| Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
| WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=43656 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | JimmyReardon [ Sun Mar 07, 2010 9:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
Watching MLB Network and the Sox last night I was directed to vote at MLB.com for Best Baseball Movie ever. Choices: "Bull Durham", "Field of Dreams", "Major League" and "The Natural". I am mystified how "Bull" only gets 13% in 4th Fooking place!! UFB! Yeah, I get "Major League". I believe it will win. It's funny. But the first 5 minutes of "Bull Durham" puts it way ahead of the others. It's the Best baseball Movie Ever. Oh, well, at least Jared Mitchell looked good against the Dodgers. |
|
| Author: | FavreFan [ Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
It should be the Natural. Field of Dreams second. Bull Durham and Major League dont belong in contention with the first two. |
|
| Author: | sjboyd0137 [ Sun Mar 07, 2010 2:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
My order would be: 1. The Natural 2. Bull Durham 3. Field of Dreams 4. Major League |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Sun Mar 07, 2010 2:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
Wrong Section. |
|
| Author: | W_Z [ Sun Mar 07, 2010 9:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
FavreFan wrote: It should be the Natural. Field of Dreams second. Bull Durham and Major League dont belong in contention with the first two. "bull durham" is one of the most honest portrayals of baseball there is. "field of dreams" is a sappy lie of what baseball enthusiasts want. it's fantasy. yeah it's fun, it gets the baby boomers weepy eyed because it reminds them of the "greatness of baseball". but it's a fraud. "the natural" is pure hollywood garbage. for once on this board, i wholeheartedly agree with reardon. "durham" is brilliantly written and executed. it's a great film. |
|
| Author: | Elmhurst Steve [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
I would put THE ROOKIE (Dennis Quaid) ahead of Field of Dreams or The Natural. The story is so improbable, that if it were not based on a true story, people would say it was hokey. I thought Dennis Quaid did a pretty good job in it too. It looked like he could throw a bit, unlike Bull Durham's Tim Robbins. Robbins may be a good actor, but the only thing he could throw is a fit. He was supposed to be a flame throwing stud and I'll bet he couldn't throw 70 MPH if his life depended on it. Kevin Costner made up for it though. He was believable as a ballplayer. Nice swing and a pretty decent arm. |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
No baseball movie list is complete without Gary Busey as 'Chet Stedman'! |
|
| Author: | man of few opinions [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
|
|
|
| Author: | Elar [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
I don't get how Major League makes all these lists. It was okay, but that's it. Bull Durham is the clear winner. Costner was outstanding. Yeah, Robbins isn't exactly an athlete, but he looks like more of one than a ton of actual big league pitchers. |
|
| Author: | Jalapenos and More [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
The film adaptation of "The Natural" sucks. So does the novel even though the plot—and its protagonist, Roy Hobbs—follows a different trajectory and reaches a denouement greatly divergent from that in the film. The novel is darker, of course, but Malamud's story is so reliant upon allegory that the characters are flat and faded like daguerreotypes. If you've read Homer and/or any Arthurian tales, you've read "The Natural." I don't there's ever been a great baseball movie. Many have been entertaining. None have approached greatness. Except for "Mr. Baseball," as indicated above. And, of course, "Little Big League." |
|
| Author: | Krazy Ivan [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
Frank Coztansa wrote: No baseball movie list is complete without Gary Busey as 'Chet Stedman'! What a 'Have to'? |
|
| Author: | FavreFan [ Wed Mar 10, 2010 7:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: WTF? "Bull Durham" is in 4th place for Best Movie |
W_Z wrote: FavreFan wrote: It should be the Natural. Field of Dreams second. Bull Durham and Major League dont belong in contention with the first two. "bull durham" is one of the most honest portrayals of baseball there is. "field of dreams" is a sappy lie of what baseball enthusiasts want. it's fantasy. yeah it's fun, it gets the baby boomers weepy eyed because it reminds them of the "greatness of baseball". but it's a fraud. "the natural" is pure hollywood garbage. for once on this board, i wholeheartedly agree with reardon. "durham" is brilliantly written and executed. it's a great film. I dont know. You obviously know movies alot more than I do, but I cant agree on Durham. Sure, it's more of a baseball movie than the first two, but overall it kinda sucks as a movie IMO. I'm not nearly as cynical about Field of Dreams as you are either. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|