young kids to see this movie due to all the language, sexual innuendo, and just plain crass behavior by the kids as well as adults (mostly Billy Bob). Go buy the DVD of the original, which is far better. However, I will say, as the movie progressed, the language and rude, crude, and crass behavior, for the most part, disappeared. Why they didn't start that way is a mystery second only to the Pyramids. Maybe no one wanted to upset Billy Bob's record of playing bad characters like in Bad Santa.

There is one thing I will say in defense of Billy Bob's character (Morris Buttermaker) and that the character was always level-headed and never intense and never out of control. I had to admire that. I mean kids can get on nerves at times. Yes, there were a few laughs in this, but not really out loud guffaws.

I feel this is a set-up because of some issues were not resolved and we should see Bad New Bears 2 fairly soon before the kids outgrow their sneakers. Buttermaker's relationship with his ex-wife, who was supposed to attend the championship game, was a no show; his own life was a shambles before and while coaching the team wasn't entirely resolved although he did learn a lot from the kids; and his relationship with the lawyer (Hardin) who talked him into the coaching gig and who had the hots for him as well was never really defined. Well, maybe these things don't have to be resolved, but just watch. Oh, yeah, there is one more issue that needs resolution, but I cannot make it known here.

In the end, Buttermaker lets the kids be kids and allows the chips to fall where they would. And, that part was very good and entertaining. Before that it was all about winning.

With so many and I mean many, many remakes out there I think the people doing these remakes have some kind of responsibility to make the new movie conform to the original and if not, then title it something else. But don't take us into the bathroom to see it and pretend it is like the original when the remake is nothing like it in tone and uses language and behavior that the original would never have attempted.
10 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Poor Way to Honor the Original
christian12320 December 2005
Heavy drinking, cranky former baseball player Morris Buttermaker (Billy Bob Thornton) is recruited to coach a Little League team full of misfits. Can he turn the team around and lead them to the championship, despite caring only about his paycheck?

The original Bad News Bears was pretty good. It had an original story and a lot of funny and interesting characters. The remake tells the same story but it has a lot less heart than the original. The misfits story has been done a lot since the original has been released. The remake seems to be just another retelling of the same story minus the interesting characters, fun and comedy. The film did have potential though. It's from the director of School of Rock and the writer of Bad Santa. Add in Billy Bob Thornton and you get a nice lineup. Unfortunately, the film is average at best.

The cast isn't very good. Sure, there's Billy Bob Thornton and he raises the film to mediocrity but most of the kids were awful. Thornton plays the same character from Bad Santa. If you liked that film than you will probably like him here too. He's no Walter Matthau but at least he was kind of funny. The kids in the original film were mostly all funny and interesting. The same cannot be said for the remake. All the kids seemed out of place and none of them were really that funny. The worst had to be the girl who played Amanda. I didn't expect her to be as good as Tatum but she was the worst choice for the role. Yeah, she can play baseball really well but she can't act at all. All the other kids were mostly forgettable except maybe the kid who played Tanner. There's also Marcia Gay Harden and Greg Kinnear but neither do anything special.

I thought that the comedy seemed forced. Most of the kids were more annoying than funny and some seemed awkward in front of the camera. The movie starts off promising in the beginning but than becomes dull and most of the jokes fall flat. They also kept reusing jokes throughout the entire film so it became tiresome to see the same thing being used over and over again. The ending is also a little overdone. They could have edited it a little but I guess they wanted each bad player on their team to do something for the team. I wouldn't call the remake a complete travesty but it was certainly unnecessary. In the end, I was expecting so much more from this and came out disappointed. If you're a fan of Thornton than maybe the film is worth rental but I think renting the original would be a better choice. Rating 5/10
13 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
They should have just stopped at "Bad"...
Purefunk88 September 2005
Some of you may be wondering what exactly the "Bad News" in "Bad News Bears" really means. Well it is supposed to mean bad news for the other teams in their baseball league, as it did in the original movie. Howevair, with this movie it means bad news for the viewers.

All kidding aside, it really eats monster butt. Sure, there are a few good one liners (3 maximum), but not nearly enough to hold the movie together or make it enjoyable for that matter. Oh, and if you are a fan of the art of acting at all, it's a good move to side-step this one. The child acting is HORRENDOUS on all accounts, nearly making it unwatchable. But definitely making it un-rewatchable. Then there are the lame updates in the script only topped in horribility by the complete changes to it.

