Secretariat movie, a dissapointment - Sorry but thats the way I feel

[JGHIRETIRE]

I saw it this weekend as well. I totally agree with Mightymite.
The horse that portrayed Secretariat looked very much like him but seriously lacked the charisma that the real Secretariat had. Non horsey people really don’t understand the big deal of not having had a TC winner for 25 years. I totally agree about Seabiscuit as well. However, there was absolutely nothing like the rags to riches story in Secretariat.
I still liked the movie because it was a horse movie.

[QUOTE=mighty mite;5164685]
I saw his races on TV at the time he actually ran them. I’d been waiting since 1960 for a triple crown winner so it was HUGE for me. The hype leading up to the Belmont was incredible. I got nothing like that from the movie. Nothing. I did like the movie but it was mostly centered on Penny. Not the horse. They so did not capture the feeling of the country and the character of Secretariat. Totally missed the boat on that one. At least in Seabiscuit I felt like I got to know the horse. I think they did a much better job of letting us get to know each character because they were all very important pieces to the puzzle.

I still think that Secretariat was not shown to the public the way we knew him back then and I think that is a real shame.[/QUOTE]

[moonriverfarm]

It was a very uplifting movie, and as an owner of several ex-racehorses, I just wanted to come home and ride afterward

[Calamber]

[QUOTE=KellyS;5164678]
I haven’t read through all the posts, but just wanted to say that I went to see this movie with my mom and dad this past weekend.

They, as non horse people, loved it. As did the rest of the audience that clapped at the end. And that is what these types of movies are about, in my mind…not having every detail perfect and making nit picking horse people happy, but giving people who aren’t horse people a view into our world and why we love horses so much.

I believe everyone walked out of that theater Saturday with an understanding of how wonderful horses are, and how they can inspire people. I work in the “real world” where most people haven’t even met a horse…and don’t understand the connection I have with my horses. But that movie made even my parents want to walk out into the barn when we got home and stroke my “boys” necks. It made them “get” why I love horses so much.

Just watching that moment in the movie where Diane Lane strokes Secretariat’s ears and forelock gave me goosebumps…that’s something I do everyday with Rally…and it just makes me feel at peace. So there were some really “real” horse moments in that movie.

I guess I just don’t get the diatribes about how disappointing this movie was…try looking at it for what it is…entertainment. Don’t like it, well, the world’s not coming to an end.

For me, it was a chance to share my love of horses with my family and enjoy watching those around me understand why horses are so amazing.[/QUOTE]

So to be “entertained”, we the people have to suspend the truth, believe that someone as intelligent as Penny Chenery was and is would “stroke the ears and face” of a racing stallion, and go home and pet the nosies of the horsies and we just have a group hug and all is happy talking. Okay, I guess it must be okey, dokey that a horse would be on the cover of 4 major magazines while 50,000 young Americans were dying in a “police action”, so I guess today, eveyone can just feel all warm and cuddly about this while all hell is raging in the economy, people’s lives are completely disrupted and there is much more pain to come, but hey, who is thinking about that. Not the president who likes to go to sporting events, watch ESPN non stop and play basketball with the stars because he likes to be “entertained” nor the people who roar and clap for the “sports heroes” of the day, all while Rome burns. Now at least I know why the money was spent on this so called portrayal.

[danceronice]

Calamber, you read way too much into it. (And we’ll set aside how many people died where and the relative numerical insignificance of any military action deaths since 1945 as it’s really not relevant to Secretariat.) I’m starting to think the biggest problem is, as someone inadvertently pointed out, it’s too soon for this film. There’s too many people alive to remember having been emotionally tied up in the situation.

As for the horses (plural) playing Secretariat not having his charisma, I’ll take people’s word that he had it himself as I wasn’t there, but what can you expect? They’re just horses. They’re not actors. The single most important thing about them (after having the temperament to stand there and put up with the movie-making process without hurting anyone) was that they physically looked like him. I can think of exactly ONE movie horse that you’d look twice at for both looks AND personality, and luckily Cass Ole was playing a fictional animal with no real-life comparison.

