MovieChat Forums > Pitch (2016) Discussion > Too much Baseball Jargon.

Too much Baseball Jargon.


Too much Baseball Jargon in the last episode.

Livan takes the six by two to make a home back flip. Then Ginny comes in sideways to pitch the ump to the six finger cutter. Mike Lwason now in the bullpen pulls two drops and a fast one before he homeruns in the seventh inning and hit the groundball to the bases-loaded jam.

?!

reply

wow...

reply

Livan takes the six by two to make a home back flip. Then Ginny comes in sideways to pitch the ump to the six finger cutter. Mike Lwason now in the bullpen pulls two drops and a fast one before he homeruns in the seventh inning and hit the groundball to the bases-loaded jam.

I'm an avid baseball fan, and this is complete gibberish. Did someone actually say this on the show?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU ... WILL ... ATONE!

reply

Did someone actually say this on the show?


No. The OP is exaggerating to prove the point that there is too much baseball jargon on a show about baseball. I guess they should dumb it down and say things like "The guy in the grassy area caught the ball and threw it to the guy with all of the funny padding stuff and he touched the guy from the other team who fell on the ground. I guess he was 'out' or something because he was upset. Well, maybe he should have started running sooner; he didn't even take off until the first guy caught the ball! What an idiot!"

reply

Maybe he was responding sarcastically to someone who was complaining about the jargon?

Again, it's difficult to know when someone is being sarcastic if you don't know the speaker.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU ... WILL ... ATONE!

reply

No. The OP is exaggerating to prove the point that there is too much baseball jargon on a show about baseball.

Exactly that, but not...
I guess they should dumb it down and say things like "The guy in the grassy area caught the ball...

...that.

We see all kind of shows that the professions they revolved around have, obviously, technical terms and technical thinking.
You name it. Police procedurals, about lawyers and the judicial system, about the stock market, medical, political, technological and of course the Hacking that is now in almost every show.

I'm sure if you get to hear 2 professionals of any kind to talk to each other you might not understand what are they saying. Not even if the thing that supposedly happens is good or bad!
Also I'm sure that they have many abbreviations like TPA, RMA, BOLS and a special way to say even the most common words like the "Vic" instead of the "Victim".

It is for the best interest of the writers to have a balanced script that most people will understand.

Imagine a Hacker for instance that says: "I will put a virus into their computer to track their activity."
Hum! OK! Might be not technically that accurate, but the audience gets it and can follow what is happening.
If the writers were more thorough or precise the same hacker could say:
"The TCP/IP is using version IPv4 but the ARM of the GPU is set to 3.4MHz so if I tunnel the header checksum and reversing the packets, I might be able to implement tcp stack on network drivers."
What? :-(

Most of the shows and movies don't make that mistake. Some of them do.
If you want the audience to have any emotional reaction to what you writing, they need to understand some of that and not to feel estranged.

The solution it's not to "dumb it" down or overexplained it. That could be annoying for other viewers and must be done only if it is necessary and serves the plot.
What to do then? It's up to the writers to balance it.
We have seen hundreds of movies with airplanes, submarines, trials, things we don't know anything about, without being overwhelmed from the jargon.


reply

Hi Lord! Got your pm.
Generally I agree if it is too much.
I watched the latest episode of "Secret and Lies" and two of characters said:

- He opened a $12 million line of credit and leveraged it against an S.E.G. fund.
- That's fraud.
- I know, I know. Our idiot brother committed a felony buying houses.

I don't even know what S.E.G. is! It is clear what he did was a crime though.
In that sense I agree with you. But I disagree on using something only as a plot device without any credibility. I hate the "hackers" who can penetrate ANY system, camera or government agency and give a "magical: solution to otherwise impossible tasks

Have you read my review on "Pure Genius"? I really hate the mambo-jumbo medicine which is there only to produce cheap sentiments.




Cosmos hates Google.

reply

I get what you're saying now. I guess it's a difficult balance. If they make it too simple, lifelong baseball fans like me would be unhappy. If they make it too complicated, they might miss an opportunity to draw in new fans. I see the same thing with military movies. I served in the Navy for 24 years, so I nit-pick the crap out of those movies. If I really think about it, though, they have to appeal to a civilian audience to be successful.

reply

No UncleRob there's no hint of sarcasm in the post and being that it's a new topic it's not replying. With that said I'm a baseball fan and original post isn't anywhere close to anything said in the show or anyone would say in real life. The baseball talk on the show is kept very minimal and is very clear and obvious.

reply

Okay!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU ... WILL ... ATONE!

reply

Well it's a show about a baseball player, What were you expecting ?? That's like saying Blu Bloods had to much cop talk in it. Or Bones had to much medical talk in it !!

reply

The only time they used too much baseball jargon (but it was on purpose) was when Mike was doing the All Star Gait his first me as a guest commentator for ESPN. I've been a fan for over 40 years and some of the stuff Mike said the first time around went right by me.

One thing they missed was when Levon it his first major league homer in his first at bat. Dick Enberg said it was the 6th Inning when he had his first at bat. Not possible!!! He would've been batting 4,5, or 6 and hit it in the 2nd inning. The only way it's technically possible is if Levon walked in his first 2 at bats. But Dick Enberg specifically said that it was his first major league at bat. They should've checked that one a bit closer.

reply