posted
I saw a sneak preview of Hidalgo last night. While the trailers had me interested, I can't deny that the Viggo factor was also motivation. My only hope was that I wouldn't spend the whole movie wondering "Where's Gandalf? Legolas? Frodo?"
I was not disappointed. However, after the fact, I find it hard to categorize the film, at least so as to contrast and compare it with something else and "rate" it. Brief synopsis: Viggo plays Frank T. Hopkins, a long-distance horse racer, touted as the greatest in the world. He is invited to participate in a 3,000 mile race across the Arabian Desert, the first non-Arabian man on the first non-Arabian purebred. Official Site.
Here's what I think. I think it's easier to critique the movie based on what it's not.
Hidalgo is not:
a "horse" movie a "cowboy" movie an "Indian" movie an "Arab" movie
All of these elements are present and integral, but this movie, by not falling too far into stereotypes, is a movie for anyone. The action, drama, trauma, and triumph mix like chocolate milk as opposed to toothpaste and orange juice. I don't know the "real" story of Frank T. Hopkins to know how accurate the movie is, but after seeing it, I'm definitely interested. The movie itself isn't necessarily flawless, but there are plenty of things that could have been done much worse. None of the acting stood out as particularly horrible, and the horse definitely earns title character status.
As someone who refuses to read movie reviews before I see movies, it's a bit hypocritical for me to post this and expect you to listen to me, but...oh well, I don't get to see sneak previews that often. All I'm trying to say is don't let any preconceived notions keep you from seeing a movie worthy of your time, if only once.
Hidalgo opens March 5th. Go see it and then resurrect this thread and tell me what you think.
posted
This is good. Despite my qualms about having a non-arab american horse run an endurance race against desert bred arabs, I desparately want this movie to be good.
Mostly so I'll have a job when I get done with school.
I should post a rant against horse movies sometime.
posted
A Frank T Hopkins tribute site that was around before the movie. It is sponsored by Mustang horse people, that do endurance riding. They have actual articles written by the man that sound like an authentic endurance horseman.
posted
Hmmm. After reading those sites, I'm kinda glad I didn't read them before, expect that neither one goes into great detail. Although I didn't read all the articles on the tribute site. It's still a good movie, but for some people it might require putting expectations aside. That's pretty much what I said the first time, isn't it? Well, I mean it.
And kwsni, rant away. Posts: 1090 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was generally impressed with this movie. THey did thier research on the costumes for both horses and people, the horsemanship was good(especially viggo's) and the only thing that really annoyed me was that they continued to insist that it was a true story.
There were things that made me cringe(like pulling on a rearing horse. why does EVERYONE in movies do that?) and the fact that there weren't any polish or russian horses there. But as a horse movie, this is very good.
Not good at movie reviews on a story or character basis, so i'll leave that to those that are.
Ruth and I saw it last night, and I have to say that we were both a little confused. At one point, he's in last place. Then he's attacked by raiders and falls into the pit. His horse is injured. They keep going, but then Hidalgo collapses and they sit there for a while, hallucinating. Then they get up and sprint to the finish and win.
What the heck?
What happened to all the people ahead of him? You see three people at the end of the race, even though it seemed like at least a dozen people were still ahead of him when they were attacked. Also, I couldn't keep track of who was who. It seemed like all the Arabs in the race hated him, but then that one guy stopped and helped fight off the attackers at the end. Why?
It was a moderately entertaining movie, but ultimately forgettable, I think. The only reason you want Frank to win is that he's the underdog. I just didn't really connect with the characters much, and I was so confused towards the end that I didn't even realize it was the end.
Jon Boy's rating: C
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:T3 picks up about 6-7 years after T2. John Connor (Nick Stahl) is now in his mid-twenties, moving from place to place, afraid to leave an identity trail. Why is he afraid? Didn’t John and his mother destroy the cybernetic technology in the last movie? Deep down, John believes Doomsday is only postponed and not averted. He was right.
Like T2, two terminators were sent back to John’s time: one to kill him and the other to offer well-timed comedy relief (and save him of course). The evil T-X model is played by the beautiful Kristanna Loken. The T-X has all the metamorphic abilities of her predecessor plus the ability to control other machines, form complex weapons in her hands, and enlarge her breasts at will.
The story picks up steam when John and Arnold meets Kate Brewster played by the effervescent Claire Danes. It turns out John and Kate share a bond in the past and in the future. As for their present connection, Kate’s father turns out to be a general who is in charge of Skynet, the artificial intelligence responsible for the nuclear doomsday which wiped out most of mankind. Most of the story involves John and Kate trying to reach Kate’s father with the T-X hot on their trail.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
