Rating: 
Summary: Take your pick: a lump in your throat or a roll of the eyes
Review: Your reaction to this cinematically lovely film will rely on your frame of mind when you sit down to watch it. You can either be swept up in the lush sentimentality, or you will roll your eyes at the schmaltz-appeal. Either way, it is an impressive adaptation of the popular bestseller and successfully recreates the look of the early 20th Century with exacting detail (The Wardrobe Designer is to be especially lauded, although whoever was in charge of hair made some curious choices with wigs and pieces). Tobey McGuire is typically excellent (he is also an Executive Producer)as is Chris Carter. Jeff Bridges is charming as ever, but somehow doesn't manage to convey the chemistry with his male costars that the moviemakers and press representatives relentlessly touted. Elizabeth Banks, looking lovely, has virtually nothing to do and is relegated to a lot of "Go Biscuit!" cheers, but in the filmmakers' defense--there probably wasn't much else for the ladies to do. William H. Macy is appropriately over the top in his campy cameo, making you realize that only in big-budget studio productions could you have someone of his celebrity play such a small role.As for the DVD, the bonus materials are noteworthy. Producer/Screenwriter/Director Gary Ross is an interesting and articulate guy with an obvious passion for his subject matter. Why PG-13? In my opinion, PG would have sufficed...
Rating: 
Summary: Decent
Review: This was a decent movie. Somewhat predictable, but enjoyable. Take "Chariots of Fire" and mix in a little "Black Beauty" and you get the drift. The acting is good, but not remarkable. The sound is good, as is the editing. A good "little engine that could" movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Flawless.
Review: I simply cannot wrap my mind around the concept of someone giving this amazing film less than five stars. I do not claim to be a superior critic, just a humble avid moviegoer who would like to believe she can detect a consumate, crafted work of art such as this motion picture. I'm sorry; but movies like this are not made everyday. This is truly a rare and brilliant gem. The story that this film is based upon does not simply center on the racing career of a Thoroughbred, but, it is a lyrical, fluid tribute to the time period, the people of involved with Seabiscuit's success and Seabiscuit himself. Although it is gritty and realistic, there is such a beautiful, adept handling of the cinematography in visually retelling the story of Seabiscuit: light, yet stunning and effective. It literally took my breath away. So much care and attention and detail went into the making of this film, and yet, it never felt heavy-handed. It was never too dry or too overwhelming; it was a perfect mixture of alternately focusing on the era, the people involved, and Seabiscuit's life. Although there is a narrator speaking intermittently throughout the film, there are many moments when the film breaks away from the ongoing action to display period stills. These haunting images are whole film scenes in and of themselves that articulate volumes in the continuation of the story's progress. Everything about the cinematography and the editing were accomplished in a most beautiful, lyrical and unabrupt fashion. What makes me so in love with this movie is not only are the cinematography, editing, production, direction, and the acting of a superior caliber, but also that the *story* matches that high caliber of excellence. It all comes together and meshes into this wonderful presentation. I waited to purchase this movie on DVD rather than go and see it in the theatres. I figured, "it is just a movie about a racehorse -- it is probably going to be dry and uneventful." I made such a regrettable call on that one. I would have *loved* to have seen it on the big screen, and lament the missed opportunity to do so due to my own lack of better judgment. I was so entrenched in the movie; all my senses were delightfully engaged: I was enjoying not only the sheer beauty of the physical presence the movie conducted, I was also absorbed by the incredible story it told. I would like to encourage you to buy and enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: Based on the book, "Seabiscuit"
Review: This movie is based on the non-fiction book "Seabiscuit", by Laura Hillenbrand. It is a story about three men and how these characters come together to turn an abused, run-down horse into the greatest racehorse in the Depression-era United States. This movie is not disjointed. It does like the book does. It tells us about these three different men individually, about Seabiscuit individually, and ultimately, their lives converging. Its all part of their story - how their separate lives, tragedies and fortunes or misfortunes bring them to the same place and time. Its a story with deeper, more abstract, meanings than just a racehorse winning races, so it will probably go over the heads of the less intelligent, or young and immature. As for this movie needing a single viewpoint like "Apollo 13," the true story of the Apollo 13 disaster was based on Jim Lovell's book "Lost Moon." Obviously, since it was written from Lovell's point of view, the movie will be from his point of view. "Seabiscuit" was written from an objective, third person point of view (Hillenbrand's), therefore, the movie follows suit.
Rating:
Summary: Inspirational for Human and Animalkind
Review: I was planning on not liking this movie. I had heard it was too long at the theatre and dull as well. Well I am here to say PISH POSH! There are so many over stylized one dimensional super action sugarless halfcaf movies assaulting our senses out there any more I think people don't realize when they see the genuine article. Seabuiscuit is a Great story and it TRUE too. It's part of our short history as a nation. And what an inspirational story! I really cared about the characters, wanted to know them. This is an enriching, feel good with no sugar coating movie. I highly recommend it. Horse person or not.
Rating:
Summary: Too long, moved too slow, lacked the big emotional punch.
Review: First, the acting was great. Second, the direction was beautiful. However, if you're like me, an Average Consumer who's not looking to determine if this should be the next Academy Award nominee - the movie itself was too long and the plot moved too slow. At 141 minutes, I was ready for it to end long before it did. The first 30 minutes or so are all background about the people who come in contact with Seabiscuit later in life. In my opinion, all that staging wasn't necessary or perhaps would have been better served to just focus on one person, not three. The film would have been more enjoyable if the emphasis was more on the horse and the races and the amazement of the accomplishments. Also, this movie is not really something a child under 13 should see (it is rated PG-13 after all) but I know a few people who took the little ones thinking "oh, this is just a horse movie." This is not something they will be able to follow or enjoy.
