Ruffian Movie is on

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by Riot

I thought it a typically marvelous Sam Shepard performance, showing how much Whitely loved this horse and the sport.

Whoever played Mike Bell was good - and the guy who plays Minnor the groom - hey, he was Seabiscuits groom, too! (seems this actor has found a niche role)

Yeah, it was technically amaterish regarding the racing and barn scenes, the vet hospital scenes, etc; and the horses they used were quite distracting as they were a bit ... common (they showed a closeup of "Ruffians" leg, the hairy horse leg had skin eruptions! <g> And showing the vet talking to Nack when he just walks up and asks about Ruffian - at the end of her 2-year-old year: "Yes, hairline fracture" - I about died!)

The horses were distracting to me, as TB's fit and on the muscle are just incredibly beautiful and awesomely powerful, people seeing them up close in a paddock for the first time are always amazed ... but I know I'm a hard audience to please in that respect.

I didn't think the closeup of a cannon bone collapsing through into the dirt of the track was needed, but they didn't dwell on it, and I think for the general public watching, having to know how irreversibly severely this filly was injured, it served it's brief, one-second purpose.

They avoided alot of the horribleness of that night - her shock, her lack of stabilization during surgery, the truely rough way she awoke from anesthesia and what happened then that caused her euthanasia, etc.

It was not sensationalized in the least. Very respectful to the filly and her connections.

I thought the nicest part of the film was at the end under closing credits, they showed film of the real Ruffian, winning her races, getting bathed, etc. That was lovely.

Horse racing needs every bit of "open" exposure it can get. I think this helped.

Nice post. I'm certain the movie had more than redeeming qualities. I just didn't have the nads to watch it.

I saw the match race live on TV, and I read the book.

That was more than enough for me to handle for this lifetime.

[paisjpq]

I thought it was pretty bad overall...Sam Shepard was great (but really when isn't he)...like Riot the horses bothered me, they all had kind of rough coats and just didn't look the part...the CSI-style graphic depiction of her leg snapping was over the top IMO, but perhaps Riot is right in that it paints a clearer picture to the general public....who knows, I just know that I didn't need to see it.
but I also think that racing needs any and all coverage it can get and I hope millions watched.

I DID love all the old newsreel footage of the real Ruffian that they showed at the end...that was great.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by justindew

Who is playing the jockey?

A rider from Penn National. Diaz?

Also, Ruffian was "played" by 5 geldings, according to a newspaper article I read yesterday morning.

--Dunbar

Originally Posted by TheSpyder

I, for one, thought the movie was great. This life holds many good things as well as bad. Ruffian was both to the extreme and having lived those moments when it happened and now watching the movie, I know why I love horse racing so much. I just love the animals and the game, and everthing that goes into it. Horse racing is life, every part of it.

i thought the movie was good, but what i dont understand about these horse racing movies, be it seabicuit,phar lap, or ruffian is why they dont hire some people that know what happens with the true handleing of these horses to tell them how to make it realistic. their were 15 things that were showed in that movie that isnt how its actually done, they are things that the general public wouldnt have a clue about, but why not make the movie an accurate portrayal? i dont think the cost would be anymore, it is just a lack of the producers wanting to pay attention to detail.

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Like you said, the general public has no clue, so what's the point? And it would cost more, which is why they don't do it. It's all about money.

why would it cost more to put the shank on the halter the right way? why would it cost more to walk the horse the way they really get walked? and just another small doesnt really matter sort of thing...in the very 1st scene of the movie a racing form was shown laying on a table with the PPs opened to a certain page, the horse that was on the PPs shown was take me out,,,he was born in 1988,,,it is just a pet peeve of mine, i realize it was a low budget movie but.....for some reason as i watch i pick it apart in my mind.....how did ya like when they showed ruffians gallops and breezes suposedly taking place in the mornings at belmont park? she was the only horse on the entire track, when in reality the race track is like grand central station in the morning, when the track is open for training thier are like 100 horses out there from the time it opens till it closes each morning. but my favorite all time blunder in a horse racing movie was in phar lap,,he is regarded as the best race horse in the world.....the groom and his girlfriend take him on a picnic and while they are eating they turn him loose and let him run through the woods,,,wonder if pletcher will let the groom take rags to riches to the park today and let her loose to run freely like she is in nature?
its only a movie and like i said its just my pet peeve.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by slewpy

why would it cost more to put the shank on the halter the right way? why would it cost more to walk the horse the way they really get walked? and just another small doesnt really matter sort of thing...in the very 1st scene of the movie a racing form was shown laying on a table with the PPs opened to a certain page, the horse that was on the PPs shown was take me out,,,he was born in 1988,,,it is just a pet peeve of mine, i realize it was a low budget movie but.....for some reason as i watch i pick it apart in my mind.....how did ya like when they showed ruffians gallops and breezes suposedly taking place in the mornings at belmont park? she was the only horse on the entire track, when in reality the race track is like grand central station in the morning, when the track is open for training thier are like 100 horses out there from the time it opens till it closes each morning. but my favorite all time blunder in a horse racing movie was in phar lap,,he is regarded as the best race horse in the world.....the groom and his girlfriend take him on a picnic and while they are eating they turn him loose and let him run through the woods,,,wonder if pletcher will let the groom take rags to riches to the park today and let her loose to run freely like she is in nature?
its only a movie and like i said its just my pet peeve.

you remind me of .....ME. it's why i don't watch many movies--always seem to know what's going to happen, and the incorrect details slay me. i don't enjoy them.
gimme a good book any day!

