I realized The Catcher Was A Spy wasn’t going to be a good movie when it begins with the how we got here narrative trope, which I despise. It starts just before the end of Moe Berg’s mission when he has to decide whether or not to kill a leading physicist to prevent the Nazis from having the atomic bomb. Unfortunately if you have even a passing interest in WWII history, you’ll know the answer to that question, which sadly sucks all the dramatic tension and suspense from the story in the first minute. I think it is a mistake to let us know the single mission that the movie would focus on from the beginning.
The Catcher Was A Spy sounds like it should be a good movie. It features an amazing cast helmed by the eternally affable and charming Paul Rudd. A baseball player turned spy sounds innately interesting and full of potential, especially if the spy is Jewish during World War II in the European theater. Ben Lewin primarily directs for television series, but he has a solid feature film credit, The Sessions. It attracts a broad audience: movie lovers and those who rarely see movies such as my mother, who only enjoy conventional movies. I suppose that the hint was when no theaters near me were playing it except one in a predominantly Jewish community, and considering that this film was shot on location in Boston, which usually attracts audiences interested in seeing their hometown on the big screen, that was a huge sign.
Even though The Catcher Was A Spy is an adaptation of Nicholas Dawidoff’s biography, Catcher Was A Spy: The Mysterious Life of Moe Berg—an excellent play on J.D. Salinger’s most popular novel, The Catcher in the Rye, it feels as if it is too tenuous about its subject or at least the reception of its subject if it presents him too boldly. I understand that the world is a shockingly regressive and a hateful place, especially considering what happened to Jussie Smolett recently, but we have movies like Tom of Finland, Moonlight, Brokeback Mountain and Call Me By Your Name. If Berg is gay or bisexual, then don’t be subtle when depicting his same-sex hookups and go all out in his opposite sex hookups. I get it. Sienna Miller is hot, and if she is in your cast, you want her having on screen sex as much as possible, but you made his same sex attraction an issue then depicted it unnecessarily furtively, not me. I just want consistency. A movie can convey the repression of the times without cosigning it as if it was the 1990s with Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. I don’t want any of this chaste Philadelphia nonsense unless the heterosexual hookups are just as censored. If it were really about reflecting the time’s sensibilities, then classic Hollywood movies would never have depicted a sex scene even if the heterosexual couple were married. It resulted in me immediately not trusting the movie and suspecting that they got the historical figure completely wrong.
Also by not fully developing Berg’s girlfriend, I have no idea why she would put up with Berg’s antics if she is not married to him. The character seems to know that he isn’t into her. I’m not saying that this scenario is not realistic. It helps to know what kind of man Berg is based on his choice of women. We know that he likes smart men and does not appear to have a physical type. I know that we’re supposed to like her, but is she dumb or making herself dumb?
The Catcher Was A Spy also can’t nail him in less controversial characteristics. The movie loves to tell rather than show. Berg’s resume is repeatedly trotted out in exposition barely disguised as dialogue in the first half hour. Berg says that he likes to hide, but what we see is a man that likes to hide then show off with a flourish and stunt on these fools. There are a couple of scenes that feel thrilling when the movie directs the actors to show what makes Berg different. If you’re a fan of Rudd because of his Marvel role as Ant-Man, then it won’t surprise you that he can convincingly handle a physically demanding role.
When The Catcher Was A Spy depicts Berg as a superhero finally revealing his gifts to his unsuspecting allies and pernicious enemies, it soars. When I see baseball players, I can theoretically understand that they have physical gifts, but all I see are guys sitting around, chewing and spitting, some with guts that seem to contradict their job description as athletes. This movie helped me to appreciate the stealthy stamina and strength lurking beneath an otherwise normal façade. Berg easily outpaces and stuns others with his effortless physicality while they struggle to keep up.
In contrast, The Catcher Was A Spy struggles to depict his mental acuity in as subtle a manner. The fact that he can converse with world famous scientists helps, but if we’re watching the movie and understanding what is being said, then it does not feel as if he is accomplishing something extraordinary. I know that subtitles are death to marketability, but maybe a larger portion of the movie should have shown him speaking in other languages instead of telling us that he could to show how easily he snaps into foreign environments.
As almost an afterthought, The Catcher Was A Spy takes Berg on an internal spiritual journey. He goes from a secular Jew happily engaging in Christian activities and going out of his way to reassure the Gentiles that he enthusiastically loves their traditions to going to a synagogue on Yom Kippur as if he is consulting God when making a difficult decision and asking for forgiveness if he makes the wrong one. That last scene was subtle with the potential to be missed if viewers weren’t keenly paying attention.
Connie Nielsen gets the Viola Davis award for upstaging everyone else with her brief, but relatable and passionate role as the nastiest woman who isn’t a fifty-two percenter and won’t be cowed into being polite at a dinner party. “There is no avoiding political matters.” Yasssssssssss, queen! She hates Nazis, and she isn’t here for your silent resistance. Also of note is Guy Pearce as Berg’s intelligence boss. They have some good chemistry together.
The Catcher Was A Spy is a disappointing film that looks like a Hollywood blockbuster, but lacks the verve of a well-made television movie. I don’t exactly know why it felt so flat and anti-climactic, but it did. I don’t feel as if I wasted my time, but I feel sad that so much effort was put into a movie to get this lackluster result.