It’s a movie. It’s a family movie. Its major purpose in existing is to make money. If you like racing, just hope that people go see the movie with the pretty horsie and decide they might actually want to go to the track and watch the Triple Crown on TV.

[NCRider]

The problem I have with these type of movies is that for 99% of the population, the movie “truths” become history. You can repeat all you want that it’s a Disney movie and not a documentary but the fact is that Secretariat’s story, as portrayed in this movie, will superceed the real story. And that’s horribly unfair to Lucien Lauren, who is inaccurately portrayed according to many who knew him, to Sham’s trainer who has essentially been slandered (in a cultural sense, not a legal sense) pretty callously, and to all of Sham’s connections, including his owner, who by all accounts, was significanly more emotionally invested in her horse than Penney Chenery was in Secretariat.

It’s that type of character assassination (much more so than the fact that the Belmont was filmed at Keeneland) that bothers me most about this movie. When you take a topic that no one knows anything about and turn real historical figures into villians for dramatic effect, that’s horribly unfair to the memory of those people and their descendants.

[Somermist]

[QUOTE=danceronice;5165499]
Calamber, you read way too much into it. (And we’ll set aside how many people died where and the relative numerical insignificance of any military action deaths since 1945 as it’s really not relevant to Secretariat.) I’m starting to think the biggest problem is, as someone inadvertently pointed out, it’s too soon for this film. There’s too many people alive to remember having been emotionally tied up in the situation.

As for the horses (plural) playing Secretariat not having his charisma, I’ll take people’s word that he had it himself as I wasn’t there, but what can you expect? They’re just horses. They’re not actors. The single most important thing about them (after having the temperament to stand there and put up with the movie-making process without hurting anyone) was that they physically looked like him. I can think of exactly ONE movie horse that you’d look twice at for both looks AND personality, and luckily Cass Ole was playing a fictional animal with no real-life comparison.

It’s a movie. It’s a family movie. Its major purpose in existing is to make money. If you like racing, just hope that people go see the movie with the pretty horsie and decide they might actually want to go to the track and watch the Triple Crown on TV.[/QUOTE]

:)

[Pronzini]

@NCRider;5165554

The problem I have with these type of movies is that for 99% of the population, the movie “truths” become history. You can repeat all you want that it’s a Disney movie and not a documentary but the fact is that Secretariat’s story, as portrayed in this movie, will superceed the real story. And that’s horribly unfair to Lucien Lauren, who is inaccurately portrayed according to many who knew him, to Sham’s trainer who has essentially been slandered (in a cultural sense, not a legal sense) pretty callously, and to all of Sham’s connections, including his owner, who by all accounts, was significanly more emotionally invested in her horse than Penney Chenery was in Secretariat.

It’s that type of character assassination (much more so than the fact that the Belmont was filmed at Keeneland) that bothers me most about this movie. When you take a topic that no one knows anything about and turn real historical figures into villians for dramatic effect, that’s horribly unfair to the memory of those people and their descendants.

Agreed. The Pancho Martin portrayal was cringe worthy. Making a real person into a villain is a lot worse thing to do to someone’s memory than making him look like a clown. But sometimes it’s just the simple things that turn people off of a biopic like this. A friend of mine --a lifelong racetracker who remembers the Secretariat years well–told me that he refuses to see the movie. I thought it had to do with the --um–liberties Disney took in backstretch accuracy. But that didn’t faze him as much as the whole save the farm premise. "I don’t know how I can keep from shouting “you’ve got Riva Ridge. You’re doing just fine.”

[lauriep]

[QUOTE=Calamber;5165458]
So to be “entertained”, we the people have to suspend the truth, believe that someone as intelligent as Penny Chenery was and is would “stroke the ears and face” of a racing stallion, and go home and pet the nosies of the horsies and we just have a group hug and all is happy talking. Okay, I guess it must be okey, dokey that a horse would be on the cover of 4 major magazines while 50,000 young Americans were dying in a “police action”, so I guess today, eveyone can just feel all warm and cuddly about this while all hell is raging in the economy, people’s lives are completely disrupted and there is much more pain to come, but hey, who is thinking about that. Not the president who likes to go to sporting events, watch ESPN non stop and play basketball with the stars because he likes to be “entertained” nor the people who roar and clap for the “sports heroes” of the day, all while Rome burns. Now at least I know why the money was spent on this so called portrayal.[/QUOTE]

Wow, so much anger and angst about a horse movie you feel missed its mark? Apparently, Disney didn’t get the message that they were supposed to be making a documentary.

