MovieChat Forums > Hoop Dreams (1994) Discussion > Are the critics crazy, or am I??

Are the critics crazy, or am I??

posted 19 years ago by haverpopper4
105 replies | jump to latest

**Warning, some spoilers below**

So I finally saw "Hoop Dreams" last night, and while I thought it was good, and sometimes even very good (I think I'd give it a respectable 7/10 on Imdb) I'm frankly astonished that this is the movie that Roger Ebert listed as the Best Movie of the 90s, and that was on more critics top 10 lists in 1994 than any other movie. I think my main problem was that I was unable to empathize with the characters quite as much as the filmmakers intended me to (or as much as many critics evidently did). But how could I, considering how maddeningly stupid the boys and their families could be throughout the film?? Now, I don't want to overstate things, and I realize that there was a lot of hardship and misery that the families could not avoid, but there were equal amounts of stupidity on display. Members of both boy's families repeatedly lost minimum wage jobs; no explanations were given for the majority of these losses, but it seems likely that given, for example, Arthur's father's crack problem and William's brother's attitude problem, they weren't good workers who were simply let go because of tough economic times. But this is glossed over, and instead we're treated to a minor rant from Arthur's mother about how the people in charge of welfare just "don't care." Now, I know it's not her fault that her husband was a crackhead moron, but I also can't help but be a bit skeptical that she couldn't keep a job because of "chronic back pain," considering the way she was able to move when Arthur scored in a basketball game.

And how about William's brother? Am I really supposed to sympathize with him? The guy had a promising basketball career and a college scholarship, but his attitude was so bad that he lost out on both, becomes a security guard, and then even loses that job, for unexplained (but surmisable) reasons, and sits at home without a job for months on end. Reading through some reviews, I get the impression that I'm supposed to view this guy as a tragic victim of the ghettoes, but as far as I can see (given the information we have from the movie) he has no one to blame but himself.

And as for the two leads, William and Arthur. Naturally you want to sympathize with the guys, but sometimes they just make it hard, especially Arthur. Was I the only one watching the movie who wanted to slap the guy upside the head, make him sit up straight, look his teachers in the eye, and pay attention in class? He seemed to have some good teachers (both at the Catholic school and the inner city school, the latter of which, incidentally, didn't seem to be the unsurmountable urban jungle of popular imagination) but the kid was so stupid and disruptive he barely graduated. If his education was as important as his mother claimed, why didn't she do what any responsible parent would do and threaten to take him off the basketball team if he didn't knuckle down in his studies?? William fares much better in this regard, and there's some indication that he has some degree of untapped academic potential. But really, how dumb do you have to be to take the ACT 5 times, including free special tutorial training sessions, and still only average a 17.5, which then has to be rounded up to an 18, the **bare minimum** needed to get a sports scholarship?? And then there are the maddening personal choices made by the boys, both fathering illegitamate children before the movie is over -- guess that Catholic education did William a lot of good. Anyways, being dumb and inarticulate (which both boys also are) does not make one a bad person, but it does make one a less interesting documentary subject.

I realize I've been harsh, but I'm not totally unsympathetic to the boys and their families. The way they were manipulated by the system was also maddening, and no one came out in a very good light. (Though, for all the reviewers who demonize the "system" on display in the movie, it also had its good side, such as Marquette honoring its commitment to let William keep his scholarship even after dropping out of the basketball team.) And I'm sure the life in inner city Chicago was not easy -- some of Arthur's idiocy can be excused by the actions of his father. (The scene where he sees his coked up dad on the basketball court was the most astonishing scene in the film for me.) But at the end of the day, in too many ways the boys and their families held themselves back too much for me to rank this as the masterpiece so many others found it to be.

[–] MovieMan0283part2 16 years ago

Congratulations if everything in your life has worked out as planned, if you never complained, always made the right choices and had a cheerful attitude all the time. All of us regular folk out there (i.e. 99.999999% of the human race or, more likely, 100%) tip our hat to you and at the same time ask that maybe, just maybe, you have a little more sympathy - if your imaginative powers don't allow empathy - for those who aren't perfect, who make mistakes, who are - God forbid, not as intelligent as you (since that's obviously their own fault).

The movie is not a political document, or a 3-hour whine, it's a story about 2 kids and they life they led. That they are not perfect is not exceptional (and shouldn't be an impediment to empathy for any sane person), that they are living in tough conditions with rough backgrounds is, to a certain extent.

I respect your honesty in stating your feelings but perhaps you should also concede that your criteria for judging people isn't quite fair. I thought many of the same things you did, about William's brother, about all the people losing their jobs, about the slacking-off in school. But I also remembered people I knew and mistakes that I personally had made, and thought "there, but for the grace of God, go I..."

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MovieMan0283part2 16 years ago

Well-played, well-played. You've certainly refuted my point.

