The cast of The Sandlot has reunited 25 years after the movie was released for an epically nostalgic photo.
If you were a kid in the ’90s you more than likely watched The Sandlot repeatedly as, to this day, it remains a classic family sports film.
Videos by PopCulture.com
The whole gang — sans Mike Vitar, Benny “The Jet” Rodriguez — reunited on the TODAY Show and spoke about what life is like for them now.
“It’s been crazy,” said Marty York, who played Alan “Yeah-Yeah” McClennan. “I mean, it definitely gets you in places for free. I can’t walk through a Las Vegas casino without someone yelling ‘Yeah-Yeah!’ “
Patrick Renna, who played Hamilton “Ham” Porter, joked about recently screening the film for his own son, saying, “I showed (my son) the movie for the first time, and … well, he’s really big on Moana.”
The Sandlot debuted in theaters on April 7, 1993, making 2018 the 25th anniversary of the first time audiences were brought to tears-of-laughter by Smalls, Benny, Ham, and the rest of the gang.
“The film was made with the same amount of love that people have for it, and it was the greatest summer of our lives,” said David Mickey Evans, The Sandlot’s director, writer and narrator.
When it premiered, the film earned a box office revenue of over $30 million on a budget of only $7 million.
Iconic film critic Roger Ebert once described how enthralling The Sandlot is by saying, “There was a moment in the film when Rodriguez hit a line drive directly at the pitcher’s mound, and I ducked and held up my mitt, and then I realized I didn’t have a mitt, and it was then I also realized how completely this movie had seduced me with its memories of what really matters when you are 12.”
Interestingly, The Sandlot was not without it’s minor controversies, as back in 1998 a defamation lawsuit was brought against 20th Century Fox and the film’s producers.
The suit was filed by Michael Polydoros, who claimed to have gone to school with Evans and alleged that the character of Michael “Squints” Palledorous was based on him.
Polydoros sought damages, claiming that the film character “was derogatory and caused him shame and humiliation.” At trial, the court found in favor of the filmmakers, a finding that was later affirmed by the California Court of Appeal.
An appeal request was brought to The Supreme Court of California, and was initially accepted, but eventually dismissed in favor of reinstating the Court of Appeal’s decision in favor of the producers.