Fans of the original don't taint your memories with this god awful movie.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Paint the mustouche on the Mona Lisa why don't you?
shapiromshap22 March 2007
I generally am a Richard Linklater fan and consider Mr. Thorton one of the finest actors and writers we have. I'd like to kick them both dead on in the nuts for this one. The original was a structurally flawless piece of work and their version was horrendous and stupid. Everything the original did with grace, skill and humor they trampled over needlessly. Every time they changed Lancaster's original script they did so without tact and screwed up the rhythm of the piece

See the original. It remains a masterpiece and one of the greatest sports movies ever made. This is a cheap remake that should have never been made. So many great scripts and premises have been screwed up, why not remake those and start with JJ Abrams original screenplay of "Regarding Henry" another movie where a top notch director did not do his best work. Now that should be remade how Abrams envisioned it.

He's never written anything better, nor have most of the rest of us.
15 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A total and complete waste of film
jboydstun5 February 2006
There is no "good news" about these "bad news Bears". How can anyone have respect for a film that shows no respect for anything. These losers don't seem to learn from their mistakes. Instead of a "feel good" movie, this is a "feel bad" movie. Very predictable. After watching this movie, I was totally depressed, and embarrassed that I wasted my time & money renting it. What a mess. I honestly can't recall ever seeing a worse movie than this. I need to apologize to my kids. It's truly sad to see kids using bad language, and its even worse when considering that they're the target audience for this film. There is no inspiration here.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
No matter how you slice it this movie strikes out.
binstence-19 August 2005
This remake is no remake. BNB 2005 has not one scintilla of the charm or humor of the original. Bad News Bears 2005 is nothing more than another perverted film producer pimping out an American classic for monetary gain. It is more a documentary about America's cultural slide toward degeneracy. The movies' child actors are victims of child abuse and any parent who would take a child to see this movie is guilty of child abuse. Is there any question why box office revenues are plunging when the entertainment holy land Hollywood and all of its artistic geniuses continue as if addicted, to produce obscene and offensive rubbish? BNB is essentially a tragic chronicling of the dissolution of the once great American family and the "new virtue" of celebrating moral depravity. The bad news is that "Rome is burning". Addition on 2/4/06. Where in heaven's name is the possible "spoiler"? Sheesh.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Comments about movie...Not positive
xerotrek32824 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The movie was a remake, so I went in there expecting a letdown. I am the kind of guy that wants some things to remain the same, forget the times. I thought they did some good things by not having Roy (the Yankees manager)smack Joey (his kid) on the mound. It IS 2005, and you just can't show something like that. Or the Bears drinking REAL beer at the end...I accept that too. But there are some things that didn't ring true to me.

Why did they make Kelly #5 in the movie? That stole something important away from me and all the other fans. That final inning, he comes up and is announced, that's one of the great moments of anticipation in sports movie history. You KNOW he is swinging away anyway, and that announcement makes you realize who he is...How good he is...How IMPORTANT this at-bat is...But they get the number wrong. Several numbers were wrong, but this one is the most glaring.

Tanner Boyle, as expected, doesn't use the same colorful curses as in the original. In a PC world, it's expected that he would be a little more tame...But ANYONE that saw the original and Bears II knows that Tanner can NOT be tame because he is the epitome of attitude. To "water-him-down" is a gross injustice, and he should have been a foul-mouthed little bastard that fought more people than just Engleberg. He kept going after him, and not the whole team. They could not have let him be the original, agreed, but why did he play second base? Tanner is the SHORTSTOP, which is the perfect irony because he is terrible and his position is the most vital in the infield for a team that faces so many right-handed batters.

There is no Albert/Alfred Ogilvie. The brain of the team, the scout, the first one to get on base with 2-outs in the last inning of the championship. That weird Armenian kid played a sort-of-afterthought role, but it is BS. The little speech of being "0-14 and next to Timmy Lupus, probably the worst player in the league" was gone from the movie. The time it was delivered in the original was DETRIMENTAL to the plot, and showed the comeback with the proper perspective. Ahmed didn't bunt, some weird new kid did...Little Miguel is supposed to walk because of his size...Um, where was that? Kelly is supposed to bat last, with the bases juiced and 2 away. Why is that Armenian kid hitting there? Kelly slapping a hit earlier in inning and being on-base is like the end of Bears II, but that Armenian kid is no Carmen Ronzonni, let alone Kelly Leak. The Armenian, Aztec, Argentinian, African, whatever he is kid should be on the cutting room floor.

