User Reviews (54)

Add a Review

  • While I enjoyed the movie and John Goodman's performance, The Babe's weight was never near that of John and made him look like a lumbering athlete, which in fact he was not. While the Babe was not a role model, he was truly a hero ............. then and now.

    He did not make the comments about Lou Gehrig shown in the movie. His problem with Lou Gehrig had to do with a party his wife went to ahead of the when Lou got to the party and Gehrig was upset his wife might have been intimate with The Babe, which is doubtful. Ruth and Gehrig had been close friends until Lou got jealous.

    The Babe was not a bumbler on the ball field, only in life, due to his lack of class, which was caused by the lack of a loving family. He did have a great care for children, due his lack of having that during his upbringing. It was a good movie in terms of many things, but left those who have read the read biographies of The Babe, disappointed with how the so called facts were presented. The Babe will live on long after this movie, which I avoided for many years, due to figuring it was tainted ............. and it was, very tainted. I do have to say I still enjoyed most of the movie. Like many biographies to much poetic license was taken.
  • 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.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    OK you lot, just what is wrong with this film? I know I'm a limey mofo so my baseball appreciation is not on a par with many Americans, I mean I follow the Cleveland Indians purely because of the film Major League {oh and because a dear friend on this site is a fan}. Was the film inaccurate or something? A quick look at the film's board would suggest that all the glorious moments in the film are true, John Goodman is great and seems to fit the bill, and for once Kelly McGillis doesn't drag a film down, I just watched this and I feel suitably stirred in a real good way.

    Did the Yank crowd really turn on him and he then went on to hit 60? The two home run promise to the sick child? Knocking the ball out of Forbes Park 3 times and then quitting? Calling the shot after letting two go by to clinch the world series against the Cubs? Those are just some of the glorious moments in a film that portrays what obviously was a legend on the pitch and a messed up man off it.

    I really enjoyed it and I'm that interested in the man now I may well seek out a biography to read. 8/10 and the rating here is a disgrace in my humble opinion. That is unless I'm not privy to something of course?!
  • The 2 biggest complaints I had were the sequence of events in the movie and the character that Mr. Goodman portrayed.

    It seemed that the movie attempted to show all events which dealt with Babe Ruth's life. Most actually seemed accurate, but the positioning of each event was off. For example, if Babe was so much against divorcing his first wife, why did he go ahead and marry Claire while still being married? The fact is, that he did not marry Claire until his first wife tragically died. This is not portrayed this way in the movie. Also, the movie suggested that Babe met claire as a rookie in Boston. He met Claire in New York in 1923. Does anyone actually think that Babe Ruth would have continued playing for the Yankees if he dangled his manager (his boss) off a moving train???

    As for the acting. Babe Ruth NEVER approached the weight displayed by Mr. Goodman. Babe hovered around 200-210 for the most part of his career although his weight did fluctuate. It was a truly sick thing trying to watch Mr. Goodman swing or run around the bases. The guy could barely fit into a uniform. I did think that Mr. Goodman really did well in his facial expressions, speech and overall demeanor of the Babe. It was the physical acting that was left to be desired.

    I would have liked the movie to concentrate more on Babe's lifestyle off the field. His womanizing (not enough in this movie), his appetite (not enough in this movie), and the fact he just was a social boob (i.e. couldn't remember names, had no manners). His on the field statistics speak for themselves.
  • As someone familiar with the historic record of Babe Ruth's life, the many "playings around" with the facts were noticeable. In some of the cases, presenting the story accurately wouldn't have changed the filmmakers' intent at all. Example: In the movie, Babe already is married to Clare when Dorothy dies in the fire. Dorothy died a couple of years before Babe got married. He was a Catholic, remember; they weren't living together.

    I'm still pretty sure the Baby Ruth candy bar was named for Grover Cleveland's daughter, not the Babe. I am old enough to have attended many ballgames in Forbes Field, and they didn't even try to make the park in the movie look the same. Where was the ivy?!

