This movie is based on a play, and is the second adaptation of this work. Paul Sorvino plays the basketball coach of a team of players that against all odds took home the championship 20 years ago. They have all met for a reunion. Terry Kinney plays James, a Junior High principal, and will quickly get on your nerves with all his whining and feel sorry for me role. Vincent D'Onofrio, as Phil, plays an obnoxious businessman with just the right amount of "money" cockiness. Tony Shalhoub is George, the current Mayor of the town, and appears to be on the verge of some sort of breakdown. Gary Sinise plays Tom, a writer, turned alcoholic, and in my opinion, is excellent in the role. While they are all suppose to be celebrating their championship, conflicts, jealousy, and fighting abound. As the men come to terms with what was, and is now, they are forced to look at their lives in a non-pleasant way. It's unusual to have a group of men talking and crying about what could have been, and I found it interesting watching them relate to each other. It's not the best movie I've seen, but it's certainly good enough for a viewing.
Add a Review
-
Tam-1612 June 1999
-
alex4322310 May 2012Just saw this today. I thought it was great. Wasn't too exciting, and slow at times, but I thought the story was rather good. It kept me interested and the actors acted it well. I've seen the stars of this film do better, no doubt, but they are still good here. What can you expect for a TV movie after all? I would definitely check it out, if you are interested in basketball, or perhaps high school sports. Haven't seen another quite like it, with a similar story I mean. Sorvino, I had only seen once before, in GoodFellas. I loved that movie as did most people it seems, and I'm sure he was paid far more. The rest of the cast I recognized only from later work. I caught this on Encore and thought I'd give it a chance, I don't know why. Nothing better on I suppose. Well directed, indeed.
-
Jetset97115 December 2012The problem with both this 1999 version and the 1982 version of That Championship Season is that they both suffer badly when transfered to the big or even little screen. This is a fantastic play but is at best when it is put on where it belongs, on stage in front of an audience. Paul Sorvino not only graduates from playing Phil Romano on Broadway and in the 82 version but in this 1999 version he is both the coach and director. While he gives a brilliant performance as the coach, much better than Robert Mitchem did, he doesn't have the directing chops needed for this ambitious endeavor. As for the rest of the cast, only Gary Sinise, equals Sorvino in the acting calibur. Not that the others don't try but it seems insignificant in comparison to the two. I think the writers, Jason Miller, second attempt at making this into a movie is certainly an improvement but still feels out of place off the stage. Still, give it a look.
-
This is the second attempt to bring this thought provoking play to the mass market, this time through a TV movie now in rental. Thoreau is quoted as saying: "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation." This play peels away the layers of self delusion to reveal such desperation in the insecurities, disappointments, unrealized potential and mediocrity of four men and a coach who's lives peaked in high school when they won the state basketball championship.
It is, unfortunately, a depiction too familiar to the many who never escaped their small town or neighborhood and live trying to salvage some feeling of dignity from the mediocrity and despair to which they have allowed their lives to sink.
At the 20th reunion at the coach's house (Paul Sorvino) the characters gradually reveal how pathetic their lives have become. There is the bitter coach, a unabashed bigot who still talks to grown men like they were teenaged basketball players and who believes all of life can be summed up in sports aphorisms.
James (Terry Kinney), a junior high school principal, is by far the most self delusional of the five, clearly a loser who never changed with the times, he believes he has a bright future in politics when he couldn't get elected to a sanitation post.
George (Tony Shalhoub) plays the mayor of Filmore, who has bungled his term in office and will imminently be voted out. He spends most of this time trying to convince himself and everyone else how popular and wonderful he is, when it is clear to everyone that he is a fool.
Phil (Vincent D'Onofrio) is a spoiled little rich boy who inherited his father's business which is now raping the environment for profit. He supports George's campaign so he can get variances that allow him to profit from this abuse.
Tom (a fabulous performance by Gary Sinese) is James brother, a vagabond alcoholic who ironically is the only one who sees the situation with any clarity. He is openly cynical of himself and the others and constantly speaks with justifiable disgust about all his peers and their miserable lives.
The problem with this and most plays that try to go to film is that unless the director adds uniqueness visually, or through the set, location, props or costumes, it just looks like you are watching a play through a window. Since you have lost the power of the live performance, it always loses something in translation.