Oh, and the stroking the ears/forelock? There is a picture out there, I’ve seen it, of Penny doing that very thing, to a mature Secretariat with nary a halter in sight. So yeah, someone as intelligent as Penny DID do that.

[Calamber]

[QUOTE=lauriep;5165932]
Wow, so much anger and angst about a horse movie you feel missed its mark? Apparently, Disney didn’t get the message that they were supposed to be making a documentary.

Oh, and the stroking the ears/forelock? There is a picture out there, I’ve seen it, of Penny doing that very thing, to a mature Secretariat with nary a halter in sight. So yeah, someone as intelligent as Penny DID do that.[/QUOTE]

Not while he was in race training, or during the course of the preparation for the race I warrant. Perhaps you missed where she laughed and said something about him removing an appendage if she had. It’s okay really. Bambiland awaits those who wait for it at the Rainbow Bridge, just cross that bridge carefully because it will likely collapse beneath the weight due to budget cuts and misspent “stimulus” monies.

[Calamber]

[QUOTE=NCRider;5165554]
The problem I have with these type of movies is that for 99% of the population, the movie “truths” become history. You can repeat all you want that it’s a Disney movie and not a documentary but the fact is that Secretariat’s story, as portrayed in this movie, will superceed the real story. And that’s horribly unfair to Lucien Lauren, who is inaccurately portrayed according to many who knew him, to Sham’s trainer who has essentially been slandered (in a cultural sense, not a legal sense) pretty callously, and to all of Sham’s connections, including his owner, who by all accounts, was significanly more emotionally invested in her horse than Penney Chenery was in Secretariat.

It’s that type of character assassination (much more so than the fact that the Belmont was filmed at Keeneland) that bothers me most about this movie. When you take a topic that no one knows anything about and turn real historical figures into villians for dramatic effect, that’s horribly unfair to the memory of those people and their descendants.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for this.

[RugBug]

@Pronzini;5165830

A friend of mine --a lifelong racetracker who remembers the Secretariat years well–told me that he refuses to see the movie. I thought it had to do with the --um–liberties Disney took in backstretch accuracy. But that didn’t faze him as much as the whole save the farm premise. "I don’t know how I can keep from shouting “you’ve got Riva Ridge. You’re doing just fine.”

Bolding mine

Another friend said the same thing to me…the farm wasn’t hurting for money. But that doesn’t jive with the radio interview that was just linked where Penny Tweedy said herself, that Secretariat didn’t race as a 4 year old because it was a condition of the syndication and they HAD to do the syndication because of the inheritance tax on the farm of $9 million. I guess maybe she’s too old to remember that they were flush with cash at the time?

It was interesting to hear about the coin toss and that Ogden Phipps didn’t actually choose the other horse…but rather the foal outcomes of 1969 meant Penny got Secretariat by default in 1970. There was a coin toss…but not the timing or way it played out in the movie (no huge surprise there).

At any rate, if the general public wants to take the movie as history, so be it. They also tend to vote for the cause/candidate with the biggest advertising budget, fall prey to ridiculous marketing schemes, believe what they read on the internet, etc. You can’t account for the gullibility, naivete and even disinterest in truth of the general public.

[danceronice]

Look at it this way: the choice is the public generally, in as much as non-racing fans will give it five minutes’ thought after leaving the theater, take it all as more or less true (the way they presumably do about the rosy, deceptively innocent portrayal of Seabiscuit’s connections) as they do any film “based on a true story”…

Or they never hear of any of them. At all. They have NO IDEA any of these people exist or existed, and don’t care. They don’t know there was a horse named Sham at all. They haven’t got the faintest clue who these people are. All they would know is that there was some big red horse named Secretariat and he won some big races and was the bestest horse ever (now that anyone who remembers Man o’ War is dead and can’t argue the point, and only turf afficianados and a few people who remember Seattle Slew and Affirmed can even name the other Triple Crown winners.) They don’t know who owned him, they couldn’t even begin to guess his trainer or jockey’s names, they can’t name a single other horse in the races…and they don’t care. Never mind the people who weren’t even born.