    In real life, Clare wanted Babe to retire after the 3 homers in Pittsburgh, but Babe had promised people he would appear in several more games. Nothing happened in those games, and, dramatically, having him quit after Pittsburgh made good sense for the movie.

    I'm also glad the picture ended when it did, not showing Babe in his last frustrating years waiting vainly for the Yankees to call him. We didn't need to see his - and Clare's - decline.

    I take serious issue with the critic here who apparently likes the William Bendix movie better. Keep in mind that was made while Babe was still alive. The Babe they presented there was so perfumed and sugar-coated as to be completely unrecognizable.
  • Despite critical reviews, this is really an interesting movie. A different look at legendary home run slugger Babe Ruth. Very low budget and historically incorrect. A major league turn around from the William Bendix BABE RUTH STORY(1948). Rowdy and ribald and one of baseball's original heroes is shown drinking, cavorting, skirt chasing and deep in gluttony. The real "Bambino"? Not candy coated, but not honestly factual either. John Goodman is outstanding as the slugger of mammoth and mythical home runs. Kelly McGillis plays Clare Ruth. Also in the cast are Bruce Boxleitner, Joe Ragno and Peter Donat. Take it all in stride. It is only a movie and not engraved in granite.
  • Possibly the worst baseball bio-pic ever made. No relation to Ruth's actual career, you'd never guess he started out as a pitching star before graduating to the Sultan of Swat. Every home run Goodman hits goes out of the stadium. Not into the stands, but out of the stadium. When he's not hitting gigantic home runs, he flails around at the plate like a drunken klutz. It's complete nonsense. Ruth was a terrific athlete most of his career with a lifetime .342 batting average, only growing overweight toward the end. Goodman flaunts his bulk with no hint of athleticism and doesn't seem to play any actual baseball, he only shows up to hit the homers. He must be really good, too, because he barely has any teammates worth mentioning. Ruth dominated the Roaring 20s as a larger than life figure. Goodman's Ruth is merely large. If you wish to see Babe Ruth portrayed as a gross clownish moron, this is your chance.
  • "The Babe" was a wonderful film. If critics want to nitpick it by commenting on the "authenticity" of the film like saying that all the games were played on the same field just re-organized, and making negative comments about about the film portraying the "dark side" of Babe Ruth, etc, I guess that's fine, but give the film what it deserves. First of all, John Goodman did an amazing job.

    The truth is that Babe was a very confused person. He is probably baseball's greatest legend, but he did have some serious problems with women and alcohol. His childhood was a mess in many ways. He didn't know how to be married or to be a Father to a child. Everyone has issues. Accept the documented facts that he was not an angel. He had a huge heart and loved to do things for people. He also had his own demons to overcome and most of us do. I know that the film added a few things that may or may not have happened and I know that many things were left out, but unfortunately this is the way it has to be in ALL films like this. There is NO way to capture every single thing that the Babe ever did in less than 2 hours. They just have to do the best job they can with the time they have to work with.

    This film was genuinely uplifting and to all who only saw the negative side of this film, shame on you. John Goodman is a huge Babe fan and even he felt that this was an acurate portrayal of the Bambino. The film is inspiring, positive for the most part and it's made me feel good every time I've seen it.
  • 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.
  • John Goodman steamrolls his way through this film, with just about everyone else pushed into the background.

    Purists no doubt will cane this film for historical inaccuracies. Heck, I'm from another country and know jack about baseball, but 15 minutes on the Internet was enough to show me that the film took serious short-cuts with Babe's life and career, not to mention a number of errors and distortions of fact.

    Does this matter? Well, yes, probably. But you have to feel for the filmmakers. How do you condense a 20-year sporting career, not to mention a study of a complex and flawed individual, into a couple of hours of cinema? It's not easy, and the film suffers from events that are merely touched on Example 1: Ruth is introduced to mobsters in a speakeasy, but this seems to lead nowhere. The obvious question is: what happened next?. Example 2: The conflict between Ruth and Lou Gehrig is not portrayed accurately, and its resolution is not shown at all.