Sorvino, as the director, failed to do this. He clearly focused on the actors performances (which were all exceptional) and did a brilliant job of recreating a great play on film. That did not make it a great film. It made it seem overly long and tedious. As a play I would give it a 9, as a film a 6.
This is not a film for everyone. One needs to get into a philosophical frame of mind and prepare to see an interesting character study of some very miserable characters. If you are an avid theater goer and can handle a downbeat drama about the failings of common people, I strongly recommend it. Otherwise look for some lighter fare. -
MNFConsulting18 March 2012Being the second attempt to put on film an outstanding Broadway play, you would think that the producer/director would set aside egos long enough to learn something. The movie is a tedious affair with none-believable character portrayals (even for Gary Sinise, while being the best, is directed to get too drunk too soon).
Perhaps a warning flag could have been posted when Sorvino took on the roles of producer, director, actor, theme song composer, violin concerto composer and with all the out-of-work actors available, agent who hires his own relatives for bit parts (even though Ron Howard and John Travolta do this regularly, they at least produce good movies).
As an actor Sorvino is great...when being directed by others. His performance is stiff, scripted, and evokes no emotion of sympathy for the by-gone glories. By the end, the audience has no attachment or like of the characters (racist, anti-Semitic, selfish) and could care less that they have all resolved their differences and end up posing for a "happy" picture for the scrap book. Paul, go back to acting. -
kellyag24 May 2000I love basketball and this seemed like an intriguing movie. However, in the first ten minutes of the movie I knew that it was going to be lousy. It was poorly acted and much too slow. On top of that it was very, very racist, sexist, antisemitic and homophobic. Sometimes putting in racial, ethnic and other types of slurs has a point, illustrating the bigotry that exists. In this movie there was no point to the horrible bigotry and no one learned from what was being said. Part of the problem is that it was an adaption of a play and a remake of a 1982 movie that dealt with a basketball team from the 1950's. Having this movie take place earlier in time would have made a little bit more sense. It didn't translate well to modern times and the writing was horrible. I don't know how the play was originally written but I can't believe that any movie as bad and as hateful as this one has made it to television and video in 1999. It was disgusting. Don't waste your precious time on this one.
-
Atomic_Cafe71418 June 2006This movie is based mainly on the emotions and interactions of people. There are only three locations (the school, the store, and the coach's house) that are really used. It's primarily at the coach's house, however. A movie doesn't need special effects or amazing views to be amazing in itself.
Four friends who had bonded during their basketball days meet up. One is rich, important, and has no real love outside of money. One wants to be mayor again, but his competition is turning him sour. One wants to be superintendent of the school and take care of his family. One is a traveling alcoholic.
First off, I love the actors in this film. They've all been household names to me. They proved their worth here.
One of the most pivotal moments is when Tom, played by Gary Sinise, blows up on the coach. He yells and rants about how the coach cheated in the winning game. His blows the coach's whistle and yells back his catchphrases - "Forgive me Father, for I have sinned!" It's amazing to watch, with energy that just chills you.
Highly recommended to anyone who understands human emotion and doesn't need shiny effects to interest them. -
davidabarak27 October 2022...and not so great for film audiences... in my opinion. Here's why...
It's not that difficult to make a good film with the source material being a good play. The problem is that the filmmakers hesitate to stray too far from the original story.
A play is written with oftentimes very obvious "on the nose dialog," with lots of repetition. Live theater audiences rarely are close enough to see the actors clearly, and so they don't have the benefit of reading facial expressions or even, as odd as it sounds, seeing the actors' lips reciting the dialog. So theatrical dialog is obvious, repetitive and oratorical.
However, that's not an issue with film. As film audiences, we're usually right in the middle of things when dialog is being spoken. Movie watchers don't need overt and repetitive dialog. There can be a lot of nuance.
So the failure with most adaptations is that the filmmakers don't make the needed adjustments, and that's where this version (I haven't seen the other) of That Championship Season fails. We're watching a movie with dialog pulled from live theater.
I do have a quarrel with the original play. Without going into details - no spoilers here - I really have to wonder why none of the four guys left the coach's house as they fought amongst themselves. I certainly wouldn't have stuck around if things got as heated as they did in this story. Maybe I'm just not willing to put up with accusations, insults and worse.
Two last things about the movie, minor things only a film geek like me would have noticed.