Timmy Lupus making stupid statements...He eats poop I think I heard...What have they DONE to the underdog hero? He was a quiet, shy kid that had a moment. He isn't even a boogie-eating moron now, he eats poop and is too weird to be a factor in the hearts of any viewers. If I were Quinn Smith, I'd try to sue BIG TIME. Anyways, he doesn't even get to make the catch to redeem himself. He misses that too, and this WHEELCHAIR kid Hooper makes it. I get it, Hooper=Looper, Gay for the pun...Yank, yank on my lower extremity. A wheelchair...OK, it was funny...But you stole the glory from Lupus. He has no respect from the viewing public now.

Hooper should have been named Ogilvie, and played that role. Let him bat in the sixth, and get walked when a ball hits his chair or something...Then he hits super-speed on his chair or something and scores on Ahmed's bunt after stealing a base or two...The girl that played Amanda has boobs. Couldn't they cast a flat girl with some ANGER in her acting to play the Bears ace? This kid had no spunk, no attitude, no talent for acting. And the bra line was lost because of her body. Period line? Cheap replacement.

I did like the ending parts between Buttermaker and Amanda, them being friendly and maybe a bit tender. Better way to see them ride into sunset...Although the dugout scene with her arm in ice was lacking, considering what they couldn't or wouldn't say in this day and age. Kelly and Amanda kiss...BULL. A terrible thing. Since she won't be in a sequel (BETTER NOT BE, DON'T MESS THE SERIES UP MORE,)why tease us? There are so many other problems I have with this movie, but there is not enough time or space to list them all. Yeah, I'll buy it on DVD when it comes out to add to my COMPLETE sports movie collection...But I guarantee it will remain sealed. I wouldn't let anyone that saw the original poison their eyes with it.

The thing that makes me most angry though, is the fact that in 10 years or so, I'll be telling my kid or some kid (I coach baseball actually) about how anyone can make a great play. I'll bring up the Bears and say Timmy Lupus or something, and the kid will say "the kid in the wheelchair?" Or after a loss, I'll say that some calls are just wrong...Like Kelly in the last at-bat, and they will argue and say it was some Armenian kid. I hate that most kids growing up today won't see or know about the original movie. This piece of crap is all they will know, and it is just WRONG to pass this off as the same. It misses a lot of detrimental parts that shaped the movie, and lines that should never be forgotten. RESCREEN the original in theaters for us, that would be fair. The movie would kick ass these days, and great ratings. Do it and make a fortune, as well as cool me off.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Bad News Bears - great!
hotlace28 July 2005
I did not see the original movie, since I was born 3 years later, but I thought this movie was hilarious. I love Billy Bob's dry humor, which I agree, is the same as in Bad Santa. I don't think we should be comparing classics made 30 years ago with movies made today. They aren't comparable and doing so just sets you up for disappointment. By going to see this movie with a clean slate, you'll get more than enough laughs for your money and a great night out! I would strongly recommend this movie to anyone wanting a good laugh and who is tired of all those gory horror or predictable drama movies. However, this is definitely NOT a kid's movie, although it appears to be at first glance.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Just Horrible
blingblinger425 July 2005
I think everyone who has seen this movie would agree with me, Billy Bob was the only good aspect to this film. The kids were terrible at acting, they made it seem like they were reading off a teleprompter the whole time. There were very few funny lines, and the kids seemed like nothing but potty mouth little brats.

The original is way better, the performance I saw by Walter Matthau in the original got me very excited because Billy Bob always plays a good drunk, but in this film Billy Bob was just too nice most of the time, so his character was a little too dull. If you enjoy baseball films then you might enjoy this, but I doubt even the biggest Billy Bob fan would give this 2 thumbs up...
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Bad was a good word to use for this one
NHNeil25 July 2005
If you saw and enjoyed the original, don't waste your time with this fair re-make. Other than Billy Bob in the lead role, there wasn't much else in this one to make it worth seeing. If there were no original, I probably would have thought more of this one......trouble is, there was.

Tatum O'Neal was more likable than Sammi Kraft in the role of Amanda Whurlitzer. Vic Morrow was more believable than Greg Kinnear and so on and so forth. In the original, I actually found myself rooting for the Bears but in this one, they weren't a group of kids that I cared anything about.

Just rent Bad Santa and you'll pretty much get the role that Thornton plays.
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

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

Recently Viewed