The Natural : Stupid Movie

Stupid Movie

This movie is terrible on may levels. I read in one of IMDB reviews that the movie is based on one Eddie Waitkus who was shot by a crazed female fan and he started playing baseball after one year. Why was it changed in the movie to 16 years? Robert Redford was 48 when he acted in this movie and he played 19 year old and 35 year old in the movie. This is howlarious! He was total misfit for the role. May be the producers wanted to stick with Robert Redford for the role so they changed the comeback to 16 years from 1 year. It would be pretty dumb to show Robert Redford playing a 20 year old for the entire movie. What was he doing for these 16 years? Why was the bullet not removed for 16 years? Was there any scene showing young Robert redford and glenn close making love? Where did the son come from? Why did not glenn close tell Robert redford in the hospital that he has a son? I also thought Robert Duvalls role was incomplete. There was no explaination in the movie why Barbara Hershey shot Robert Redford. Was the version I saw edited? Robert Duvall reads from a news paper that 2 athletes were shot by a silver bullet. So, should we assume that they were also killed by Barbara Hershey. Glenn Close stands and Robert Redford sees her from a long distance after 16 years, identifies her and starts hitting the ball. Later he asks why did you stand. What a stupid scene.

Re: Stupid Movie

Excellent questions.
And not many answers, eh?
I thought this movie wasn't as good as others have raved.
The premise doesn't make sense, and there's too many holes in the story anyways.
Most of the cast along with the sets are very well done, but Redford is definitely too old for 16, and maybe even the 35 year old role...
A '6' in my books at best..."OK, fine, whatever."
'You can't HANDLE the truth!'

Re: Stupid Movie

Because it's a movie.

Re: Stupid Movie

I don't know if it was changed to 16 years to accomodate Redford's age or not but it makes sense. I think he still makes it work. It's better than him playing a college student in THE WAY WE WERE when he was 36.

One of the mysteries of the movie is what Hobbs did for 16 years. He alludes to playing some ball "here and there" and is very private about his past to anyone that asks.

Why would there need to be a scene of Hobbs and Iris making love? To prove she could get pregnant? He told her he wanted to marry her. That was enough.

Where did the son come from? Better ask Masters and Johnson.

There IS an explanation as to why the woman shot Hobbs. On the train it is mentioned that the greatest athletes from other sports are being murdered. She has her sights set on the Whammer (Joe Don Baker) until Hobbs strikes him out in the field. She asks Hobbs more than once (including just before shooting him) if he is going to be the greatest. This implicates her in the other murders.

Once again the film is filled with fantasy and mysticism. You can't accept Glenn Close standing and Hobbs hitting a home run but you can (since you didn't mention it) accept her glowing white like an angel. You can accept that when Hobbs gets involved with Memo (Kim Basinger) he goes into a major slump. And apparently you can accept Hobbs hitting baseballs so hard he tears the cover off one, breaks a clock atop a scoreboard with another and lastly destroys a light tower causing 4th of July like fireworks to go off?

You either buy it all or you don't I suppose. I did and I loved it.

Re: Stupid Movie

Sorry but the original posters comments were stupid, not this movie.

First of all, in the original they showed Redford/Close embracing and move away from the screen into the hay in the barn, after saying they loved each other. Clearly the assumption is they were 'together' in that moment as he was leaving the next morning. 16 years later there is a 15 year old boy, does that not simplify it enough for you?

He was away from the game for 16 years because he was told by his doctors he could not play ball again or it could kill him. This took place almost 100 years ago, the medical field was obviously not what it was today. Maybe the bullet was in another part of the body and made its way into his stomach over the course of time, we don't know. Maybe he thought he was done playing after those 2 years in the hospital, but after some time he could no longer feel the pain from the bullet so he wanted to give it another try? This was a fantasy kind of movie, obviously with him hitting the cover off the ball.