First, in a few low-angle shots we could see glare from a few of the movie lights placed up above the camera's field of view. The overall color of "practical" (intended to be in the shot) light was the golden color of tungsten bulbs, but the glare was very white and came not from anyplace a practical ceiling lamp would have been placed.
The second thing was the wardrobe choice for the guy who'd set his life aside for others because he wouldn't stand up for himself. He had 1950s-style glasses, a short sleeved shirt with his suit, and white socks. That was a silly, lazy way to make him look like a second class citizen. -
ttreakle7 March 2023What a good movie filled with good performances. The actors alone is worth the watch. You have a story about a highschool coach and his former players coming together to reminisce about the glory days of winning the state title in basketball. While at the coaches house other drama comes to light and all hell breaks loose. I loved the drama and stories of what each was up to and how their lives have been since winning the title. My favorite character was played by Gary Sinise and he was funny. Although I think the movie was to long and could've been shortened by 15 minutes this is truly a heartbreaking and heartwarming tale about friendship.
Timothy Treakle. -
chthon212 June 2003Four former basketball teammates meet up at their coaches house after some time and remnisce (I bet that's spelled wrong) about the good old days. Eventually, it turns into a cynical, upsetting night with the only guy making sense being the alcoholic, Tom (Gary Sinise).
This was based on a stage play, so putting it into film was probably an odd experience. I never saw the original film version, so I can't compare the two. But in this film, most of what we see goes on in one location, so there's mostly dialogue. The dialogue is excellent because of the actors (Sinise, Shalhoub, D'Onofrio especially), so you'll like this if you like 'talking movies'. If you're into movies with more action, then this probably won't be for you. -
dacmoviebuff31 March 2022Anyone who gave this a bad review totally missed the point of this movie (play). I see why this play won the Pulitzer prize for drama. It illustrates how we all look back at our youth, and possible triumphs, and paint it as much better and rosier than it was. Nothing was as perfect as it seemed, but for some, it's all they have to hold onto to give their life meaning & purpose. Also, it portrays the lengths some people will go to perpetuate a false image of happiness and perfection.
-
To someone who was born and/or spent any time in Scranton, Pa., "That Championship Season" is sort of what "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil" is to someone from Savannah, Ga. -- even though it isn't literally based on fact, as the latter is, it is sort of the "hometown" play, in that we all know characters like those in Jason Miller's play. I don't live in Scranton anymore, but I was there when the 1982 movie was made, and there was an incredible amount of hoopla surrounding it. Again, everybody either was at one of the film sites, or was actually in the film, or knows somebody in it. Some of my relatives actually befriended one of the cast members to the extent that they still keep in touch. The 1982 film's first half-hour or so are eerie to me in that they amazingly captured the look and feel of Scranton at that time, which were depressing, to say the least. A lot has changed -- for the better; it couldn't have gotten much worse -- since that movie was filmed, so they did capture a slice of history. All things considered, though, I give a slight nod to the newer, TV version. Sorvino -- a link to the original Broadway production -- is a little bit below Mitchum as the coach. But the 4 members of the TV cast have it over the 4 in the film. In fact, I thought Sorvino was the only one in the film to nail his part. In the TV version, Gary Sinese blows away Martin Sheen in the part of the drunk, Tom Daley. By the end of the film, Sheen was so obviously acting it was pathetic ... Sinese, who never gives a bad performance, clicked with the role much better and longer, I thought. The rest of the TV cast did a little bit better as an ensemble and with theatrical material than did Dern, Keach, etc. Dern's performance deteriorated as the film went on, too. Shahoub held it together better.
-
PeteG3 June 1999In much the same way as "Our Town" or "Death of a Salesman" was for earlier ones, "That Championship Season" is becoming a classic of a later generation. By some scheduling fluke, I was able to watch "TCS" with my son before its scheduled release on ShowTime about a week early.
This latest incarnation will no doubt reach more viewers than have other productions and Paul Sorvino has done a great job with a cast of actors both recognized for their dramatic accomplishments and just breaking out of comic or character actor roles. Gary Sinise (Forest Gump, Truman-HBO) and Vincent D'Onofrio (Homocide, MIB) provide solid ground for Sorvino's anchor and define an orbit for Tony Shaloub (Wings, MIB) and Terry Kinney (OZ-HBO) to work freely within.
Watch this and rent the 1982 video.