Secretariat: The Movie, Whoa!

[GenuineRisk]

Saw it last night. Almost so bad it's good, but not quite. Thanks for the budget numbers, Merlinsky; that explains why it looked so bad. It was either shot on a combination of film and video or entirely on video and then transferred to film (poorly). Also explains why there were so many scenes of people sitting around talking about things instead of showing those things happening. I don't think there was a single scene of Malkovich's character actually training a horse.

And the dialogue is really clunky. They should give Diane Lane an honorary Oscar just for all the as God is my witness I'll never be hungry again speeches she had to deliver.

The best part was the two people sitting behind us.
Diane Lane: "Daddy, this is Big Red."
Lady Behind Us: "I THOUGHT HIS NAME WAS SECRETARIAT."

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

The best part was the two people sitting behind us.
Diane Lane: "Daddy, this is Big Red."
Lady Behind Us: "I THOUGHT HIS NAME WAS SECRETARIAT."

May God inspire a woman like that to bet on racehorses. Talk about dumb money.

Yeah I did a double take when I realized the budget was so different. Another point about the shooting of the movie, I heard the director said they tried to shoot the racing with better cameras, but it looked lousy so they did it with cheap $800 cameras and it supposedly looked better. No idea how bad it must've been to not go with the original footage.

The Seabiscuit book was such a phenomenon. People who didn't normally follow the sport got interested in the film because the book was big. There's another book about a horse being adapted for the screen. Steven Spielberg's doing a film based on the novel War Horse. http://www.filmofilia.com/2010/05/06...rgs-war-horse/

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

May God inspire a woman like that to bet on racehorses. Talk about dumb money.

Yeah I did a double take when I realized the budget was so different. Another point about the shooting of the movie, I heard the director said they tried to shoot the racing with better cameras, but it looked lousy so they did it with cheap $800 cameras and it supposedly looked better. No idea how bad it must've been to not go with the original footage.

The Seabiscuit book was such a phenomenon. People who didn't normally follow the sport got interested in the film because the book was big. There's another book about a horse being adapted for the screen. Steven Spielberg's doing a film based on the novel War Horse. http://www.filmofilia.com/2010/05/06...rgs-war-horse/

I also think that people embraced Seabiscuit and Red Pollard (for that matter) because of their underdog status/story. It was a REAL likeable story that was easy to root for. There was a true high created for the end of the movie (even though they ruined it by having him come from like 20 lengths out to win).
I really believe that people who don't follow the sport can't appreciate how good Secretariat was. And from what I'm hearing the rest of the storyline around the movie sounds ficitional. So it just sounds like a tough movie to really embrace. I guess they leave the theater thinking that Big Red saved the farm, which would really detract how good he was on the track. That's bad for the sport. I would almost rather have people watch the ESPN sports century on Secretariat. I thought that was a great piece that really hit the spot on how good he was and what he really meant to Penny Chennery. Obviously if you a fan of the sport, the Bill Nack book is a must.

I still plan on seeing it, but I am really not expecting much.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I also think that people embraced Seabiscuit and Red Pollard (for that matter) because of their underdog status/story. It was a REAL likeable story that was easy to root for. There was a true high created for the end of the movie (even though they ruined it by having him come from like 20 lengths out to win).
I really believe that people who don't follow the sport can't appreciate how good Secretariat was. And from what I'm hearing the rest of the storyline around the movie sounds ficitional. So it just sounds like a tough movie to really embrace. I guess they leave the theater thinking that Big Red saved the farm, which would really detract how good he was on the track. That's bad for the sport. I would almost rather have people watch the ESPN sports century on Secretariat. I thought that was a great piece that really hit the spot on how good he was and what he really meant to Penny Chennery. Obviously if you a fan of the sport, the Bill Nack book is a must.

I still plan on seeing it, but I am really not expecting much.

If that is the case, they must not tell the moviegoers that Meadow Farm/Stable won the 1972 Derby with Riva Ridge, or it would make it difficult to put the farm in dire straits so Secretariat could come along and save it.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

If that is the case, they must not tell the moviegoers that Meadow Farm/Stable won the 1972 Derby with Riva Ridge, or it would make it difficult to put the farm in dire straits so Secretariat could come along and save it.