[Downthestretch55]

I liked it. On a day when a nice filly wins the Belmont, and Ruffian remains buried there...well, maybe the movie makes some fans.
I also like the angle of people actually having "feelings" for a horse, beyond their wallets.
On a 1-10, I give it a 7.

Originally Posted by Danzig

you remind me of .....ME. it's why i don't watch many movies--always seem to know what's going to happen, and the incorrect details slay me. i don't enjoy them.
gimme a good book any day!

some of it was painfully blatant, the trainer is leading ruffian into her stall he is walking about 3 feet in front of her with no chain over her nose and he is walking on the wrong side of the horse, and the horse that was used in that scene was not a horse in any kind of training much less race training, the horse was about 14 hands with a big old belly and was walking behind him with the head way down and the trainer wasnt even looking at the horse, which in real life is about as dangerous a thing that you could do,,,the other thing that i noticed before each race she was suppossed to run the trainer ponied her into the paddock, go to the paddock at any track and they arent leading the horse into the paddock with a pony. again this is just me,,i thought seabscuit was one of the worst movies ive ever seen about equal with those japaneze movies where they speak english

[Danzig]

i was in the minority about seabiscuit. i thought they took a very good book, and turned it into typical hollywood garbage. the filming was good, the race scenes, but the actual writing, and the whole good vs evil crap...and then turning war admiral into some huge black monster of a horse, that was laughable.

[GenuineRisk]

You and I can be in the minority together about "Seabiscuit," Danzig. I loved the book and disliked the movie (and I really tried to like it). It's not the inaccuracies for me (I'm still watching the sucky "The Tudors," somehow) so much as the g*dd*mned narration. I hate narration in movies (with a few exceptions so don't y'all start sending me examples of excellent movies using narration because yes, I know there are some). In my opinion, film is a visual medium and if you can't tell the story purely through the pictures and the action then you're not telling it well.

As for "Ruffian"- I thought it was all right for what it was, but the story was weak. It's a story that doesn't have an inherent dramatic arc (whatever else one thinks about Ruffian, a story about a perfect filly who breaks down in her last race and is destroyed doesn't really have a dramatic arc from a storytelling point of view, while Seabiscuit's, for comparison, had more ups and downs than a rollercoaster, which is good for drama) All of the characters were essentially at the same place at the end of the film as they were in the beginning (the only way we knew it had permanently affected Nack's love affair with the track was through... yes, the g*dd*mn narration) and no one else was any different at the end. So, someone unfamiliar with Ruffian is left saying, "So what? Why bother to tell the story?"

I think I would tell my non-racing friends that the first two-thirds are pretty slow and the last third is incredibly sad.

[Stall Mucker]

I thought the movie was OK. More, I thought Bill Nack played to big a part and I don't remember him crossing the track before the race was over.
That aside, I was at Saratoga to see her and all I can report is that I never saw such a STUNNING Filly. Glad to be there. I dream for the day to see another.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

You and I can be in the minority together about "Seabiscuit," Danzig. I loved the book and disliked the movie (and I really tried to like it). It's not the inaccuracies for me (I'm still watching the sucky "The Tudors," somehow) so much as the g*dd*mned narration. I hate narration in movies (with a few exceptions so don't y'all start sending me examples of excellent movies using narration because yes, I know there are some). In my opinion, film is a visual medium and if you can't tell the story purely through the pictures and the action then you're not telling it well.

As for "Ruffian"- I thought it was all right for what it was, but the story was weak. It's a story that doesn't have an inherent dramatic arc (whatever else one thinks about Ruffian, a story about a perfect filly who breaks down in her last race and is destroyed doesn't really have a dramatic arc from a storytelling point of view, while Seabiscuit's, for comparison, had more ups and downs than a rollercoaster, which is good for drama) All of the characters were essentially at the same place at the end of the film as they were in the beginning (the only way we knew it had permanently affected Nack's love affair with the track was through... yes, the g*dd*mn narration) and no one else was any different at the end. So, someone unfamiliar with Ruffian is left saying, "So what? Why bother to tell the story?"

I think I would tell my non-racing friends that the first two-thirds are pretty slow and the last third is incredibly sad.

wanna be my friend? cause your smart

[quote=Danzig]i was in the minority about seabiscuit. i thought they took a very good book, and turned it into typical hollywood garbage. the filming was good, the race scenes, but the actual writing, and the whole good vs evil crap...and then turning war admiral into some huge black monster of a horse, that was laughable.[/QUOT bet on vaca city flyer next out at hollywood

[Sightseek]

While I am an enormous fan of the pint-sized Jazil...don't you think they should have picked a racing scene for the cover of the DVD that was fairly anonomous and occured like 20 something years ago?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:RuffianDVD.jpg

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

While I am an enormous fan of the pint-sized Jazil...don't you think they should have picked a racing scene for the cover of the DVD that was fairly anonomous and occured like 20 something years ago

It obvious what they were trying to do with that cover....

Everyone knows that the two most tragic events in the history of the Belmont Spring meet are Ruffian's breakdown, and that bum Jazil winning the Belmont.

I believe ESPN added bonus coverage of the '06 Belmont Stakes after the end of the movie. I guess their reasoning was that if seeing Ruffian break down doesn't leave you feeling fully depressed....watching Jazil sure will.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

It obvious what they were trying to do with that cover....

Everyone knows that the two most tragic events in the history of the Belmont Spring meet are Ruffian's breakdown, and that bum Jazil winning the Belmont.

I believe ESPN added bonus coverage of the '06 Belmont Stakes after the end of the movie. I guess their reasoning was that if seeing Ruffian break down doesn't leave you feeling fully depressed....watching Jazil sure will.

I'm going to kick your arse.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Stop turning me on.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Stop turning me on.

ror!