Raetsonwe
Redundant and unnecessary.
Philippa
All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
g-melicharek
i have been a babe fan all my life and to see a movie was a cool experience. But, they made him look like a bad guy even my kids where like "dad he not to nice." but the truth is he was a man who wanted to enjoy life and he loved what he loved baseball.They could have added a few extra parts but overall a decent film. i do suggest this is not a film for the younger audience it dose contain minor curses and use of alcohol.The acting OK iv seen better but, the drama and emotion can inspire you after i watch i wanted to play baseball.the movie was entertaining from start to end there are some great quotes to mine and probably everyone's for sure is "your the best, your the best there ever will be."
ahlstrom61
The best part of "The Babe" with John Goodman is his excellent imitation of Babe Ruth's mannerisms and speaking. Goodman particularly handled Ruth's verbal style. This film suffered quite a bit from its emphasis and interpretation of Babe Ruth's character and life. I know people that knew Babe Ruth, and while they said he went out and drank regularly, they said he was rarely out of control they way he was depicted by Goodman in the film. Nor was he sloppy and horribly overweight like John Goodman was in the film. The Babe didn't get particularly heavy till his last 2-3 years in the major leagues, and even after retiring continued to play in exhibitions around North America. Some others asked if he really hit 3 homeruns in his last game with the Boston Braves. That is also not correct and was incorrectly depicted in the film (Ruth dropping his hat in front of the Braves owner). He did hit three homeruns in one game in his final season in old Forbes Field in Pittsburgh, but it was not his final game. This film focused almost solely on Ruth's lack of personal discipline and immaturity, which was not a problem for him after 1925 when he was fined and admonished by his Manager Miller Huggins. From 1926 to 1932, Ruth had perhaps the finest run of offensive seasons of any Major League hitter - this was not even mentioned in the film, and his banner years of 1923 (when he hit .393) and 1927 (60 homeruns) were barely mentioned; I think the film spent less than one minute on his 60 homerun year. All in all, this film was very disappointing, particularly to Yankee fans and to those who were acquainted with Babe Ruth. The TV movie about Babe Ruth (which included Pete Rose as Ty Cobb) was a much better film.
ccthemovieman-1
This is what modern-day Hollywood does to most icons, to most of our "heroes." It, generally speaking, trashes them, emphasizing the bad in their lives over the good.While the 1948 Babe Ruth Story way over-sugarcoated Ruth's story, this new version portrays this sports hero - perhaps the most famous sports personality in American history - to the other extreme, of course. Why can't Hollywood just be neutral on these biographies? Show the good and bad, but be fair about it.If you read about Babe Ruth, it's astonishing to find out just how big a celebrity he was in his lifetime: literally bigger-than-life, and the fact so many people know his name and face over 90 years after he started playing Major League Baseball is a testimony to that. Much of what Ruth did was good stuff, especially with kids and charities, but he also had a crude, rough side to him and a life that had more than its share of sufferings. He was, indeed, and complex and fascinating human being. One thing that is outright lie: the plot line as written on the title page here saying ' {Babe) is unheroic to those who know him." No, all the old players said for years afterward how much they all liked Ruth, what a great guy he was and generous to a fault."Ruth's bad points should be pointed out, but this movie dwells too much on the unpleasant scenes which is probably one good reason why it wasn't a hit movie. Hollywood just doesn't get it: people don't want mostly negative stuff, especially about their heroes.Anyway, John Goodman did a fine job of playing Ruth. He didn't write the script, so I am not upset with him. Kelli McGillis is a pretty woman and also adds nicely to the film as Ruth's strong wife, "Clare." Also, the movie is still interesting, especially if you're a baseball fan. But, as a big fan, I would like to have enjoyed this movie and bought the VHS (now DVD) and viewed it many times .....but it's not fun to watch.
djbell1
My wife watched this film with me for the first time after I had seen it a couple of times. She had some good questions, including what the Babe did after his retirement from Baseball in 1935 up to his death in 1948. The end credits mention he never managed in Baseball. I really find it hard to believe that someone in Major League Baseball, if not the Yankees, would not have hired the Babe to manage. The film seemed to display an overall sentiment that Baseball was not very kind to Ruth. The attitude of the owner of the club in their meeting toward the end of the movie is unbelievable. How could he have turned against someone who probably helped make him wealthy? You would think he would have offered him something in the organization if he truly did not believe he was management material.Anyway, I thought the film was adequate and probably captured the spirit of the man he was on and off the field. John Goodman did a good job in his leading role. Although he did seem overweight, in some of the scenes he bore a striking resemblance to the Babe in the photos and film I have seen.
