In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • “Not Just a Game.”
  • Christopher Tinson (bio)
“Not Just a Game.” Directed by Jeremy Earp; written by Dave Zirin, Jeremy Earp, and Chris Boulton (Media Education Foundation, 2010). 62 Minutes.

“Not Just a Game,” a new documentary about the intersection of sports and politics, was released last year by Northampton, Massachusetts-based Media Education Foundation. The film was co-written by Dave Zirin, a critic noted for his cutting edge analyses of the social function of sports, and Zirin also acts as our on-camera guide. “Not Just a Game” is a new and in many ways refreshing take on U.S. militarism in sports, the silence around queer identified athletes, the sexism and homophobia that persists at the core of athletic competition and marketing, and the impact of racism on American sports history. The film takes most of its cues from Zirin’s other well-regarded works, namely Welcome to the Terrordome1 and A People’s History of Sports.2 Though the documentary seems to want to lay its claim as a film version of A People’s History of Sports, it fell short of my expectations.

“Not Just a Game” opens, appropriately enough, with a discussion of militarism. Summoning numerous examples from American football, including a bevy of images from F-14 pre-game flyovers and Fox Sunday NFL anchors in military camouflage, to footage of athletes using military rhetoric to describe their on-the-field battles, it reveals football as the pinnacle of American gladiator sports. Yet, as the film reveals, football is hardly alone in celebrating war. Indeed, all American sports are either uncritically patriotic or wholly militaristic.

From this starting point, “Not Just a Game” tackles the issue of gender, highlighting the contributions of female athletes such as tennis legend Billie Jean King. She not only revolutionized the game of tennis, but also enlisted herself in the service of the socially and politically volatile issues of women’s and gay rights. Additionally, the documentary explores the silence around sexism and homophobia in men’s and women’s professional sports. As the film shows, there has not been a single gay male athlete to come out of the closet about his sexuality during his playing career. Yet, these are not the only silences that exist in sports. Amongst male athletes there is a deadly silence on the issue of violence towards women by all of the major professional sports leagues.

Importantly, the film highlights the federal statute known as Title IX, which mandated gender equity in collegiate athletics. The strides that have been made since the 1975 legislation are highlighted; [End Page 69] however, the gap in spending on men’s and women’s athletics persists 35 years later. Here the film reveals a significant gap in its narrative: the role of Jody Dixon, the first woman to file a lawsuit against sex discrimination under Title IX while a tennis coach at Yale University.3

“Not Just a Game” deals less successfully with issues of race and racism in sports. Though the maverick careers of Jack Johnson, Jackie Robinson, Muhammad Ali, and John Carlos are explored, the film generalizes their collective meaning for social justice. The chief difficulty is that the film holds Civil Rights as the umbrella movement uniting these figures. As such it unwittingly (and ahistorically) reifies American liberalism, which many of these athletes firmly opposed. The documentary seeks to position these athletes as rebels, yet at the same time recasts them as citizen-reformers seeking merely to fit into American society. This flaw is clearest when discussing Tommie Smith and John Carlos’s Black Power salute on the podium at the 1968 Mexico City Olympic games. Zirin, the film’s narrator, mistakenly states that these athletes were exhibiting their respect for the Civil Rights Movement when they were expressing solidarity with Black Power and Human Rights. The result of the depiction in the film is a sanitized version of what Harry Edwards called the “Revolt of the Black Athlete.”4 The film is more effective, however, in its critique of Michael Jordan and LeBron James as the antitheses of the political heroism displayed by Robinson and others.

Deservedly, Jackie Robinson...

pdf

Share