TV Review: '30 for 30' - 'Four Days in October'
The 2004 Red Sox comeback was inspiring, but this doc is by-the-numbers
The 2004 Boston Red Sox celebration
Credit: AP
Normally, Sepinwall does his reviews for the "30 for 30" franchise. Through this whole ESPN series, he has at least offered a few words on nearly every one of the documentaries.
But Sepinwall isn't watching this week's "30 for 30" doc, "Four Days in October," focusing on the 2004 Red Sox and their unlikely comeback from a 3-0 series deficit against the New York Yankees.
Now I'm gonna leave aside the number of times I've watched Bill Buckner and Aaron Bleeping Boone, often willingly, usually unavoidably. I'll also leave aside that Sepinwall's beloved Yankees have a more recent World Series title than the Sox and that, unlike the Sox, they're still alive as baseball heads into the 2010 postseason.
I'm not going to get into that, because "Four Days in October" isn't about the rational. It's about an unimaginable thing that happened 2004, something that had never happened before in baseball. But it isn't about understanding a new version of what happened or getting a new perspective on what happened. It's just about reliving that thing that happened. I can see why one wouldn't want to necessarily relive those four days, if you happen to be a Yankees fan (or a Red Sox hater).
Because of the lack of perspective and the lack of insight, "Four Days in October" doesn't really have very much reach. If you're a Red Sox fan, there is no chance that it won't push all of the right buttons and leave you emotional and misty-eyed.
I am and it did.
If you aren't, it'll just remind you of that four-day period where the Red Sox (and their Nation) went from lovable underdogs to frequently insufferable bullies, but it won't push any deeper than that.
That's a simple explanation for how I found "Four Days in October" to be both utterly satisfying and frustratingly disappointing.
[More thoughts after the break...]
As I've said more than a few times, the "30 for 30" franchise has worked best when a filmmaker has been able to deliver a passion project that was practically bursting from their chest.
So what artiste channeled their love for the Boston Red Sox into "Four Days in October"?
What auteur was determined to put their own stamp on an oft-retold underdog tale?
What storyteller couldn't sleep before spinning a yarn about this group of self-described Idiots?
The title card reads "Directed by Major League Baseball Productions."
I could basically stop this review right there. You don't need to know anything else.
"Four Days in October" wasn't a passion project for anybody. It was a pandering project for ESPN and MLB Productions, who know that you can always get ratings by catering to Red Sox Nation.
It kind of boggles my mind that given the number of A-list creative types who count themselves as Red Sox devotees, ESPN wasn't able to track down somebody who wanted to steer this ship, either as a director or as a talent-wrangling producer. Affleck Brothers? Matt Damon? Denis Leary? Stephen King? Did somebody approach PBS to see if Ken Burns had an hour-long Red Sox edit from "The 10th Inning" that he wanted the world to see? Heck, why didn't "30 for 30" team captain Bill Simmons step up to the plate and try to see if he could direct a 51-minute documentary about his beloved squad?
In short, how did the task of bringing this emotional story to screen fall to a corporate entity?
Yes, the Red Sox comeback was a great story. And yes, I'm awfully relieved we didn't get a predictable documentary about The Curse of the Bambino.
But how could somebody not have had a more intimate or slightly left-of-center approach to the tale? Don't get me wrong, if I ever stop getting choked up watching Dave Roberts steal second or Papi going deep or Curt Schilling's bloody sock, that's a bad sign. But I've already got an MLB-produced documentary about that post-season.
"Four Days in October" definitely doesn't lack for basic access. The game footage is tremendous, albeit familiar. I don't think there's anything here that you haven't seen before, at least from the game action. There's some pre-game footage and locker room stuff that captures the behind-the-scenes excitement and that may be new, some of it at least. You know what MLB Productions has available and that's what you get. The documentary is then punctuated by predictable talking head interviews with many/most of the key participants on the Red Sox side.
You walk away reminded of how big an emotional piece Kevin Millar was to that Red Sox puzzle. You're reminded, once again, of the humor of Pedro Martinez. You salute Roberts and the unlikely hero he was. And this documentary seems every bit as integral to Schilling's Hall of Fame candidacy as "Winning Time" was for Reggie Miller.
And every once in a while you get Simmons and Lenny Clarke sitting at a bar reminiscing, but not with any real insight. It's just a bunch of, "Yeah, could you believe when *that* happened?" excitement. It turns out that like most Red Sox fans, Simmons and Clarke were skeptical that the Red Sox could come back from 3-0 down and then when it happened, they were rather overjoyed.
"Four Days in October" is exactly the story it sets out to be, which happens to be a story that absolutely everybody already knows by heart. It's not like this was a great opportunity for Schilling to unburden himself and go, "Yeah, that was soy sauce on my sock" or for Alex Rodriguez to pop up and go, "Ooops, maybe trying to slap the ball out of Bronson Arroyo's glove really was a pathetic, bush league move." The perspective from the other dugout is lacking, not that I expected A-Rod or Jeter or Joe Torre to be eagerly effusive in discussing this season. It still might have been nice.