If you care enough about racing and Thoroughbreds to be posting on an internet forum devoted to the subject, congratulations, you are already more knowledgeable on the subject than 99.9% of people who will see the film. They don’t know any of those details. And they DO NOT CARE. And NEVER WILL. If 5% of them decide to go see a real race or turn on the Breeder’s Cup or decide to go visit the KHP, the movie will have done more for the sport than all the bitching, grousing, and taking offense on behalf of those depicted who aren’t offended (or who, being horses and mostly dead to boot, cannot take offense to begin with.)

[LaurieB]

@Calamber;5165967

Not while he was in race training, or during the course of the preparation for the race I warrant. Perhaps you missed where she laughed and said something about him removing an appendage if she had. It’s okay really. Bambiland awaits those who wait for it at the Rainbow Bridge, just cross that bridge carefully because it will likely collapse beneath the weight due to budget cuts and misspent “stimulus” monies.

I know it’s a small point but seriously if you’ve never seen anyone stroke the ears and forelock of a “racing stallion” you haven’t spent much time on the backstretch where it happens quite frequently.

I’m amazed at how much anger there is about this movie. I saw it, I enjoyed it, I thought it was fun. I lived through the Secretariat years but I guess I don’t feel any ownership over the story of someone else’s horse the way some of you do. If Penny Chenery was pleased with how it turned out, I think that says alot.

[Pronzini]

But a syndication of an asset is not the same as almost losing the farm. I would not presume to tell Penny’s story but Bill Nack and countless reporters did–Secretariat and Riva Ridge were syndicated for stud in early '73 in part due to the inheritance issues but also to balance the risk. While there was no performance clause as implied in the movie, it was a way to lock in Big Red’s value in case he fell on his expensive face later that year.

After a horse becomes worth a certain amount, the individual risk is enormous. This is the main reason that many great 3 year old colts don’t race at 4 - not that anyone is going to lose a farm with an asset like that.

[mighty_mite]

[QUOTE=LaurieB;5166473]
I know it’s a small point but seriously if you’ve never seen anyone stroke the ears and forelock of a “racing stallion” you haven’t spent much time on the backstretch where it happens quite frequently.

I’m amazed at how much anger there is about this movie. I saw it, I enjoyed it, I thought it was fun. I lived through the Secretariat years but I guess I don’t feel any ownership over the story of someone else’s horse the way some of you do. If Penny Chenery was pleased with how it turned out, I think that says alot.[/QUOTE]

My biggest complaint about the movie is that we did not get to know Secretariat and the importance of the triple crown and I find that a big injustice to a great horse. I know it’s not that long of a time but the 12 years before he won the triple crown when I started watching racing seemed like an eternity. One of my sisters even quit her job because she couldn’t get the Belmont Saturday off.

I’m sure Penny must be very pleased about the movie, after all it was mostly about her and how she saved the farm. I was an adult when Secretariat was racing and I remember watching all of his races and any segment on TV where they did a story on him or his connections. I couldn’t get enough of him. What I did notice is that never, ever did I see any of Penny’s family. Not one child, not a husband, nothing. And never any mention of any of them by Penny. Not ever. The only reason I knew she had a family was that the media mentioned that she had been a housewife in Colorado. I really think Penny preferred to have the spotlight on only Penny.

I will never forget Secretariat’s last race at Woodbine. There was tons of media coverage leading up to the race. And on race day, there was Penny, all alone in the stands and I think that is exactly the way she wanted it. I never once felt a twinge of pity for her because she seemed to have no family to share in this great horse because she seemed so content to be by herself. And this is just my take on what I think I saw. Maybe she was crying inside because her family was not with her but if that were the case then she put up a great front.

