vchimpanzee In this fact-based movie, a hundred years in the history of football are shown. If you are American as I am, the game is not football, but soccer. Regardless, it is simpler for me to refer to the game as football since that is the term used most of the time.In 1902, there is no organized football competition between countries. England has organized competition but will not play teams in other countries. Carl wants to change that. he goes to a football game where the man in charge is yelling at people who do things wrong. Talking to him might not be a good idea, but Carl does talk with another man.In another scene, a group of men are sitting at a table and FIFA is born.In 1924, Uruguay wins the Olympic medal in football. Jules Rimet shows up at a meeting to downplay their efforts because Uruguay did not in fact play everyone to get the title, and many of their players were not from there. Rimet soon becomes president of FIFA. And as part of Uruguay's centennial, a real world championship game is proposed, in a new stadium which will seat 100,000 in Montevideo. That game is played in 1930; we see what looks like actual footage along with headlines and footage of newspapers being printed. It's not a lot, but it does represent what happened. The so-called World Cup will be played every four years.Rimet's daughter Annette is talking to a man at an event. He says Africans can't play football; they're too stupid. Why, for Negroes to play football would be like women playing football! Annette wants to protest but Rimet doesn't defend his daughter. Annette later stands up to people who are arguing and shows she has a mind of her own.World War II and the events preceding it have a negative effect on competition. In fact, there is one game, which we see a few scenes from (made for the movie, because the film quality is better than in 1930), between Germany and Ukrainian prisoners. Germany will win ... or else. The referees have been paid off. Yet the Ukrainians are very determined ...After the war life is normal again. We go to a major stadium and there is lots of excitement. We see fans in several locations. Based on the credits and what is possible nowadays, I don't think there were real people in that stadium, or at least actors in this movie were superimposed on actual footage. The game looks like real footage because the film quality is inferior. The first goal is scored and everyone goes crazy. Even the announcer. I don't think he's THAT guy but he does yell, "GOOOOOOOOOAL!" As professional as the announcer is, he is very biased, showing no emotion as the other team scores. There is disappointment in the other locations. And when the game is over, it's like a disaster just happened. The movie's whole tone changes.We have watched Rimet age many years, and then we see his funeral. Annette does an admirable job with the eulogy.We fast forward a few more years as a new president of FIFA is elected. The losing candidate is convinced Africans can't play. The winner is a strong supporter of including African teams.Another game. More excitement. Again, film quality is inferior, so we must be seeing real footage. Someone named Pele appears to be the first superstar in the sport. By this time the movie is about half over, but it's not quite as exciting any more. We do see another game and plenty of excitement in the scenes associated with the game. Mostly, though, the rest of the movie is about controversy. FIFA is running out of money but one solution is to sell merchandise related to football. World events interfere as tensions between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. make boycotts of the Olympics possible. FIFA must take a stand on Apartheid. Women's teams must be considered. And fans who can't behave themselves are a real problem.Then there are scandals for which a man who is not even president of FIFA is being blamed. Then he takes over as president and ... well, what WILL he do?The movie ends about a hundred years after it started, and football has become very popular. We see kids playing, even girls. I won't call it an Oscar-winning effort but at least the first half is very good for what it is. Sure, it skips over a lot of years, but apparently the most important details are included. And that one game in the 50s shows a wide range of emotion, and really communicates passion for the sport. The leading actors are shown in the credits but I have to say I didn't recognize any of them. That makes the movie work better because I am seeing the characters, not the actors. I think most of them did a good enough job.Gerard Depardieu does a good job but I wouldn't exactly say he shows the talent to win an Oscar. Other than that, no one really stood out, and while we are shown a lot of information after Rimet's tenure, there is educational value (I suppose) but not that much entertainment value.

Michael Ledo The film starts out in 1904 as Europe organizes FIFA. The English smugly refuse to join "the Frogs." The movie then jumps to 1924. In a need to create a World Cup it sells itself to Uruguay. Indeed the films jumps rather quickly as it shows us 106 years of history in 100 minutes. Characters are created to die. The only aging makeup was the graying of hair. FIFA appears to be in a constant state of "broke." It has lofty apolitical origins, yet becomes very political and in the end pretends to be the body for world peace. Being broke forced FIFA into the realm of corporate sponsors, who are subject to boycotts, who are swayed by world politics.When watching the film, it is best if one knows the world political theater of the last century as it plays an important background, but there is an assumption the viewer is well informed. The film features a quick symbolic subplot of kids playing football on a third world lot. As the game evolves so does the play on the field. I believe Pele was mentioned about three times. The movie includes some historical footage, but not much.Parental Guide: No F-bombs, sex, or nudity.

elijaprice Why on earth was this film ever made? Who did they think would care? Apparently 90% of the budget was supplied by FIFA, which just leaves me wondering who the hell put up the other 10%.By turns hilarious and nauseating, this shining great turd of a self-congratulatory vanity project is so ridiculous that if someone had told me it was a parody, I would have believed them. It's the kind of movie that makes you want to hurt members of your own family just to give you an excuse to stop watching. It tells the 'story' of those unsung heroes of the world, FOOTBALL FAT CATS. Who, apparently, are all saints. Why? Just because. Don't argue. And they're ENTITLED to luxury goddammit, because they're making dreams come true. It just so happens that the dreams are their own, and those dreams consist of drinking champagne and private jets and staying in luxury hotels - yes, in a multi-million dollar movie starring famous and respected actors, this film literally has the cheek to include not one, but many lines of dialogue attempting to justify football officials indulging themselves. Sepp Blatter, cast as a sort of modern day crusader (presumably by himself, I can't imagine why anyone else would have), played by Tim Roth, is given close-ups and swelling emotional incidental music as if he is some kind of hero, but nobody, least of all the filmmakers, seems to have any idea why. It's honestly like a propaganda film biography of el presidente designed to encourage the cult of personality in some tinpot banana republic. ('Look, he pays the wages out of his own pocket when all others around him are corrupt! He is such a man of the people that he knows the cleaning lady's name!')It ends up just being bizarre, and you feel sorry for pretty much everyone involved with it. Also, weirdly, this film portrays all English people as racist, sexist, stuck-up tossers. Why? Is it coz they wouldn't join FIFA's gentleman's club 100 years ago? Seems a little petty.

vauxhall19 After reading scathing reviews in the papers on a flight to Sofia I turned on my hotel TV to find Bulgaria's national TV station BNT showing this film that very same night. Not only that they repeated it the following evening! I don't know what the people of Bulgaria ever did to deserve such punishment but clearly BNT is part of the whole FIFA corruption circus to be giving this cinematic dreck airtime. But it at least gave me the chance to see this turkey without handing over any cash. Tim Roth and Sam Neil, you've made yourselves look like cheap whores and if your careers never recover, it'll be well deserved for taking the FIFA/Blatter thirty pieces of silver. As for Depardieu, he was a joke already. An absolute stinker of a film and a suitably corrupt epitaph for Blatter and his money grabbing cronies.