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

[lauriep]

[QUOTE=RugBug;5166156]
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.[/QUOTE]

Why would you think they were “flush with cash?” Just curious, but even with Riva, who certainly pulled them back from the brink, the farm had been steadily losing money for a good while, was still very active in breeding and racing, so had major expenses, and the inheritance tax was very steep.

Most movies combine characters/events to save time and move the story along. The audience wouldn’t have understood the way the real coin toss happened, nor did it fit into the timeline of the movie. The general story was there, especially beginning with Secretariats career, so I wasn’t bothered at all by some liberties they took. And really, I don’t think the general audience is going to give t much thought once they walk out the door. Those that ARE inspired to learn more have Google!

[DLee]

I wanted to see the Black Stallion huge and impressive as he was in the book, with Alec the correct age and not wearing a stupid helmet with a plume on it for the Match Race. Oh well. It’s just a movie.

[DMK]

@DLee;5167714

not wearing a stupid helmet with a plume on it

Yup, many years later and I’m still letting that get to me. This time I’m determined to show my maturity and wisdom by letting. it. go. when that instinct grabs me by the throat during Secretariat.

[danceronice]

I would actually like to see “The Black Stallion” remade. As for “huge and majestic”, you’ll never get a better ‘match’ than Cass Ole, which is the only area that would make me hesitate as you’d never find a heavy-built, powerful-looking Arab like that these days. But I’d like to see Alec an older teen and not a little kid who couldn’t act for crap, both Alec’s parents alive and involved and cast vaguely reminiscent of their descriptions. I think that one’s actually more in need of reworking than “Secretariat.” That one you can always go get a documentary or look up the races on youtube.

[LaurieB]

@DLee;5167714

I wanted to see the Black Stallion huge and impressive as he was in the book, with Alec the correct age and not wearing a stupid helmet with a plume on it for the Match Race. Oh well. It’s just a movie.

Hey DLee, didn’t I see you briefly in the Secretariat movie’s “Belmont” Keeneland paddock scene? Were you wearing a white hat and had your hair in a pony tail? I kept looking for Mr. DLee too but I never found him.

And I totally agree about the stupid plume–and it still bothers me all these years later.

[DMK]

[QUOTE=danceronice;5167847]
As for “huge and majestic”, you’ll never get a better ‘match’ than Cass Ole, which is the only area that would make me hesitate as you’d never find a heavy-built, powerful-looking Arab like that these days.[/QUOTE]

Bigger. Taller. Alec Ramsey was older AND taller and the Black was an impossible combination of big and still arab-like (and black and suitable for the movies). That’s why I forgave them those two errors, a teen Alec would have been all oversized legs on the closest thing to the Black (Cass Ole). The purple plume? Not so much with the forgiveness.

[DLee]

Haha! I love that I am not the only one not over the Black Stallion! I met Cass Ole (cleaned his stall even) and while he was very pretty he was sooo small. I would have given up the dishy Arab true Black Stallion head for some size! Ah well. DMK I am totally with you on all counts.

Laurie B you probably did! We’ve only seen it once and I only saw myself in the stands behind Diane Lane in the Belmont, but we shot a lot in the paddock and maybe I missed it!

[Slewdledo]

This movie was fun, I’m glad they made it, and they said beforehand if they could do half or a third as well as Seabiscuit (a summertime blockbuster type movie) did, they’d be more than satisfied. Secretariat made about $13m opening weekend, Seabiscuit $20m, so I think they’re happy.

It was a dumb movie, but it was fun. I laughed at some inopportune times (like when the trainer tells the owner “it’s none of your business” - um, in racing, it really isn’t!)

Sadly, one of the local newspapers reviewing it said this movie was better than “a day at the amateur races.” I think that means a day at the track, which is soooo untrue.

My two favorite things about Secretariat:

1. Charles Hatton, turf writer who coined the term “Triple Crown” in the 30s, is said to have been motivated to stand up at his first sight of Secretariat on the backstretch, as 2YO I think. Said something like “Who is that horse” It’s the most perfect horse I’ve ever seen." And by the 70s, he had seen A LOT.

2. Watching the Belmont replay, the crowd cheering and waving their arms and applauding as he came down the stretch so far in front. Just unreal. Moves me to tears everytime. Jack Whittaker cried watching it at home live.

For the person who said Secretariat did the impossible by going faster and faster with each furlong: Meet Zenyatta.

[Slewdledo]

Also - the best review I read by an in-the-know horseman was in the Thoroughbred Times. It said “appreciate this movie for what it is. Don’t knock it for what it isn’t.”