    An excess of sentiment also hurts the film. There are moments that look like cliched scenes from countless other sporting movies - especially the sick kiddie in hospital extracting a promise of 2 home runs from Ruth, who dutifully delivers, and the same kiddie, now fully recovered and grown up, showing up at Ruth's swansong. It's emotionally manipulative film-making and I regret to say it works, but it also pulls this film back from greatness.

    All up, just above average, unlike its subject matter.
  • skpc923 March 2020
    I honestly think this was a GREAT portrayal movie of Babe Ruth!! Must see movie.
  • thebishop24 August 2004
    Ever seen a movie and just wanted to punch the screen?

    The Babe, starring John Goodman, is a horrendously bad film. It's almost a total fabrication of the man's life. There's so much wrong, I don't know where to begin.

    Perhaps we should look at the fact that John Goodman was way too heavy to play him. Babe Ruth was never 350 pounds. He was actually a good athlete in his prime. He started as a pitcher, yet they skipped over that despite his being one of the better pitchers in the American League for several years before moving fulltime to the outfield.

    He wasn't mentally impaired, either, yet they make it seem like he had the know how of a 2 year old. They had him marrying his second wife before his first wife died, something that he wouldn't due to religious reasons. All they had him do was harp about managing, wanting to manage in the majors. He did want to, it's well documented, but it wasn't the only thing he thought of. And he didn't call Lou Gehrig Iron Man when he was 3 years into the league, heck, no one did!! you get that kind of nickname you play several years without missing games. Gehrig's character was also a complete waste. I'm surprised they didn't just cut him out of the movie like he didn't exist, they cut out so much that did anyway.

    This movie has the feel of a bad made for TV film. The acting stinks, the shots stink, the crowd/atmosphere stinks, everything is very contrived, and they completely forgot it was a historical setting. It feels like the screen writer just decided to write up a completely different story and then added Babe Ruth to it.

    Watch it if you want, but if you know anything about baseball history, you'll wish you hadn't. -100 on a 1-10 scale.
  • This may very well be the worst baseball movie ever made.

    The "location" shots are often laughable -- the real world Chicago is palmed off as such wildly dissimilar places as Boston, New York and New Orleans, and the old ballpark mock-ups are comically unconvincing. John Goodman resembles Ruth only in bulk -- John Candy would have played this role with far greater joy and credibility.

    Babe Ruth was not only the greatest ballplayer who ever lived, but his life story was richer and more interesting that the cliche-riddled and often inaccurate script suggests. This cheap, cheesy, and unimaginative piece of hack work is one big strikeout.
  • jlacerra7 July 2001
    Could Babe Ruth have possibly been the undisciplined gutter swine he is portrayed as in this movie? The usually likable John Goodman is effective at losing audience compassion early, and then exposing an American icon as a moronic heel driven purely by his uncontrolled hedonism. You leave this movie feeling the ironic unfairness that such great athletic gifts were wasted on this despicable man.
  • mronrox4520 September 2012
    This might not be the biggest flop in baseball movie history, but it was definitely the biggest baseball "blockbuster" flop of all time. There was a lot of hype for this movie when it came out so a lot of people went to see it, me included. I couldn't have been more disappointed. It was just so cheesy! Almost to the point that I was embarrassed to be in the theater! That scene where Ruth hits a pop fly in the infield where no one can find it while he rounds all 4 bases was so over the top I had to excuse myself to go get some popcorn. I understand that directors tend to change the story of historical figures a bit to make the story more interesting, but most of what was shown in the movie wasn't even remotely historically accurate! John Goodman did an OK job as Babe Ruth the man, but his baseball play was just painful to watch. The next time a Hollywood director wants to make a sports movie they need to at least know a little about the sport they are making the movie about. Don't even bother watching this movie, its a waste of time and an insult to the great Babe Ruth.
  • mjprigge27 February 2008
    I found this movie to be appallingly bad. The actually story of Babe Ruth is fascinating, but the movie treats him as the same caricature that popular memory has created. Goodman's portrayal is shallow and treads on parody. He does manage to copy the voice of the Babe fairly well, but that only picks up about an hour into the film. Facts are disregarded throughout the story and confusing leaps through time distort his career.

