A based-on-fact story of Jimmy Piersall, a major league player of the 1950s who suffered what looks like a major depression with some paranoid ideas. Not much could be done with major league mental illnesses at the time, before the French accidentally discovered anti-psychotic meds. The movie ends, as all such movies do whenever possible, on an up-beat note with Piersall (Tony Perkins) returning to the Red Sox after defeating his demons.I have no idea how closely the movie sticks to the real facts of Piersall's life, but it certainly hews close to the formula line. Basically, everything is blamed on Piersall's father (Karl Malden), who pushed the kid too hard, brutally sometimes, to excel. Nothing would do but that Piersall not only play for the Sox but that he play the OUTFIELD. Shortstop wasn't good enough. Poor kid. While still in the minors, in Scranton, he brags to his pop that he's the third highest hitter in the league. Malden smiles and says, "Well, that's not first." Think about that, next time your kid comes home with a B plus on his report card. You want to drive him nuts? I don't doubt that Piersall's father was pushy about his son's training and career. For all we know there may be as many sports fathers as there are stage mothers. But it seems a bit unfair to make him the sole heavy. It's not easy to drive someone crazy, not as easy as it seems in the movies anyway. It helps a lot, especially with major affective disorders, if you bring something genetic to the party, as numerous studies have shown. Not that genetics explains everything, because one identical twin may "get it" while the other doesn't.Anyway, the movie isn't very satisfying, as a movie. The director, Robert Mulligan, has done better work elsewhere. And Tony Perkins gives a by-the-numbers performance as a madman, with his facial muscles trembling and his eyes bulging. How primitive can you get? He was a much better (if entirely different) kind of psychotic in "Psycho." An improved script might have helped him. Malden is okay as the well-meaning but destructive father whom Perkins finally tells off at the cathartic climax. Perkins' wife's role is underwritten and doesn't contribute much as Malden's potential rival.It would have been nice too if we'd seen a little more about baseball, the sport and the career ladder, and less of the formulaic material on having a breakdown. At least your performance on the baseball diamond is something you can do something about. In the grip of mental illness like Piersall's, you're practically helpless, and that's not too dramatic.

This is one of a myriad sporting biopics made by Hollywood around this time – and whose appeal didn't really travel to other countries because the sport involved (or, for that matter, the star player whose life story we're supposed to be viewing) is only appreciated by Americans: in this case, Jim Piersall and baseball. Anyway, while not exactly better than similar biopics, the film is sufficiently different (and therefore interesting) in view of its inherent psychological elements dealing as it does with Piersall's mental breakdown.The pre-requisite Method performances ensure a rather melodramatic approach and I'm quite surprised how Anthony Perkins' excellent central performance did not win him any accolades, whereas director Mulligan was nominated for the Directors' Guild Award for his work here when, in hindsight, I cannot help thinking how much better the film would have been in the hands of, say, Elia Kazan or Nicholas Ray. His handling is competent but predictable – down to the inspirational final shot; as for the the scenes at the mental institution, these don't garner as much power as they ought to, since it's made obvious from the start that Piersall's problem lies in his troubled relationship with his bullying father (Karl Malden). Even so, Elmer Bernstein's fine score is a definite asset to the film.

I saw this movie again, on a friend's VHS tape, for the first time in a long, long time. This formed the following question in my mind. What do Gary Cooper, Dan Dailey, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Stewart have in common? Two things. First, all were good-looking, virile screen presences, and all appeared in some outstanding movies and gave outstanding performances. Second, all starred in baseball movies, portraying prominent real-life baseball stars, and none of them exhibited the least bit of capability to throw or catch a baseball, or swing a bat. If any of them had attended your family picnic, not one of these guys (except for his celebrity) would have been better than a late-round choice in a choose-up softball game - even including a group with your fat Uncle Al, elderly Aunt Edna, etc.On the other hand, Dennis Quaid, Kevin Costner, and some others - particularly Robert Redford - have appeared in baseball movies and given performances which make them appear capable of leaving the set and suiting-up with the Dodgers, Yankees, or another major.However, Perkins makes Cooper, Reagan, Dailey and Stewart all look like Albert Pujols or Pedro Martinez. If you gave a ball and gloves, say, to two Bulgarian 10-year-old girls, who had never seen either, they could appear more adept at playing catch than Perkins and Karl Malden did in this flick.I lived in Chicago some years ago, when Harry Caray announced the White Sox games in old Comiskey Park, with Jimmy Piersall as his sidekick and color man. Piersall was thoroughly interesting and engaging in this position, and entertainingly outspoken, and still occasionally a bit "over the edge." While not an all-time super star, he was an excellent player, and the latter portions of this film were a large part of the picture's focus, displaying with the severe problems he had, and subsequently overcame.But another aspect is that displaying his normal film persona, Perkins was probably the one actor who could display even more neurotic tendencies, angst, and hyper/outrageous actions, than Piersall did in his real-life trials.Still a good story, and even more interesting now as something of a "period piece," both in terms of the time period shown and the film style when made.(This is a film where they should have used actual footage, or a stand-in at long range, whenever possible, instead of displaying Perkins' baseball ineptitude.)p.s. If Tony Perkins had attended the "family picnic," for the softball game, would have been best to let him perhaps keep score and make certain nobody tripped over the bats.

I don't find movies about illnesses whether they are physical or mental, real or fictitious, to be entertaining, maybe informative or educational, so I am approaching my criticism of this movie from the baseball aspect. Jimmy Piersall was quite a character. He overcame a mental breakdown to become one of the greatest outfielders in baseball history. He was a real crowd pleaser with his fielding and antics, but his hitting left a lot to be desired. He just about ruined his arm showing off how far and hard he could throw the ball. When he hit his 100th homerun, he ran the bases backwards. Living near Boston, I saw him play ball on many occasions and I met him in person at a First National Supermarket opening in Lawrence, Mass. He signed a baseball and a photograph of himself for me, but I had to buy two bags of potato chips (Cains, I think it was) beforehand. As a kid, I could barely afford it, but more than fifty years later, I still have the ball and photo. What a thrill it was! I remember him as being handsome and big and strong, not a skinny guy like Anthony Perkins. As far as the movie goes, it was good, but not very accurate. Did you notice the obvious padding to Perkin's shoulders to make him look bulky? He looked like he never played baseball in real life, he was so awkward. (Gary Cooper as Lou Gehrig and William Bendix as Babe Ruth also looked pretty bad in their baseball movies). Did you notice that the stock footage was of Fenway Park but whenever Perkins was playing they showed some minor league park? Just look at the outfield background, that's not Fenway. What really bothers me is that they only mention one real life Red Sox person, Joe Cronin, and that was wrong, it should have been Pinky Higgins. What happened to Ted Williams, Jackie Jensen (my all time favorite Red Sox player), Dom Dimaggio, Bobby Doerr, Johnny Pesky, and a bunch of others who played on the team with Piersall? Ted's career was actually extended because Piersall was so good as a fielder that he used to run from center to left to catch flyballs so that Williams didn't have to tire himself out trying to get to them. Piersall was eventually traded to another team, so all his euphoria about playing for the Bosox didn't last. Still with all its' faults and disappointments, this movie is well worth watching, especially for baseball fans.