“This is not a football film.”
A football film does not have to be all about the football – we have actual matches for that. But the narrative should in some way be connected to the football. Take the first instalment of the Goal trilogy for example, the happy ending doesn’t come from Newcastle qualifying for the Europa League. It comes from Santi overcoming obstacles to become the team’s hero, and the fact that his dad saw him play against “Ful-ham.”
In the second, it’s all about how he deals with superstardom as he moves to Real Madrid. I don’t remember much about the second one, but I remember it being fine.
The third one however, belongs in a completely different category of art. It’s so bad, it’s actually incredibly watchable. So devoid of any attachment to the characters involved, you begin to watch it with a different eye.
Why did they have to give Charlie’s character a role in a Romanian BDSM movie?
Why did Liam receive a call from the England manager to find out both he and Charlie were in the World Cup squad?
Why is Santiago a side character now?
How did this piece of shit cost $10million?
These are just some of the questions you will ask yourself when you watch it.
Having never seen it before, we got our very own Joe Gilmore to watch, and review, Goal III: Taking on the World.
"It's the epitome of throwing everything into a film, see what sticks, and fucking none of it stuck."@Gilology and @ReubenPinder rate Goal III, possibly the worst football film of all time. pic.twitter.com/hSJy2URulj
— FootballJOE (@FootballJOE) June 10, 2020