    Not for baseball fans, not for history fans, not for movie fans. The only people who might enjoy this are Red Sox fans, as the whole two hours does a great injustice to the most famous Yankee of them all.
  • I can't help but wonder if this film wasn't made more from an excuse to cash in on the popularity of John Goodman at the time of this film than an honest desire to portray the baseball icon. It would certainly explain the film's inaccuracies and rushed feel. I remember that around that time (late 80's, early 90s), Goodman seemed to be fairly popular. Can it be coincidence that somebody wanted to make a film about Babe Ruth at around the same time Goodman started receiving recognition in Hollywood? Honestly, I don't think so. At any rate, Goodman is miscast as Ruth. For one thing, Ruth wasn't really fat; more like broad and stocky. He was quite athletic and able to play the field - remember, there was no such thing as a designated hitter back then. In other words, offense isn't the only part of baseball; Ruth played defense too. Does this film ever show Ruth in the outfield? Can't say for sure because I didn't really watch the entire thing, but it's hard to imagine paunchy John Goodman fielding fly balls. The other thing is Goodman is simply unlikeable as Ruth. As we can see from film footage (including Pride of the Yankees), the real Ruth was energetic and charismatic. Goodman's Ruth is simply loud, crass and grating.
  • dweilermg-112 April 2019
    As youngsters we all loved the William Bendix highly fictionalized Babe Ruth movie that concentrated on the legend of a lovable childlike guy rather than a more truthful portrayal of the man. The John Goodman version seemed more into telling it like it was.
  • gamcw9 March 2018
    I'm a sucker for corny old movies, especially when they involve baseball. My only problem here, was that Babe Ruth was not obese when he began his career with the Red Sox. He was barrel chested and strong as an ox and didn't gain all that weight until the end of the '20's, beginning of the '30's! They make him look like a hot dog eating pig as a young man. Remember, this young man hit more home runs in 1920, than any other TEAM in the American League!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I watched this movie back when it first came out and I did not write anything then. I watched it again today and it was not a very good story. Although they put in a few facts, the story line was ridiculous. John Goodman is a fine actor but he was twice the weight of Ruth during his prime. The Babe during the first 10 years of his career was 6 feet 2 inches tall and weighed ONLY 215 pounds. He was big but still lean compared to what Goodman portrayed. Ruth never hit and infield pop fly that went for a home run. Ruth was a very good pitcher for the Red Sox from 1915-1919 he won 89 games pitching and 3 world series games. Although he was controversial in his manner, he still loved kids. After all, he was one himself. Ruth was a great athlete but not manager / leader material. In the movie, they made Ruth look very awkward when swinging the bat. He was a natural athlete yet they made him look funny. Maybe Goodman never played baseball or he was right handed. He looked uncoordinated when swinging the bat. Ruth was very well coordinated and smooth when hitting. I will leave it here. Thank you.
  • Back in 1948 when Babe Ruth was dying of cancer a small independent film The Babe Ruth Story came out with William Bendix as the star. It was based on Babe's own G rated memoirs with the same title ghost written by Bob Considine and ghost ghost written by Fred Lieb. It was how I'm sure Ruth wanted to be remembered. But even people knew then the facts said otherwise.

    John Goodman in the title role of The Babe is a lot closer to the swaggering hedonist who was just a kid at heart who never out grew his childhood. Abandoned and left to the care of the Christian brothers at St. Mary's Industrial School in Baltimore, the over-sized trouble-making youth was saved from probably a criminal existence by the way he could both hit and pitch a baseball. One of the many things forgotten was how good a pitcher he was and the crucial decision made by Ed Barrow his manager at the Red Sox to put Babe exclusively in the outfield to keep his bat in the lineup every day. When Ruth left for the Yankees, Barrow followed him and he's not even a character in this film.