[Rallycairn]

And all these years later I still don’t know which bothers me most, the plume or the much-too-young Alec!

[DMK]

@Slewdledo;5168038

For the person who said Secretariat did the impossible by going faster and faster with each furlong: Meet Zenyatta.

LOL, it was almost poetic that she did that in the Lady’s Secret Stakes, wasn’t it? Payin’ homage all the way…

But running 5 quarters progressively faster and setting a track record is still pretty amazing, I wonder if that has ever been repeated? One or the other, sure… but both? Interesting question…

[farmgirl88]

[QUOTE=mighty mite;5167486]
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.[/QUOTE]

But according to what you have listed; then it deffinately shouldn’t have been called Secretariat. This story wasn’t about Sham, wasn’t about Bold Ruler, Wasn’t about Riva Riva Ridge or the fact that he was “favored”.

it wasn’t about Laffite Pincay or what he was told to do either.

According to what you have listed above; most of it did occur in the movie. I remember a specific line about the horse posing for the cameras in the movie. It was also pretty darn obvious that the horse was well liked by this country…especially in the nationally televised TV program of his race; and the amount of fans and media that hyped around him.

There was also a lot of gamble with Penny’s decision over syndicating him and i think that was a major part of the movie—the money that circulated around the horse over his fame

As for Ron Trucotte being fired? Did you not see the scene were Penny and Lucien were lacing into him and you pretty much knew that he was about to get fired if it wasnt for a simply change of events soon after the race. Did you not see the scenes where he was sitting on the bench with his saddle and silks after lucien and penny had ripped him up one side and down the other for such a poor performance??

As for Penny’s family not being in the media…so just because they weren’t in the media means they don’t deserve to be in the movie? This is what is wrong with what you people are stating: there is so much more to the story than the general public cares to even recognize or at least WANT to recognize. There is so much to the story that was kept hidden from the public eye from all the years and now its come out in the movie.

What you need to understand is that Secretariat didnt get to the triple crown by himself; heck; the horse would’ve never made it to the triple crown if it wasn’t for the people and the families in his life. HE WOULDV’E NEVER BEEN THE SECRETARIAT IF IT WASN’T FOR THEM! During this time period; movie viewers need to realize that it wasn’t easy for a housewife to get a horse to the triple crown…after all of the tragedies that ensued. You need to realize that there are many struggles for a woman like her behind “the horse and the race” that make it even more difficult and challenging for the horse to be run successfully…and that includes family and the stereotypes that were flung around during Secretariat’s years.

[RugBug]

@lauriep;5167665

Why would you think they were “flush with cash?” Just curious, but even with Riva, who certainly pulled them back from the brink, the farm had been steadily losing money for a good while, was still very active in breeding and racing, so had major expenses, and the inheritance tax was very steep.

Um, Laurie…you missed the sarcasm in my statement.

Many people on this thread, as well as a racing fan or two in my real life, have disputed that the farm was facing some financial difficulties. I even asked one that pointed to Riva Ridge and how he saved them why would they syndicate Secretariat if they didn’t need the money. He had no answer.

Then listening to the radio interview…she clearly says it was because they needed the money. I was being sarcastic that maybe due to her age she doesn’t remember that they didn’t need the money.

[mighty_mite]

[QUOTE=farmgirl88;5168317]
But according to what you have listed; then it deffinately shouldn’t have been called Secretariat. This story wasn’t about Sham, wasn’t about Bold Ruler, Wasn’t about Riva Riva Ridge or the fact that he was “favored”.

it wasn’t about Laffite Pincay or what he was told to do either.

According to what you have listed above; most of it did occur in the movie. I remember a specific line about the horse posing for the cameras in the movie. It was also pretty darn obvious that the horse was well liked by this country…especially in the nationally televised TV program of his race; and the amount of fans and media that hyped around him.

There was also a lot of gamble with Penny’s decision over syndicating him and i think that was a major part of the movie—the money that circulated around the horse over his fame

As for Ron Trucotte being fired? Did you not see the scene were Penny and Lucien were lacing into him and you pretty much knew that he was about to get fired if it wasnt for a simply change of events soon after the race. Did you not see the scenes where he was sitting on the bench with his saddle and silks after lucien and penny had ripped him up one side and down the other for such a poor performance??

As for Penny’s family not being in the media…so just because they weren’t in the media means they don’t deserve to be in the movie? This is what is wrong with what you people are stating: there is so much more to the story than the general public cares to even recognize or at least WANT to recognize. There is so much to the story that was kept hidden from the public eye from all the years and now its come out in the movie.