If you can't enjoy this kind of movie then sorry for you, but don't come in here calling it stupid because you can't follow simple plot lines. Like the poster above stated, it was clear that this lady was on a mission to kill the top athletes of the major sports. She was going to kill the greatest hitter but then Hobbs comes in and strikes him out so she thought she would get the next greatest player and then she kills herself thinking her goal was accomplished. The Whammer and the reporter were talking about this killing spree on the train in the beginning!!

Re: Stupid Movie

I'm not one who trashes someone's opinion, however, the OP is a stone cold idiot. The events in the movie i.e. the shooting was inspired by the Waitkus incident, not based on it. 2nd, the movie was based off of a novel that was written in the 1950's. A fictional novel hence the movie is fictional(right down to the NY Knights team...which never existed at least not at the major league level). What's next, he's going to watch Star Wars and complain that most of that technology isn't out yet let alone it being a long, long time ago?

Re: Stupid Movie

I quite agree with you. My main concern was about Harriet Bird's character. In the film, there is no explanation at all about that event, so i wondered what it was about. Dramatically, Redford is a good actor, but he was too old for this successful sporty kind of character.

Then, he is shown as a kind of puppet when it comes to women. So Memo is bringing him back luck? If it all depends on luck, it's because he's not that good.

The plot reminds me of a classic Greek tragedy. Hobbs looks to do good or bad according the manupulation of people around him like characters were used by Greek gods in tragedies. It makes him look childish.

Re: Stupid Movie

Um, no, he's not being manipulated by women. You weren't really paying much attention to the movie if that was your impression.

When he was shot by Harriet Bird, he was 19 years old. My God, Roy Hobbs had never even been on a train before. When I was 19, I was pretty clueless, and certainly no more expert on women. Hell, now at 43, they still mystify me at times. To quote from Hawkeye (relaying what his father had told him) in Last of the Mohicans:


Women are a breed apart, and make no sense.


Remember the scene when he's in the maternity ward at the end of the hospital after having his stomach pumped? He said he should have seen it coming. What did Iris say? "How could you have known she would hurt you? How could anyone?" How exactly do you think Harriet "manipulated" him? By calling him to her hotel room? Seriously? Roy was attracted to her, yes. He went to meet her. Harriet was beautiful, sophisticated, well-learned. She spoke of Homer, Lancelot and Maldamor. She was a kind of woman Roy had likely never met before. Is it manipulation to be drawn to a woman? Of course not. He wasn't out robbing banks for her. She wasn't bending him to her will. Roy found her fascinating, nothing more. Then she blew a silver bullet into his gut.

Then there's Memo. Memo is Pop's niece. Roy doesn't think she's evil, and I don't think she was evil, either. Flawed, absolutely. She was basically abandoned by her father as a child (he walked out on her family), and Gus provides her with things. She knows what's going on, and so does Roy. Remember the exchange, where she tells him about her relationship with Gus, how she "picked her up when she was down?"

"Gus gives me things. Things I've never had before in my life. Is there anything wrong with that?" To which Roy replies "not if you know the risks." Memo tells Roy flat out she's not looking for love, that she's been with lots of men. Roy isn't walking blindly into the arms of some manipulator. Memo is an attractive young woman in a place where Roy knows nobody. But when, exactly, did she manipulate him into doing something against his will? Not that I recall, and I've seen the movie at least thirty times. Roy went out every day, played his butt off. He did slump before Iris, "the lady in white", appeared. But if you remember, Pop told Roy he thought his niece, whom he loved, was bad luck. When Memo came to Roy in the hospital, and appealed to him to not play that one last game, did he bow to her will? Gus was going to stake them to a large amount of money. Then he'd "live for sure, and not walk away empty-handed." Did he acquiesce to her? Nope. He wasn't letting anybody manipulate him. Not Gus at the table when he guessed how much money Roy had in his pockets, and told Roy that "he'd owe him one." Not Pop when he wanted to send Roy back down. Not the Judge when he came in and offered him $20,000, "double the going rate for this sort of rate." Even when he threatened to expose Roy's past, showing the pictures of Roy shot in Harriet's hotel room, and Harriet, "a half naked lady" on the sidewalk below. What does Roy say? "I don't care. Go ahead. Get on the phone." Ooooooo! Masterful job of manipulating Mr. Hobbs into doing his bidding!