[LaurieB]

@mighty mite;5166692

My biggest complaint about the movie is that we did not get to know Secretariat and the importance of the triple crown and I find that a big injustice to a great horse. I know it’s not that long of a time but the 12 years before he won the triple crown when I started watching racing seemed like an eternity. One of my sisters even quit her job because she couldn’t get the Belmont Saturday off.

I’m sure Penny must be very pleased about the movie, after all it was mostly about her and how she saved the farm.

But that’s the way animal movies are made unless they’re animated cartoons. Secretariat was every bit as prominent in this movie as Lassie was in Lassie Come Home, or The Black was in The Black Stallion, or Seabiscuit was in his movie. I think they’re wrong but movie-makers assume that audiences won’t go to see a movie that’s only about animals. Better a movie about Penny Chenery and Secretariat than no movie at all.

[DMK]

@LaurieB;5166719

Better a movie about Penny Chenery and Secretariat than no movie at all.

Exactly.

Even though I’m pretty sure all the little things that bug me about every horse movie ever made (no matter how well done it is) doesn’t take away how good this movie is for racing, TBs, Secretariat’s legacy and the Chenery family.

And you know what? Probably by watching this movie, some people will take the time to learn more. Probably more people than would have ever bothered without the movie to inspire their curiosity. Good thing, right?

[RugBug]

@LaurieB;5166719

But that’s the way animal movies are made unless they’re animated cartoons. Secretariat was every bit as prominent in this movie as Lassie was in Lassie Come Home, or The Black was in The Black Stallion, or Seabiscuit was in his movie. I think they’re wrong but movie-makers assume that audiences won’t go to see a movie that’s only about animals. Better a movie about Penny Chenery and Secretariat than no movie at all.

If the movie IS only about animals, they make the animals talk. (i.e. Homeward Bound). I’d much rather see the Penny Chenery story than see the Talking Secretariat story.

[danceronice]

[QUOTE=RugBug;5166945]
If the movie IS only about animals, they make the animals talk. (i.e. Homeward Bound). I’d much rather see the Penny Chenery story than see the Talking Secretariat story.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Or you get utter. CRAP. Like the Cloud documentaries, with narrative anthropomorphizing. Ye gods, we’re talking in circles. They make movies about the people around animals because animals do not talk. They don’t act. They don’t have the first idea what a movie is. They basically want to eat, sleep, and make baby horsies (unless they’re geldings, in which case strike that last part.) In as much as they can be said to want anything. They’re ANIMALS. They do not drive the plot with any form of intent because they are incapable of understanding intent. Movies are plots (unless you’re doing dada, surrealism, etc and let’s not go there) and animals do not do plots. They’re like infants, glorified props.

[mighty_mite]

I didn’t want a movie about talking horses. I wanted a movie that showed how much the country was behind this horse, why he was on three major magazine covers, how long racing fans had waited for a triple crown winner. I wanted to see him in workouts or posing for photographers. I wanted to hear how Riva Ridge had won the Derby and Belmont the year before and pumped the money into the farm. I wanted to see Penny making the decision on whether or not to syndicate him. Doing so before the Derby meant she was only getting $6 million. Had she waited and he did not win the triple crown, she would have gotten less, had she waited and he won the triple crown, she would have gotten more. She had to gamble. I wanted to see the true reaction when Secretariat lost the Wood and Penny almost fired Ron Turcott. Her disdain for Angle Light and her obvious favortism for Riva Ridge.

It would have been interesting to see a little bit of Bold Ruler’s story as well. How, when the day he died Seth Hancock left his office early and told them to get on with it but he never wanted to hear anyone talk about his death. Ever. Heck, they could have opened the movie with that story line.

I would have loved to have seen more of the real story on Sham and his owners. How Laffite Pincay was told to “stay with him” in the Belmont and how was that even possible?

There were so many different paths they could have taken and stuck to the truth and to Secretariats story. I would much rather have seen Secretariat played by horses that didn’t look all that much like him rather than his story not told the way it really was.

At the time of the races, Penny’s family was almost never mentioned in the press. Actually, I never ever heard mention of them. We didn’t have to know what Kate was doing. It really had nothing to do with Secretariats story. But then not much of the movie did.

As I said before, I liked the movie. But it should not have been called Secretariat.