What you need to understand is that Secretariat didnt get to the triple crown by himself; heck; the horse would’ve never made it to the triple crown if it wasn’t for the people and the families in his life. HE WOULDV’E NEVER BEEN THE SECRETARIAT IF IT WASN’T FOR THEM! During this time period; movie viewers need to realize that it wasn’t easy for a housewife to get a horse to the triple crown…after all of the tragedies that ensued. You need to realize that there are many struggles for a woman like her behind “the horse and the race” that make it even more difficult and challenging for the horse to be run successfully…and that includes family and the stereotypes that were flung around during Secretariat’s years.[/QUOTE]

Well then you wanted to see the Penny Chenery story and you got it. I wanted to see the Secretariat story and got only a part of it. And I did say in my post that I did NOT think it should have been called Secretariat. In case you didn’t know, Bold Ruler, Sham and Riva Ridge were all a very big part of the Secretariat story. Heck, without Bold Ruler there really would not have been a Secretariat, don’t ya think? And I do think it was very much about Laffite Pincay and the Belmont. Geez, the Belmont is probably his most famous race so a little more insight into how that played out would have been interesting to the people who wanted to see more of Secretariat’s story. And yes, one little line about him liking to pose for cameras. If you’d seen this horse live, you would have understood just how much he liked to pose for the cameras. Blinked and you would have missed it in the movie. And as for Penny wanting to fire Ron Turcott (I did see that in the movie,by the way), It was only Ron. Lucien Lauren had to really convince Penny to keep him. They completely changed that story around.

And no, I didn’t want to know all about Penny’s kids who had nothing whatsoever to do with Secretariat. But apparently you do so you got what you wanted and I’m very happy for you. I wanted to see the Secretariat story and didn’t get it. And I know there are a lot of people out there who feel the same way as I do. Yes, they are mostly people who have been following racing for numerous years and many also remember how it was when Secretariat ran the triple crown. I’m sure that the general public who knows not much about racing probably enjoyed the film but my gripe is that they didn’t really get to know this great horse. And if you’d been following racing the years prior to Secretariat’s wins and then saw him race, you’d know what I’m talking about.

[SmartAlex]

[QUOTE=mighty mite;5168552]
And yes, one little line about him liking to pose for cameras. If you’d seen this horse live, you would have understood just how much he liked to pose for the cameras. Blinked and you would have missed it in the movie. [/QUOTE]

I wonder how the horses know about posing for cameras… I grew up on a little Arabian, who, as soon as he saw a camera, would strike a pose and look off into the distance as if he had read all the books, and heard of the “look of eagles”. It’s truely uncanny. I’m sure they don’t understand about picutes, but a lot of them really get the whole admiration thing don’t they?

[danceronice]

[QUOTE=mighty mite;5168552]
And no, I didn’t want to know all about Penny’s kids who had nothing whatsoever to do with Secretariat. But apparently you do so you got what you wanted and I’m very happy for you. I wanted to see the Secretariat story and didn’t get it. And I know there are a lot of people out there who feel the same way as I do. Yes, they are mostly people who have been following racing for numerous years and many also remember how it was when Secretariat ran the triple crown. I’m sure that the general public who knows not much about racing probably enjoyed the film but my gripe is that they didn’t really get to know this great horse. And if you’d been following racing the years prior to Secretariat’s wins and then saw him race, you’d know what I’m talking about.[/QUOTE]

You apparently wanted a documentary on “Breeding and Racing in the early 1970s and the Importance of the Bold Ruler Sire Line.”

And by your logic, no one who wasn’t alive and following racing at the time can understand. Possibly it’s more they can step back and look at it for what it was, how much of a feature entertainment film you couold make out if it, and what would appeal to the 99.999% of the US population who either was not alive at the time or was not paying especially close attention and as such doesn’t really care and never will who will make up the overwhelming majority of the ticket sales.

Apparently, it was too soon. Because “Seabiscuit” was just as hokey, just as inaccurate, and even featured a laughable case of actor recycling for movie buffs (I realized a very short way in that “HEY! Jeff Bridges is just playing Preston Tucker again only with horses instead of cars! I’ve totally seen this before like twenty years ago!”) A fleeting mention of Seabiscuit’s first trainer and how important a person he was, almost no mention of Hard Tack and Swing On or how terribly important the Man o’ War/Ben Brush mares nick was to race breeding (or how that same nick produced War Admiral, who was, like Sham, depicted entirely contrary to what he was and had not only his build but his own insanely impressive career, like winning the Belmont bleeding all the way, glossed.) But somehow, there were very few complaints and the movie made whopping great boatloads of money. Possibly because not only did the majority of viewers not care about details that are staggeringly important to racing historians and pedigree junkies, but almost everyone who could remember the horse is either EXTREMELY old or dead.