Who was Roy being manipulated by? Did Bump manipulate Roy before he ran into the outfield wall? Wait, I've got it. Maybe Bobby Savoy, the bat boy for the Knights, "manipulated" Roy into helping him craft the Savoy Special. Uh huh. Max Mercy "manipulated" Roy into telling him about their chance meeting when Roy blew three pitches by the Whammer 16 years earlier. Wait, nope. I've got nothing. The diner owner who brought Roy and Iris lemonade? Ah! He "manipulated" Roy into spending two bucks on drinks! Trickery and deceit!!!!!

Where Roy might not have aggressively pursued his dream after being shot, now he was coming to do so. We don't know what happened in those sixteen years. That is being added for dramatic effect. Then, Iris hears about "Wonderboy", and "this guy Roy Hobbs", who is going to be something special. She seeks him out, and that's when Roy truly starts finding himself again. And nobody was making Roy do something against his will. Not a beautiful woman, not some hustler throwing around obscene amounts of money. Nobody.

"Correct me if I'm wrong, Hobbs. But we had a deal....I thought I could rely on your honor."

"You're about to." Roy knew what was right, and that's what he did. He was so not being manipulated that he went out there to play, risking death to do so. Why? Because of his love for the game. Because he wanted to win a pennant for Pop. Because he loathed what Gus and the Judge stood for. And, lastly, because he learned his son was in the stands. No, Roy Hobbs was not being manipulated.

This is a movie, based on a novel. It's allegory. Not everything in the book (or film) is meant to be taken literally. Or, did you think that triumphant home runs always shattered clocks, or blew out stadium lights? Did you think when a guy says "knock the cover off the ball", it actually happens?

Go back and watch the movie again. And this time, pay attention!

Never for the sake of peace and quiet deny your convictions-Dag Hammarskjold

Re: Stupid Movie

Read the book, Malamud was a fine writer. It will change your perception of the film. The novella was a classical tragedy. Roy Hobbs had great gifts but could not come to terms with aging and the loss of "his chance". Many of the characters are broadly drawn stand-ins for gods/sorcerers/monsters.

The film changed the ending thus making the characters oversimplified.

That said, it is a fun film for a baseball fan to watch.

Re: Stupid Movie

It's based on a NOVEL. And yes, Hershey's character killed the other athletes; she was a serial killer who killed great athletes who didn't play the game for the "right" reason.

Re: Stupid Movie

Its a freakin movie for Gods sake. Its a feel good story. Get with it.

Re: Stupid Movie

It's not based off of any real life people. It was a novel first and the movie is a representation of the book. I personally like the movie better than book, because it has a much happier ending and to me has more feeling than the book. In the movie, Roy Hobbs hits the game winning home run, continuing the Knights season while ending his own career on a high note. However in the book, Roy actually takes the Judge's offer to throw the game and the Knights lose the pennant. Afterwards, Roy is caught and is thrown from the game in disgrace.

This movie and Field of Dreams are the premiere baseball films of all time. It has elements of hope, determination, and tradition. For anyone who has played baseball, it has nostalgic value that people who are not familiar with the game would not understand. The scene where Roy is playing catch with his son has profound meaning to anyone who remembers their dad teaching them the game. The passing of the game from generation to generation has unimaginable value to players of the game. It was an early bond made between a father and son that has meaning way beyond the game itself.

I give it an 8/10 every time. It's a baseball classic.

Re: Stupid Movie

The film was an adaptation of the book. Not sure if the novel was an inspiration of real life events.

It was noted at the time when the film was released, that Redford might be too old
to play his younger self, hence why does scenes had to be shot in distance with bathed sunlight etc.

