GetPapa
Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible
Ogosmith
Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.
filippaberry84
I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.
Blake Rivera
If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.
Neil Doyle
BRENDAN FRASER seems to specialize in playing dumb--or at least that's the impression I had after watching him emote as a child-like baseball player who happens to have a great pitching arm in THE SCOUT. He does get laughs with his dumb act, so I suppose that's why he was chosen for this particular role.But most of the laughs come from the fact that ALBERT BROOKS is his co-star, a man who can say a funny line without ever giving a hint that he thinks it's funny. And sometimes, the result is hilarious--particularly in the "knife" scene in which Brooks is trying to hide all his kitchen knives from Fraser who "wants to cut something".None of the humor is particularly subtle, but DIANNE WIEST is a welcome addition as Dr. Aarons, the psychiatrist who determines that Fraser might have his dangerous moments after subjecting him to a series of tests with photos. But the baseball scenes at the finish are too over-the-top, straining credulity to the limits.The Tony Bennett nightclub sequence is also guaranteed to have you squirming in discomfort as Fraser sings an off-key version of "I Left My Heart in San Francisco", much to Bennett's chagrin.Summing up: With a wittier script and a different approach, could have been a very winning comedy.
gavin6942
Why do they let Brendan Fraser keep on making movies? He's not funny, he's hideously deformed and his antics get on my nerves like you wouldn't believe.A scout for the Yankees, after finding prospects in the past who "flake out", is sent to Mexico where he finds Steve Nebraska (Fraser), the greatest ball player that ever lived. But after a mandatory psych exam, Nebraska begins to "flake out", too.The general plot is decent, and the idea of a perfect ballplayer is a fun one (though hardly original, especially after I just watched "The Natural"). But Fraser is not a likable character for me, and I was really hoping he would be hit by a bus. The film is thoroughly predictable with no twists or surprises at all, and an ending that still leaves some key issues unexplained (again like "The Natural" it ends rather abruptly). I can't say what they issues are at the risk of writing spoilers, although I don't know how you can spoil a film this simple.In the beginning of the film, the scout brings in Michael Rapaport as his star player (before Rapaport flakes out). Now, if he had brought in Fraser and then later on had Rapaport playing Fraser's part, this film might have been one of the better baseball movies ever made. But whoever did the casting clearly has no idea that Fraser is utterly worthless as an actor. A few cheap laughs in "Bedazzled" and "Encino Man" do not a great comedian make.
matthew87
It seemed like baseball fantasies in the mid 90's were a very popular type style.This time It's about a pitcher steve nebraska who is in mexico and a scout albert brooks finds him.From then on he lives in new york city gets paid millions,and plays for the yankees.The relationship between brooks and fraser is like a father and son relationship,but in some scenes fraser has serious mental problems.
bob the moo
After drafting two consecutive lemons into the Yankees at great cost and having them flop to great embarrassment, scout Al Percolo is banished to scout in Mexico where the standard of baseball is a lot lower try watching a goat play on third base! However there he finds an American player, Steve Nebraska, who can pitch like the wind and bat like a monster. He drafts him to the Yankees but has to get a physiologist to treat him to ensure he doesn't flop in the same way as the others.I like Albert Brooks. He has never set the world on fire here in the UK but his films can usually be witty and well written if never hilarious. Here however he hits a real bum note with a misguided and unfunny script that he fails to make better in production and delivery. The film starts promisingly enough, with the illusion of being bright and breezy. The introduction of Nebraska appears to deliver more of the same but no it doesn't. The tone becomes heavier as Nebraska's psyche is probed and I expected it to go deeper. However it does neither. It is never well explained why he is the way he is, or what he's working on instead he just goes moody. Add to this the usual fun of sports movies is gone but nothing replaces it.The end result is that it is a drag to watch with nothing explaining enough for you to care what's going on. When the sports action does return in the final 10 minutes it is so unlikely (in fact impossible by official rules and biological reason) and badly shot that it adds nothing to the film. It's a shame cause Brooks could have mixed comedy with the deeper issues raised by Nebraska instead he loses the plot with them both and delivers neither well.Brooks is actually OK but has no real witty lines to deliver after the first 15 minutes. Also, because of a lazy script, he has to become the character that everyone watching will know he shouldn't become but it sets up the finale
lazy! Fraser is somewhere between playing a goofy guy we love and being `a good actor', however here he is just annoying and is neither. Wiest is wasted but it's interesting to see a young Rapaport. Sadly the baseball cameos were wasted on this little Irish lad and I may have missed jokes as a result.Overall this is a wasted chance to mix witty comedy with deeper issues as told through Nebraska. The film starts well but soon the deeper issues suck all the fun out of it but aren't developed well enough to replace them with anything else. Well worth missing.