[mighty_mite]

[QUOTE=danceronice;5168599]
You apparently wanted a documentary on “Breeding and Racing in the early 1970s and the Importance of the Bold Ruler Sire Line.”

And by your logic, no one who wasn’t alive and following racing at the time can understand. Possibly it’s more they can step back and look at it for what it was, how much of a feature entertainment film you couold make out if it, and what would appeal to the 99.999% of the US population who either was not alive at the time or was not paying especially close attention and as such doesn’t really care and never will who will make up the overwhelming majority of the ticket sales.

Apparently, it was too soon. Because “Seabiscuit” was just as hokey, just as inaccurate, and even featured a laughable case of actor recycling for movie buffs (I realized a very short way in that “HEY! Jeff Bridges is just playing Preston Tucker again only with horses instead of cars! I’ve totally seen this before like twenty years ago!”) A fleeting mention of Seabiscuit’s first trainer and how important a person he was, almost no mention of Hard Tack and Swing On or how terribly important the Man o’ War/Ben Brush mares nick was to race breeding (or how that same nick produced War Admiral, who was, like Sham, depicted entirely contrary to what he was and had not only his build but his own insanely impressive career, like winning the Belmont bleeding all the way, glossed.) But somehow, there were very few complaints and the movie made whopping great boatloads of money. Possibly because not only did the majority of viewers not care about details that are staggeringly important to racing historians and pedigree junkies, but almost everyone who could remember the horse is either EXTREMELY old or dead.[/QUOTE]

You know it’s just really a matter of opinion. I felt that this great horse was not portrayed the way it was back then. And if you hadn’t been around back then, then no, you wouldn’t have gotten that same feeling from this movie. How could you? That is all I’m saying. I’m not saying it’s bad or anything. And I said nothing about breeding. I just think it would have been interesting if they opened the film with the death of Bold Ruler because he was the sire of Secretariat and it was a huge, crushing blow to Claiborne. Just different opinions on what type of movies we like, that is all. Oh and I was only referring to the Secretariat movie, not Seabiscuit.

Peace.

[danceronice]

Seabiscuit is relevant because no film exists in a vacuum. Without Seabiscuit, no Secretariat movie, I promise you, because up until then horse movies aren’t profitable–they’re, by and large, little-girl flicks that don’t make enough to warrant serious investment. (“The Black Stallion” is a bit of an oddball as it was done almost as an art-house piece, where the primary concern seemed to be gunning for technical/behind-camera Oscar nominations.) Seabiscuit took the horsey stuff, made it largely secondary to the people drama, and it was taken VERY seriously by the industry and audiences. What this told studios was, if you want to pitch a horse movie to anyone outside the Pony Girls demographic (who have relatively little purchasing power when we’re talking ticket sales), focus on the human sob stories. More people can identify with that than can even begin to read a five-gen pedigree chart. Most audiences won’t remember the name of any other horse in the film besides the title horse. With Seabiscuit, they got the bonus of going for the “horse grips the nation!” thing with bonus Depression Pathos, AND some weepy human insterest stories on the people around him. Secretariat suffers a little bit by having human-interest angles that are, in some cases, still a bit hot-button, plus the horse himself has fans who are still alive and able to remember (it actually reminds me of my college seminar on Vietnam–I don’t think the professor realized the reason all of us students could be so cool and clinical about the whole thing, nitpicking military tactical decisions and treating numbers as statistics no more meaningful than deaths in World War I was that all of us were born after it was all over. We could step back from the material and be analytical about it in a way students ten or fifteen years earlier couldn’t. I think it kind of broke his little Baby-Boomer heart, but then at my uni we tended to enjoy doing that to all the profs anyway. We were not the liberal ivory-tower academia tropes of some schools.)

[WhiteCamry]

@Slewdledo;5168038

2. Watching the Belmont replay, the crowd cheering and waving their arms and applauding as he came down the stretch so far in front. Just unreal. Moves me to tears everytime. Jack Whittaker cried watching it at home live.

How? Jack Whittaker was at Belmont, covering the race live for CBS.

[WhiteCamry]

@Slewdledo;5168040

Also - the best review I read by an in-the-know horseman was in the Thoroughbred Times. It said “appreciate this movie for what it is. Don’t knock it for what it isn’t.”

Which reminds me of the release of Apollo 13, way back just before the dawn of the internet as we know it. To some deservedly anonymous journalist’s remark about how people were saying the movie wasn’t all that accurate, Tom Hanks replied, “for every one thing we didn’t get right, we got two things right.”