[–] Movie-Jay 15 years ago

The original poster is confusing empathy and sympathy. To have empathy is to walk in the shoes of others and to understand their lives or their specific situation at hand.

I loved this movie when it came out, and it's just as good everytime I see it again.

We live in an age of mindless literalism. Yes, mom jumps up and down even though she suffers back pain. But in real life, some people have better days than others. What's wrong with people that they would prefer to be bean counters while watching a movie, rather than involve themselves in the lives of the characters?

I love that we actually see some moments of self pity in this movie. That's real. When you don't have the luxury of a safety net, sometimes the bottom falls out from underneath you, and that's when people are more inclined to make a series of bad choices with their lives, instead of the choices that many of us who have more security might make.

In Hoop Dreams, people do lose minimum wage jobs, and sometimes we don't find out why, but again, in an environment where your destiny is supposed to be failure, it becomes hardwired in one's biology that failure IS an option, even if they don't know it. Sometimes we watch these characters flirting with failure, and they don't even see it, or they do see it, and they're so enveloped by dark clouds, that for them there exists no silver lining.

These people are at times imperfect, flawed, hopeful, and sometimes lost, and every scene is absolutely fascinating to watch as there are no easy answers.

[–] wackawacka4747 15 years ago

This is a long thread so didnt get to read all the responses but what I think what the OP is missing is that this was REAL life with REAL people

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bmitov 13 years ago

tyrexden,

I don't really understand your criticisms. Why does a documentary need to come full circle? Didn't you enjoy the REAL story and the REAL emotions in this film? For me this film is a story about two boys growing up in a tough environment with the same dream. If anything, one of the themes in this movie is how no matter your dedication or talent, factor's out of one's control also contribute to success or failure (eg. Will's injury and Arthur getting kicked out of the better school). We see the two environments one beside the other. One school is a nurturing environment where you are pushed and pushed, while in the other its "cool" to not study or pay attention in class. The movie is also a true underdog story, in that even with the more established coach and higher standard for success, ultimately William never went down state whereas Arthur did with his team in a dramatic fashion, beating the defending champions.

Yeah, we've seen this before, but it's much more painful to see a REAL kid's dream fade away, just as it is much more pleasurable to see them experience happiness. These kids had one shot at success (basketball), otherwise they were threatened to fall back into the ghetto (an example of this is Curtis). To really understand this story you have to empathize with these kids and their families and really let the emotions felt by them flow through you as well.

And to those of you saying that the environment isn't to blame, read up on what has happened in the characters' lives since the movie: Curtis, Arthur Sr., and Arthur's brother have all been gunned down. How can you judge these kids when they live with the threat of that very thing occurring every day?

For me this movie is definitely one of the best I've seen.

[–] ufodoubleg 14 years ago

except ty-whatever :P

KEEP YOUR FRIENDS CLOSE, BUT YOUR ENEMIES CLOSER

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] petr-785-834397 12 years ago

Maybe you didn't see it projected on a big screen with many people around you.

[–] scissorhands__emily 12 years ago

I wonder how some of these people posting acted in high school. William seemed pretty respectable the entire film. Yes he got a girl pregnant, but that is pretty common in poorer areas. At least he stuck around and took care of her. Also, he struggled in school. Arthur did as well, and this is a direct result of their environment and poor educational system. The film showed that William progressed quickly when he first entered St. Joseph's. Also, why does no one discuss the immense pressure that coach obviously put on him?

Also, another sign that these people live in the ghetto is how the mothers pushed graduating high school. They knew it was a long shot for them to be able to go to college, but at least wanted them to graduate high school. I don't know about you, but for me it was a given that I would attend college. In poorer communities though, it is not a given to even graduate high school. Also, I know some people in college that have clearly only gotten by from the pushing of other people (basically parents force them to go to college, use their connections to get them jobs, etc), and if they lived in an environment like these boys they would probably have children and be drop outs, as well as other things. It's easy to watch a film and idly judge, but if we watched each of ourselves in high school we could probably say we weren't motivated, were not respectful, etc. Most kids are not motivated in high school. I will say I really only became motivated to do well in school in college. In high school it was just the place we were forced to go every day. The boy in the film says it best, if high schools were closed, you wouldn't have many students picketing in protest.

Another sign of this environment is the mom celebrating her son's 18th birthday and basically saying it's a thing to celebrate because some kids don't make it to this age. The active gang community was also mentioned, and it was shown that drugs are around in the area. If you thing none of this has an affect on these kids than you are a bit crazy.

[–] carthur27 10 years ago

"Yes he got a girl pregnant, but that is pretty common in poorer areas."

Yes, it's very common and the resulting lack of proper parenting in most cases is a primary cause of continued poverty.

[–] fudgenuts101 12 years ago

You're just an *beep*