The film was not to everyone's taste and did not to that well at the box office but found a more appreciative audience on VHS and in later years.

Its that man again!!

Re: Stupid Movie


It's not based off of any real life people.


The film is adapted from the novel of the same name, which in turn was inspired by a number of real life people, most notably 'Shoeless' Joe Jackson who was implicated in the Black Sox scandal of 1919.

Joe Jackson was a brilliant hitter from rural America who played with a famous bat called Black Betsy. A famous (but possibly apocryphal) story tells of a young lad begging Joe outside a court house to 'Say it ain't so, Joe!' when the player was being investigated by a grand jury for throwing the World Series.

In the novel, this is mirrored with a young boy pleading 'Say it ain't true, Roy!'


-----On the other side of the screen it all looks so easy.------

Re: Stupid Movie

Athadu

Take up video games. You obviously know absolutely nothing about movies or what it takes to make one.

You get all bogged down on what inspired the movie and why didn't the movie stick to what inspired it. WHO CARES? Not one of your questions is relevant to the story. Robert Redford is now 77 and just played one of the most athletic roles in recent memory. Is his age relevant to that role, too? "Why was the bullet not removed for 16 years?" Are you remotely familiar with the state of medicine in the 1920s and 30s? Didn't think so.

Leaving aside your miserable spelling and punctuation (which betrays you as just as uneducated about grammar and spelling as you are about good film making) your review simply screams one message: "I DIDN'T LIKE THIS MOVIE SO NEITHER SHOULD YOU!"

Sorry. This was one of the more uplifting movies – sport or otherwise – of its time. Its endurance as a cult favorite simply proves that fact. That you don’t get it says more about your flaws than it does about the film’s.

Re: Stupid Movie

Pretty snarky reply.

Yes, he does have a strange view of the film, but he is also entitled to his opinion. And nowhere does he suggest that becuse he didn't like it nobody should.

Given that his name is Athadu, there's a good chance English is his second language, so your making fun of his skills is quite juvenile.

Re: Stupid Movie

tl,dr; it was a great film, watch it again and you'll thank me later. You are welcome in advance.

Re: Stupid Movie

I concur.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: Stupid Movie

I agree with everything you just said yet for some reason I still like the movie lol silver bullet? Was Roy a werewolf? Max actually forgot roy hobbs? Wtf lol

Re: Stupid Movie


Max actually forgot roy hobbs? Wtf lol


Max was a beat writer which meant he met and spoke to many thousands of young ballplayers as well as many thousands of people in the game itself (like the Knights owner), or more interesting folk like the gambler Gus. Why would he remember Hobbs particularly after so many years? If you think he should have because Hobbs struck out a major leaguer who hadn't warmed up and was wearing a suit and tie 16 years earlier you're over estimating the achievement. The reason it was important to the story is that Harriet Bird witnessed young Hobbs defeating the legend she originally intended to kill.

When Hobbs blew that pitch past the catcher during practice it triggered Max's memory.



Is very bad to steal Jobu's rum. Is very bad.

Re: Stupid Movie

The problem is that people just don't pay attention. A movie cannot spell out every last detail like a book does or else it would be a six hour movie. You have to follow the movie closely so that when event happen you can put two and two together and understand. It is spoken about that other athletes were being killed by silver bullets. Hershey's character seems attached to the Whammer until she watches Hobbs strike him out on three pitches. Hobb's leaves town and then like a stalker she shows up at his hotel and calls Hobbs down to her room. She then proceeds to ask him if he's going to be the best of all time. When he says yes she shoots him and then jumps out the window.

Now, you have to be capable of using your brain to think for a minute. The woman is clearly crazy as she shoots Hobbs thinking she killed him and then takes her own life by jumping out the window. Then think about the other athletes that were shot and killed and conclude that she was the one who did it. Only she didn't kill herself until she finished off her last victim.

Re: Stupid Movie

Tl;dr

Why are you so crabby?

Re: Stupid Movie

Troll.
Top