Rating: 
Summary: A good concept poorly executed
Review: I really wanted to like Seabiscuit, but simply couldn't. It has a phenomenal cast including Tobey McGuire and William H. Macy among others. The actors couldn't compensate for a disjointed script that tries to tell the story of too many individuals too quickly. For comparison, Apollo 13 (another historical drama), really tells the story from the Lovell family point of view with the rest of the subplots supporting that viewpoint. Seabiscuit tries to tell the owner's story, the jockey's story, and the horse's story without every drawing the viewer into any one of those stories. I never got to the point where I cared about any of these characters. And, the rivalry story line just left me flat; I didn't care whether Seabiscuit won. This movie could have used its fine cast much more effectively
Rating:
Summary: ...and the hardcore horse fan says...
Review: Seabiscuit (Gary Ross, 2003) Judging by the polarized reviews given to me by people I trust, people I don't trust, and friends who know far more about how horses should look than I do, I expected to either love this movie or hate it. What I didn't expect was the middle-of-the-road reaction I ended up with. I always seem to forget Jeff Bridges as an actor, despite his fabulous performances in movies as diverse as Starman, Jagged Edge, and Tucker. He can take just about anything and make himself into it. And he does this quite well with Seabiscuit owner Charles Howard, self-made millionaire and general blowhard. Chris Cooper is excellent (if a bit too loquacious) as trainer Tom Smith, and Tobey Maguire does a capable job of playing Red Pollard, finally proving he can act. And when the three of them get together with Fighting Furrari (who was the "main" actor among the many horses who played Seabiscuit), the movie is magic. I don't know conformation from constipation. If you put Seabiscuit (often described as short, ugly, deformed, etc.) next to Man o' War (often described as one of the perfect specimens of the breed), I'd probably not be able to tell them apart without nametags. So I can't react to many of the details I've heard are incorrect about various parts of the movie. Others have done so far more capably than I. I'm also not going to make exhaustive comparisons with the book, since I read it roughly three hundred books ago and don't remember many details, though all three of the human characters mentioned above seemed to be different than they were portrayed in the book. The one criticism I do have with the last hour and a half of the movie is that, let's face it, two jockeys traveling forty miles an hour on the backs of two racehorses are not going to be able to have long rambling conversations. Try it with a friend of yours out the windows of two cars going the same speed, and see if you can hear your pal as well as Tobey Maguire hears Gary Stevens, and vice versa. Ain't happening. So in other words, the last ninety minutes were great. Inspiring. Amazing. Beautifully shot. Everyone went above and beyond the call. (Slap a coat of paint on Fairplex and uproot some hedges and you could make it look like Pimlico, but they actually went out and shot at Pimlico.) The ending was a little over the top and emotionally manipulative, would have had the same power without the voice-over, but that's to be expected from American movies. Can't really fault the filmmakers for that. The first hour, on the other hand, would have benefited from an editor with a slightly firmer hand; say, the Torso killer. What took sixty long minutes to convey could have easily been done in twenty. And those twenty could have been a mite clearer. (I knew who Tom Smith was supposed to be, because Chris Cooper looks like a heavier Tom Smith. I've heard others say they had no idea until well into the movie.) I understand what they were trying to do, and it was something I despaired of when I first found out the movie was going to be made. The book centers on Seabiscuit, but paints the larger picture of why he so captured the national imagination. That's something that, if you're going to do it in a movie, should be integrated with the plot, in the details. Look at, for example, Bladerunner. You learn everything you need to learn about the world in which the characters live without needing an hour of setup at the beginning; it's all in the details and doesn't interfere with the plot. The same could easily have been done here, but the screenwriters took the easy way out and have us an hour of setup before we got to the action. Still, it was a good film. All the performances, especially that of Jeff Bridges, were well-done, the direction was capable, and the racing scenes were very nicely scripted given the impossibility of directing horses. Very much worth a rental. *** ½
Rating:
Summary: The American "Chariots of Fire."
Review: The only negative criticism here is that this movie is very predictable. Does anyone really think Seabiscuit is going to lose any of the close races he is in? There were others, but I won't nitpick such a finely made film. It is finely made. It is heartfelt, and emotional, and the quality of the production is top-notch. This just isn't the masterpiece that so many people have told me. I have an aunt who asked me if I had seen this movie. When I told her "no, not yet" she gasped and was at a loss for words to describe what she apparently thought was one of the greatest films she had ever seen. While it is a good film, and some might see it as flawless and beautiful, it is not perfect. I could name 5 films from last year that I thought were better than this one. Could anyone really say this is on the same level as "Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" or "The Pirates of the Carribean"? However, "Seabiscuit" is worth seeing. Perhaps more than once.
Rating:
Summary: Too Good for Peoples Choice and Acacdemy Awards
Review: Great movie, all the right touches of the history of three men and a horse that stirred the nation. Narration by David McCullough a nice touch. Interwoven story line moved fluently with the right music in the right places. Haven't seen this great a movie in years. Too good for an Oscar and Peoples Choice Awards. I watch it almost every night--there is nothing to compare to what is on TV.
|