I guess my problems with "Four Days in October" boil down to these questions: What do I know that I didn't know before watching this film? And what do I understand better now or see differently now than I did before watching this film?
The answer? Zero.
And it's sad, because I don't have to think hard to come up with angles or approaches that could have used 2004 as a backdrop for complimentary stories. A couple quick options...
*** Old people. Focus on the 2004 ALCS through the eyes of a group of senior citizens born after 1918 and familiar only with Red Sox heartbreak, fans who were convinced they'd die without ever seeing the Sox win a World Series. In the months after that World Series, I have to bet that literally dozens of obituaries mentioned that the deceased were Red Sox fans who were finally able to have that moment of celebration, that they held on for just long enough. That's a good story, isn't it?
*** The bloody sock. Talk to William Morgan, who pioneered the procedure that stabilized Schilling's ankle. Talk to conspiracy theorists convinced that Schilling made a red splotch on his sock just for drama. Talk about Willis Reed. Talk about the things athletes are willing to do for glory. It's the same story, but it's the micro version, rather than the macro version.
*** Take the darker perspective. Look at Damon, Pedro and Manny and their departure from the Red Sox. Look at the dumbass Red Sox fans who booed those beloved players when they returned in other uniforms. Explore why that 2004 postseason bonded fans to players in such a way that any departure was seen as a betrayal, even if it wasn't the choice of the players.
*** The Red Sox Nation as media mosaic. Tell the story of fan reactions as filtered through message board comments, YouTube videos, talk radio snippets and news footage. We know how the series was won. How did people react, both in the despair of 0-3 and the triumph of 4-3?
*** The Red Sox Nation as obnoxious phenomenon. Simmons has ranted about the pink-hatted, fair-weather Sox fans for years. Why not do a documentary on the genesis of a bandwagon?
*** Pedro's Little Friend. Would you watch a documentary about 2'4" Nelson de la Rosa, the late actor who went from Marlon Brando's mascot in "The Island of Dr. Moreau" to being a central figure for the World Series run? I sure would.
Anyway, that was five minutes of brainstorming on how to do a documentary on the 2004 Red Sox without just repeating the same "When all hope was lost, these Idiots said 'Why not us?'" tropes. That's all "Four Days in October" is and that's why it's both utterly satisfying and frustratingly disappointing.
"Four Days in October" premieres on Tuesday, Oct. 5 at 8 p.m. on ESPN.
A long-time member of the TCA Board and a longer-time blogger of "American Idol," Dan Fienberg writes about TV, except for when he writes about movies or sometimes writes about the Red Sox. But never music. He would sound stupid talking about music.
News From Our Partners
-
Shakira Leaving 'The Voice' Next Season
Source Claims Kanye West + Kim Kardashian Will Most Likely Break Up Before the Baby Is Born
Demi Lovato Gets New 'Warrior'-Inspired Tattoo [Pic]
-
The Telefile - TNT & TBS Upfront 2013: Reaping What Other Networks Sowed
The Telefile - Fall TV 2013: What's On When
The Telefile - New Girl: Wedding Do's and Don'ts
-
Hear This: Connections gives a Guided By Voices-indebted reason to go for the opener
Watch This: The second half of Twilight Zone: The Movie more than makes up for the first
Tolerability Index: This week we're barely putting up with The Killing
-
Total Recall: Star Trek Movies
Parental Guidance: Star Trek Into Darkness
In Pictures: The Stars of Star Trek Into Darkness
-
Grimm "The Waking Dead" Review: Dead On Arrival
What to Watch Tonight: The Season Finales of Arrow, CSI, and Supernatural
CBS's 2013-2014 Schedule: New Nights for Person of Interest and Hawaii Five-0, More Comedy on Thursdays
-
'Riddick' Trailer: Vin Diesel Is Back and Playing for Blood
'Rio 2' Teaser Trailer Has Landed: Let's Dance!
Cannes 2013: Celebs Invade Opening Ceremony (PHOTOS)
-
Reese Witherspoon Joins Paul Thomas Anderson's 'Inherent Vice'
CBS Fall 2013 Trailers: Sarah Michelle Gellar's 'Crazy Ones,' Anna Faris' Mom' and More!