From what I understand there is absolutely no mention of Riva Ridge in the entire movie.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

From what I understand there is absolutely no mention of Riva Ridge in the entire movie.

Since the producer, or writer, or whomever it was, said that Secretariat would have won the triple crown again had he not been retired as a 3yo, I doubt they even have heard of Riva Ridge.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Since the producer, or writer, or whomever it was, said that Secretariat would have won the triple crown again had he not been retired as a 3yo, I doubt they even have heard of Riva Ridge.

Allegedly that was a misquote. It was really something about being a successful 4yo in the big races for older horses. Of course, that could've just been arse covering, but I'll let them go with that story.

[ddthetide]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

From what I understand there is absolutely no mention of Riva Ridge in the entire movie.

we just came from the movie. there is NO mention of RR at all. 1972 starts with Secretariat's first race in july at aqueduct. the movie is really about Ms. Chenery.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by ddthetide

we just came from the movie. there is NO mention of RR at all. 1972 starts with Secretariat's first race in july at aqueduct. the movie is really about Ms. Chenery.

Sorry it was news to you that there was no Riva mention. It would be harder for me to walk in not knowing that, but we heard about it awhile back during the making of the movie (maybe Haskin or someone on ATR mentioned it) and I had a chance to get past my disappointment. There's not enough drama for a movie about a superhorse if Riva saves the day. The only real underdog they can create is 'housewife trying to save the farm.' It's what I was always afraid of when I thought someone should do a film about Secretariat. Getting over that hurdle is hard.

I haven't been able to go yet, planning to this week.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Saw it last night. Almost so bad it's good, but not quite. Thanks for the budget numbers, Merlinsky; that explains why it looked so bad. It was either shot on a combination of film and video or entirely on video and then transferred to film (poorly). Also explains why there were so many scenes of people sitting around talking about things instead of showing those things happening. I don't think there was a single scene of Malkovich's character actually training a horse.

And the dialogue is really clunky. They should give Diane Lane an honorary Oscar just for all the as God is my witness I'll never be hungry again speeches she had to deliver.

The best part was the two people sitting behind us.
Diane Lane: "Daddy, this is Big Red."
Lady Behind Us: "I THOUGHT HIS NAME WAS SECRETARIAT."

Disney has cut costs for years. Even their G rated flicks look cheap these days.

[Arletta]

I think I have read enough to know I will wait for it to come out on DVD.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Disney has cut costs for years. Even their G rated flicks look cheap these days.

Very true. Though I still don't understand why they couldn't have gotten a better screenplay. Writers are cheap. I feel like it's giving a big middle finger to the family-friendly crowd- hey, whatever with the coherent storyline and believable dialogue they'll watch anything as long as there's no swearin' and no nekkid people.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Saw it last night. Almost so bad it's good, but not quite. Thanks for the budget numbers, Merlinsky; that explains why it looked so bad. It was either shot on a combination of film and video or entirely on video and then transferred to film (poorly). Also explains why there were so many scenes of people sitting around talking about things instead of showing those things happening. I don't think there was a single scene of Malkovich's character actually training a horse.

And the dialogue is really clunky. They should give Diane Lane an honorary Oscar just for all the as God is my witness I'll never be hungry again speeches she had to deliver.

The best part was the two people sitting behind us.
Diane Lane: "Daddy, this is Big Red."
Lady Behind Us: "I THOUGHT HIS NAME WAS SECRETARIAT."

Agree with everything you say.

Malkovich must be a big racing fan to take that role.

It was really hollow. That is the best word I can think of to describe this film. The fact that people are going is proving that either our movie choices are limited or there is a latent interest in racing.

[chucklestheclown]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Malkovich must be a big racing fan to take that role.

He said he was a Secretariat fan. Latent interest? Cool concept.

[kelster]

We saw the movie last night we enjoyed it!!!

[Arletta]

Originally Posted by kelster

We saw the movie last night we enjoyed it!!!

I saw it as well..... I thought it was pretty lame..cheesy... Theater only had about 6 people in it too...