    So much in this television film is left out and just plain made up. Third baseman Joe Dugan was Ruth's teammate on the Yankees, never the Red Sox as in this film. Played by Bruce Boxleitner he was not especially close to Ruth, as close to him as any of his other teammates which was not. The Babe partied hearty with them, but was not a soulmate per se.

    Trini Alvarado and Kelly McGillis play his first and second wives and their portrayals ring true. Wife number one Helen Wofford was just a nice kid from the country who liked country life and Ruth was a city boy all the way. Claire Hodgson Ruth was a showgirl and a very shrewd manager of the money the free spending Babe liked to shovel out as fast as he made it. She also managed the image we have of him for the rest of her life.

    Colonel Jacob Ruppert is done a terrible disservice in this film. To me Colonel Ruppert was the ideal owner of a sports team, in fact baseball and sports in general would be better with more Rupperts running things than Steinbrenners. Ruth got it in his head he wanted to manage, I think because contemporary stars like Ty Cobb, Tris Speaker, and Rogers Hornsby all got to manage. Ruppert was quite right and we saw a whole film showing how much Ruth couldn't manage himself. It never happened that Claire Ruth slapped Ruppert, NOBODY did that to him. But she knew better than anyone how much the Babe couldn't manage himself and she was not going in the dugout with him.

    Some good acting featured in The Babe. But it contains way too many inaccuracies for a higher rating.
  • I know of no two human lives that are more clearly "stories" than that of the two great Yankee teammates, Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig. Most lives a litany of events, some of which are part of "stories" that cut diagonally across the life rather than encompassing it and driving it forward. Those stories do not emanate from or thus reveal the character of the person portrayed.

    Ruth was an undisciplined man-child with a prodigious talent that enabled him to reinvent and save his sport and made him the symbol of his era, a time when America was emerging as a world power and breaking the bonds of its own traditions to create a more modern and exciting way of living. But he offended not only the traditionalists but the businessmen who controlled his sport- or used to until he came along. When age and his lifestyle began to catch to him, they disposed of him for all but ceremonial purposes. Meanwhile his age passed and the world grew more serious. He wound up lonely and depressed and became a cancer victim at the early age of 53.

    Gehrig was a serious, dutiful momma's boy, also blessed with a prodigious talent that thrust him into where he most hated to be- the limelight. It's interesting that the worst year of his prime was the one year he didn't have either Ruth or DiMaggio as a teammate, 1935. He fared much better in their shadow. He was noted, by those who noted him, as a strong, reliable workhorse of a man and a player, someone you could count on. He was amazingly beset by a disease which robbed him of his strength, the very quality in him people most admired. And that in turn, thrust him directly into the lime light. People didn't think he could respond but he looked into his heart and said what was there and nobody ever forgot it.

    How could you miss telling stories like that? But amazingly, Hollywood has always seemed to get Lou's story right and the Babe's wrong. Even though there were casting problems in all the movies made about them, the quality of "Pride of the Yankees" and of "A Love Affair: The Eleanor and Lou Gehrig Story" is superb on both counts. Meanwhile "The Babe Ruth Story" is one of the worst movies ever made and both the TV movie "Babe Ruth" and the film "The Babe" are deeply flawed.

    "Pride of the Yankees" is old fashioned Hollywood sentiment but done by experts. I find Teresa Wright's alternate clowning and crying to be a little too much and I've heard all the stories about Gary Cooper's attempts to learn how to play baseball, (he was a cowboy and an artist but no ball-player). But he was a great actor and he got to the essence of the character beautifully. His delivery of the final speech is perfect, for which reason he was asked to repeat it to the troops over and over during his travels during WWII. I'll be loving it- always.

    "The Babe Ruth Story" casts a stumpy, potato-faced introvert, William Bendix, as the big, moon-faced extrovert, Babe Ruth. It's a competent "B" movie version of his life for the first half. It might have just been a disappointing follow-up to "Pride of the Yankees" if they'd left it at that but about halfway through the script suddenly delves into science fiction and turns Ruth into a maker of medical miracles, with one ridiculous scene after another. He is, however, unable to save himself in the end, or even the film.

