Battle of the Sexes (2017)

It is 1973. World no 1 female tennis player Billie Jean King, arguing that women are vastly underpaid by comparison with male professional tennis players, is pressured into playing an exhibition match against 55-year old Bobby Riggs, a star player from 25 years earlier. At the same time, she - and husband Larry - are coming to terms with her lesbianism.Emma Stone is Billie Jean King and Steve Carrell is Bobby Riggs - high profile performers in this adaptation of a true story which switches between Riggs' gambling and humorous showmanship, King's clandestine and troubled exploration of her feminine sexual side, the male dominated tennis establishment, and Riggs' own marriage issues. It is well acted, and the period detail is good. The trouble is, I didn't really care very much. I felt sympathy for Larry King who came across as a really good person (and the credits captions seemed to confirm this), but I cared little for the main characters. And that's where this film falls down - without an emotional investment in the principals, there is little reason for this film to exist. The writing fails it.

From the director couple who made Little Miss Sunshine into a big hit comes this drama based on a true story that millions of americans watched on tv nearly 45 years ago, the "Battle of the Sexes", the tennis match between Billie Jean King and Briggs, played by Emma Stone and Steve Carell in Oscar worthy performances that should've been nominated for the golden men. The movie begins with Billie Jean facing off against Margaret Court in the so called "Mother's Day Massacre", which was named since Court defeated King by a landslide on Mother's Day. Months later, all is set for the Battle of the Sexes, a man vs woman tennis match for money broadcast live via satellite on ABC to millions of viewers beaming live from the Astrodome, where 30,000 fans pack the stadium to witness history. In the end, Billie wins and gets the trophy.

I could only make it thru 45 agonizing minutes of this "movie" ... bobbing for apples in a deep fryer woulda been more fun.

Having just finished watching this film and having read some of the user reviews, I see as much confusion in the reviews as I did in the film. I will keep this short so will not regurgitate the "plot" but a huge gripe for me was Emma Stone being cast as BJK. I realise this film will be watched in the main by people who never saw her play, can't remember what she looked like or possibly have never heard of her - in which case they won't realise she was a mere 5'2", small and dumpy, nothing like the tall, athletic-looking Stone. Having been an avid tennis fan for 40 years, I found this jarring, especially as the tennis double used for Stone is a 5'10" player.So many people have praised her performance - why? It was nothing better than ordinary and she was surrounded by a bevy of women players who largely remained nameless and in the background (with the exception of Rosie Casals) even though they would have been names in their own right. So there's an own goal straight away in a film about women being sidelined, ignored and not taken seriously - let's do the same thing to them 45 years later when we tell the story! Oh my mistake, they do shine a rather nasty spotlight on Australian legend Margaret Court, but none of it in a complimentary light of course.I have seen reviews complaining that the sexism was cartoony and too overt, a sledgehammer rather than the "subtle" depiction one viewer would have preferred - apparently unaware that sexism back then was a way life, mainstream and considered acceptable in public, private and anywhere else. It's what BJK was fighting to change, remember? Another reviewer lamenting Alan Cumming's performance as an aide to the BJK team, not realising he was actually a celebrated dress designer that specialised in tennis wear and had dressed just about every women's champion over the course of 40 years.Films about sport are usually over-simplistic and clunky with a good ladling of sentimental hogwash and this is no different, except in this case we are supposed to cheer as wildly for the LBGTQ slant as we would had BJK just hit an ace in the film we thought we were watching. So what is this "battle of the sexes" actually about? The celebrated tennis match which BJK won (a best of FIVE sets, all you serial complainers about women who only play best of 3) or the behind the scenes capitulation of her husband in favour of the aggressively pursuing female lover?Bobby Riggs was certainly a character but there was not enough focus on him, although Steve Carell did well with what little he had, turning him from an out and out idiot into a real person with doubts and regrets as well as compulsions. His performance was good while Stone (with all the screen time) seemed to be in some cheap made for TV movie, far too tall with a rotten wig.I guess I hated it, all things considered. Something that should have been compelling was reduced to preachy saccharine nonsense but as another reviewer accurately stated - the SJWs will eat it up.