There is already talk of a sequel - “43: This Time Its Personal”
Read More...Despite the film’s sleek feel, the basic life story with its tribulations and triumphs remain intact. It’s inspiring, especially as depicted by Boseman who has the swagger of a young Denzel Washington. Serious, stoic, pent up. If anything he suppresses his anger better than Washington, letting it ride under the surface, so when it erupts, it’s dramatic, forceful. The physicality of his performance—mimicking Robinson’s ...
Login to Join (0 members)
{/exp:tag:subscribed}Page rendered in 1.0850 seconds, 133 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. NJ in NY posted on September 21, 2012 at 07:33 AM # hit 0 | hit 0/Bart Scott
I dunno, all white people look alike to me.
Life moves on.
Although hilariously, after saying that, I will say that bat-flip seemed quite out of place. Any stories about the same that I was unaware of, historians?
The Hobbit, by the by, looks like it will kick ass. Topic drift away!
the cinematography looks good. nice period detail ...
but ...
this movie is going to be hollywood crap. they're going to turn a grim, ugly, totally gripping story into another phony uplifting bunch of pablum. every character in this movie is going to be a cartoon. if you've ever read 'bums' by peter golenbeck, you know that it was an extremely nuanced and complicated story. these bozos would never have the guts to film it with any verisimilitude.
its not so bad that they mangled moneyball, that isn't such an important story when all is said and done. but what happened with jackie robinson and baseball and the country at that time is one of the pivotal events in the nation's history.
sometimes i just hate what happens when moviemakers get hold of historical events.
Change "sometimes" to "usually" and I'm right there with you.
the video won't work for me so you are likely correct but guys did a form of bat flip if you will where they hit a long one and then toss the bat away like a kid shoving away a plate of 'yucky' food at the dinner table. joe adc8ck did that with a dismissive flair
- the baseball establishment would not have let jackie get away with it.
- the flip in the clip is pretty much the style you see now. i really think it would have been pretty inflammatory back in the day. ymmv.
Hell, if I were a pitcher, I'd brush a guy back for that today.
Don't listen to radio much these days, but from what I recall, whether radio/tv they never edit out drug references unless they're blatant/explicit.
If you can't "act like you've been there before, and will be there again" you shouldn't be playing in the bigs.
Why is throwing your equipment in anger an ejectable offense, but throwing it to show up the other team not?
Also, it's not like intimidating hitters doesn't produce actual in game value for the pitcher. If I were an MLB pitcher, I'd want every hitter thinking I was a crazed lunatic who might try and kill them at any time.
I don't really have a problem with throwing inside for intimidation or retaliation purposes, but I find it interesting that you find mild showboating to be terribly inappropriate, yet throwing at or near a batter's head is acceptable and prudent.
"Show up the other team" = offensive
acting like "a crazed lunatic who might try to kill them" = good idea
???
"Show up the other team" = offensive
acting like "a crazed lunatic who might try to kill them" = good idea
Brushing a guy back need not be aimed at the head. You can punish a guy for being an #######, w/o throwing at his head. I also don't think you should hit a guy just for hitting you hard.
I'm not saying I approve of head-hunting, just saying that it works. If you can get the reputation w/o actually endangering anybody, that's a huge benefit to a pitcher.
I was curious about Robinson's HBP data, so did a little looking...
In 1947, Robinson was plunked more by Pittsburgh than any other team - I'd expected the Ben Chapman Phillies.
I was surprised to see he only led the league in HBP once - with the lowest league-leading total for more than 30 years after.
His HBP rates were high, but not nearly as high as Minnie Minoso - or, in the NL, Solly Hemus.
Robinson did a lot of damage on the basepaths, obviously. But the very slow Campanella seems not to have been a beanball magnet - just 30 HBP in his career.
Robinson had a homer and an HBP in the same game 5 times:
8.8.48 (vs. CIN) - HBP in the 5th (stole second), homered in the 6th.
5.24.49 (vs. PIT) - homered in the first, homered in the third, HBP (1-1 count) in the fifth.
8.10.49 (vs. PHI) - HBP in the fourth (by Heintzelman's first pitch), game-winning homer with two out in the 9th (off Konstanty).
5.25.53 (vs. PHI) - HBP in the fourth (Drews' second pitch), 3-run homer off Konstanty in the 9th.
4.19.54 (vs. PHI) - HBP in the fourth (Miller's second pitch), homered off Konstanty in the 7th.
Chapman was fired after 1948, so whatever was happening in Philadelphia appears to be more about J-Rob's personal animus against Jim Konstanty than anything else.
(Yes, Robinson owned Konstanty: .483 / .571 / .931 over 35 PA, 4 homers.)
this movie is going to be hollywood crap. they're going to turn a grim, ugly, totally gripping story into another phony uplifting bunch of pablum. every character in this movie is going to be a cartoon.
In other words, what they did to the Ernie Davis story in "The Express," which despite a compelling performance by Dennis Quaid (as coach Ben Schwartzwalder) was forgettable. Ditto the Carla Gugino vehicle "The Mighty Macs" about the Immaculata basketball team.
Might not be as good as the original.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.