Sony Trademarks Possible PlayStation 4 Slogan "Greatness Awaits"
-
Why They Went 'Crazy'
30 EPIC Wedding Disasters
'No One Lives Forever'
Latest Posts
-
'Idol' begins to wind down a tough season with an hour of singingWednesday, May 15, 2013
-
The losing finalists discuss their lack of Jury respectWednesday, May 15, 2013
-
Dan and Alan talk upfronts, 'How I Met Your Mother' finale and moreTuesday, May 14, 2013
-
The season's 5th and 4th place finishers discuss their experienceTuesday, May 14, 2013
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupKevin Burke
October 5, 2010 at 3:57PM EST Reply to CommentMLB is extremely tight with there footage, thats why you wont see someone else direct this or any documentary containing game footage. Its a sport that an increasing number of people are leaving, and MLB wont even allow youtube footage of it. They are behind in the digital age and paying for it
October 5, 2010 at 4:15PM EST
October 5, 2010 at 3:57PM EST Reply to CommentObviously, even though Simmons has said repeatedly that 30for30 is about not doing the obvious stories, I think we all knew there would be a 2004 Sox episode.
too often in the series, a good idea has been poorly executed. The rotisserie baseball could have been great and instead, we got goofy reenactments.
next week's looks great though, in two escobars and terry fox territory.
Reed
October 5, 2010 at 4:22PM EST Reply to CommentIs the title a ripoff of Tony LaRussa/Buzz Bissinger's book "3 Nights in August", which is rumored to be made into a movie? (Great baseball book, by the way.)
Rusty
October 5, 2010 at 4:30PM EST Reply to Comment"Look at the dumbass Red Sox fans who booed those beloved players when they returned in other uniforms."
What are you talking about? We booed Damon because he signed with the Yankees. Manny got a mixed reaction because he left the team under uniquely bad circumstances and not as a free agent.
Pedro? Standing ovation. Orlando Cabrera? Standing ovation. Millar? Standing ovation. Roberts? A long standing ovation. Trot Nixon? Standing ovation. Mirabelli left the team, was traded back, got a police escort back to Fenway, standing ovation.
dan Rusty - You're right. The reactions have *generally* been positive. I guess the doc left me feeling bad for Manny and Damon, mostly. Both of those guys deserved one unsullied standing ovation apiece, at the very least, before the booing. [And the funny thing is that in conversations with non-Sox-fan friends, I've always supported Sox fans in booing Damon, though I never did it myself.]
October 5, 2010 at 4:45PM EST-Daniel
redsox1234
October 5, 2010 at 4:31PM EST Reply to CommentI guess I'll try to reserve judgement until I see it tonight, but honestly, I can't imagine not loving this doc. They are preaching to the choir here, right? After 6 years of endlessly watching replays, reading interviews, firing up the dvds, talking with fellow fans about, what happened over those 4 days in October *NEVER* gets old. I never tire of it. I can't imagine I ever will. There was so much pain and agony leading up to those 4 days that I will always relish the comeback.
I'm not disagreeing with your ideas for alternate ideas about the Red Sox and fan base. If down the line someone else took a shot at those subjects I'm sure I'd watch. I think the "old people" and "fan reaction" angles have been covered very well. Red Sox fans lived it. We watched the youtube videos, read the message boards, and bought the books done by others chronicling the fan reaction. If you haven't read it, get "Win It For...". A more beautiful collection of Red Sox fans has never been seen. It's a collection of posts written on the Sons of Sam Horn message board, in a thread titled "Win it for...." before game 7 of the ALCS. The responses inside it never fail to reduce me to a puddle of tears as posters ask the Sox to win it for their fathers, sisters, friends, sons, grandmothers and on and on. I find it fitting that when I visited the Baseball Hall of Fame a few years back, they had the entire thread printed out and available for display.
dan redsox1234 - Like I said: The doc TOTALLY plays. But it's hard to imagine anything that wouldn't play, as long as it has Papi and a bloody sock and Dave Roberts sliding into second and the rest... I guess I just wanted *more* than the DVD I already have...
October 5, 2010 at 4:39PM EST-Daniel
nfieldr
October 5, 2010 at 4:50PM EST Reply to CommentDan said:
>Now I'm gonna leave aside the number of times
> I've watched Bill Buckner and Aaron Bleeping
> Boone, often willingly, usually unavoidably.
Not to mention Jim BLEEPING Leyritz against my Braves. What? TWENTY-SEVEN championships are not enough for Mr. Sepinwall? jk, Alan... at least mostly.
Aquanaut
October 6, 2010 at 10:46PM EST Reply to CommentScrew baseball. Swimming is the only sport worth watching on TV.
Ben
October 9, 2010 at 3:55AM EST Reply to CommentI completely agree. I watched and felt nothing, of course not a Red Sox fan. This was missing that hook that got you invested in the story that everyone knows. Fire Selig.
October 9, 2010 at 1:36PM EST Reply to CommentI thought it was boring. About the only interesting point was seeing Schilling's ankle in the locker room before Game 6. I didn't learn a single new thing nor gain any further insight. It was just an extended highlight package.
Although I did crack up when the little kid before Game 7 said "You wish, Johnny Damon!".
ian
January 22, 2011 at 4:37PM EST Reply to CommentIt is for Redsox fans dumbass. how many people died in between world titles for the sox, this is for them and for anybody else who was there watching it. It didnt seem like four days it just seemed like one long day. It was the most incredible experience of my life, i was there for games 4 and 5.