    All I saw of "Babe Ruth" was a few scenes but once I saw Stephen Lang wearing what appeared to be a plastic mask, which tried but failed to make him resemble Ruth, I wanted no part of it.

    "The Babe" is the "Gone With the Wind" of Babe Ruth movies, which isn't saying much. But is a good retelling of his life and Goodman enacts the part superbly. It ends at the right moment, with Ruth hitting his last three home runs in one game in Pittsburgh to stick it to those who were jeering him. But Goodman is twice the size Ruth ever was. The Babe, as old photos show, was about 200 pounds when his career started and worked his way up to perhaps 250 pounds when he quit. Goodman must have been a minimum of 350 pounds when he filmed this movie and sent the wrong message: that you can be a blimp and still be the greatest player in the sport, an image that baseball people really resent.

    While casting is not the only problem, it could have been improved and that might have helped. Physically, someone like Dick Foran or Wayne Morris would have been a better match for Gehrig than Cooper but they wouldn't have given as good a performance. Kurt Russell, (who played some minor league ball), or Jeff Bridges would have been a much better choice for "A Love Story", than Hermann. That other "Reilly", Jackie Gleason, would have been a much better choice than Bendix for "The Babe Ruth Story", (especially if he had eaten the script). Maybe the best time to do a Ruth movie and do it right would have been after Roger Maris broke his record. Either Claude Akins, (my favorite choice of all), or Simon Oakland would have made excellent Ruths. Ramon Bieri was a good Ruth in "A Love Story". I'm not sure who would play him these days.

    Of course the best performance as Babe Ruth was by the guy who played him in "Pride of the Yankees".
  • Babe Ruth was a legend of the baseball, perhaps the best all-time slugger, whose life had always many difficulties, particularly in his behavior. Although I've never seen him playing, only some camera shots, his records were and still fabulous. Director Arthur Hiller tried to show briefly the most important aspects of Ruth's life, but to be frankly he did not succeed because Johnnie Goodman, in the role of Ruth, was more interested in showing a comic figure than a baseball player like Ruth. The other thing was that the film did not touch enough the relationships of Ruth with colleagues, such as Lou Gehrig and others. In any case, if you like baseball, you may like to see this story.
  • cristos2127 July 2020
    Warning: Spoilers
    I love John Goodman and he did a great job in this movie even though it wasn't accurate, but really, his swing was horrible. The best home run hitter in history had a beautiful smooth swing. They needed to use some camera work to super impose a better swing. It's was like watching someone shot pool that acts like a champion and can't even hold the stick.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    For years, I believed this all to be true, well as true as a Hollywood movie could be about a sports figure. I gave it a fair amount of wiggle room, when I should have given it the same credibility as the National Enquirer.

    There are far too many factual errors in this biography of Babe Ruth than there should be, especially considering the fact that the truth isn't at all boring or inconvenient in the first place!

    Among other things...

    Ruth never divorced his wife, he merely separated from her. He married his second wife, when his first wife was killed in a house fire.

    The fighting, name-calling and rivalry with Lou Gehrig was ABSOLUTELY incorrect. They actually had a deep friendship and respect for each other during Gehrig's career. The proof can be seen moments before Lou Gehrig's epic July 4th, 1939 "Today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the Earth," speech, #4, gets a hug from #3. Their relationship deteriorated after Ruth married his second wife. This movie is deeply disrespectful to their memory, I feel.

    Ruth didn't hit an infield homerun.

    Ruth never promised a sick boy two home runs; he just promised one. It was his friend Lou Gehrig who promised two, and Gehrig delivered. That's what makes this such a sad biography - it's a rip-off of another's.

    Then there's the rule-breaking:

    Ruth came stumbling into a game already in-play, batted, instead of the player that was taking his place because he had been late, and hit a home run. That was against the rules. There are many rules that were broken to make this movie.

    Viewers are smarter now. We have IMDb and the internet. Writers, producers and directors need to remember that.
An error has occured. Please try again.