Sports and Hollywood

[Solecismic]

Last night, due to the miracle of Movies on Demand*, I saw the movie Hidalgo.

Now here's one of the bigger bombs in recent history. It cost $90 million to produce, and it's a beautiful movie with a lot of horses and stunning desert scenery. But it brought in only $65 million.

The acting is decent enough. The subject - an American endurance-racing champion travels to the Middle East to participate in a 3,000-mile race across the Arabian Desert - is compelling.

Disney gave this movie the full epic treatment. For a movie that has very few budget-busting special effects, it was expensive to make. A significant investment that required significant attention from Eisner himself, no doubt.

But it's a dreadful movie. One, it features a love story that isn't. But that's just annoying, maybe a loss of one star in the Solecismic Guide to Movies.**

What makes this a bomb is its treatment of the key sporting event itself. Now stop reading if you don't Hidalgo spoiled for future viewing, not that it's a movie that can be spoiled. The plot line is as obvious as any plot line ever devised. Hidalgo wins a race of approximately 24,000 furlongs by less than one length.

You have this magnificent 3,000-mile race of endurance. Those who fail die in the hot sands. Those who succeed have been tested to the very limits of imagination. This race is apparently central to the very culture of the nomads who inhabited this region of the world.

And the script captures almost none of how the American succeeds in this race. For most of this movie, his horse is portrayed as a buffoon among horses. Too small to keep up, like a donkey at the Kentucky Derby. He's dead last, just hanging in there.

With about 400 miles remaining, Hidalgo collapses in the desert, blood running from his nose (he's already been impaled by a spear and shot at by horse thieves). Frank, who knows horses like no one has ever known horses, pulls out his revolver and places it against Hidalgo's head. Game over.

But no. Frank is visited by the spirits of his dead relatives, and he's revived. And Hidalgo stands up, just as fresh as if rested for weeks on end. And then suddenly we're in a three-horse sprint to the finish, Hidalgo coming from 100 yards back to win.

There's absolutely no footage that even remotely depicts how this transformation from donkey to superstar took place, and precious little to show how they survived. Why was Hidalgo the greatest distance racer of all time? We get none of that.

From a dramatic perspective, I suppose this is just Hollywood, business as usual. But I've noticed over the years that Hollywood just doesn't get sports movies. Every once in a while you have a book like Kinsella's Field of Dreams that gets adapted. Or something like Bull Durham, that was written and directed (on a miniscule budget) by a former sports star.

But for the most part, Hollywood sports movies don't get it. You see scoreboards with obvious mistakes. You see action sequences that make the athletes look like spastic children. You get story lines that make no sense.

Why is that? Is sports/Hollywood the same type of dichotomy as science/religion? Is the stereotype of a Hollywood actor as a 5-foot-4 gay man with lifts and liberal use of doubles (for the long shots) true***?

Why won't studios who are willing to invest $90 million in a major motion picture spend a few thousand to hire a sportswriter to go through the script and ensure it makes sense from a sports perspective?

Or am I just beating a dead horse (Hidalgo)? Is there anyone here who thought that was a good movie?

(* - If you subscribe to Starz and/or HBO and digital cable, you have access to dozens of movies at any time - highly addictive stuff. I watched all three Matrix movies for the first time in one 6 1/2-hour block the other night.)

(** - No release date yet announced. In fact we can neither confirm nor deny that we're actually working on a project like this, and we're not certain it will ever be released, or even worked on.)

(*** - Offensive stereotypes are usually guaranteed to add 50-or-so posts to the life of an item. I apologize in advance for offending about 99% of the audience with that paragraph.)

[VPI97]

Go rent Hoop Dreams and you'll feel better.


or not.

[fantastic flying froggies]

Funny, I saw just the trailer of Hidalgo, and that was enough for me...

As for your question, when has Hollywood been bothered with realism ? It's of course true for sports as you mention, but just about everything else too...

[Hammer755]

But remember that we have been blessed in the past couple of years with some quality sports movies in Miracle and Friday Night Lights.

[Barkeep49]

But remember that we have been blessed in the past couple of years with some quality sports movies in Miracle and Friday Night Lights.
I would add Million Dollar Baby to that list.

I wonder how many writers and directors in Hollywood ever seriously competed in sports. Seems to me that could be a possible explanation for why they don't get "it".

[Dutch]

I took my family to the theater to see Hidalgo. That movie sucked. And was responsible for me thinking twice about going to pay 50 bucks for the 4 of us in the future. We have more fun ordering pizza and chillin at the house watching movies anyway.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I dunno, I would say Hollywood does "sports" movies as good as it does any other genre of film. The misses often far exceed the hits. As folks here have already mentioned, there have been a number of quality sports films in recent years: Miracle, Friday Night Lights, Million Dollar Baby, Seabiscuit, etc. That's a far more impressive list of "hits" in the sports movie genre in recent years than, say, horror movies. How many quality horror movies have there been in recent years? The Ring, the re-make of Dawn of the Dead, and maybe The Gudge (can't say, I haven't seen it, though it did well at the box office).

As for Hildago, I haven't seen the movie, but I never considered it to be a "sports" movie. I guess it does involve a big race (competition), but I see it more as an "epic" than a sports movie. Just like I see the "Cannonball Run" movies as comedies as oppsoed to sports movies, even though they involve a long race as well.

[Dutch]

I think that's the big problem with Hidalgo. It's viewed going in as an epic when in reality it's an attempt at a summer blockbuster. If you are intentionally going after large audiences, chances are, you follow rule #1 in making it vastly popular. You have to make it a dumbed down action and/or love flick.

It's the big mistake Pearl Harbor made. Pearl Harbor would have been a vastly superior movie if it was about Pearl Harbor. But it wouldn't have made as much money as a movie about Ben Afleck, sadly.

(EDIT: Big mistake as in chasing audiences rather than storyline. I think Pearl Harbor was successful as opposed to Hidalgo, which fell flat).

[gstelmack]

Well, when you base a movie's storyline on pretty-much-guaranteed tall tale*, what do you expect?

(* - History Channel did a bit on this in their ongoing series that looks at the true story behind allegedly true Hollywood movies, which Hidalgo was billed to be. They can find no evidence that any such race existed, and the character of Frank pretty much appears to have been an excellent, uh, "self-promoter". So they took a made-up storyling and tried to make a realistic movie out of it. That's a recipe for failure.)

[Solecismic]

You'd think, given that there apparently isn't much truth about the Hidalgo story, they could have crafted a better movie. What was Eisner thinking? It's no wonder they're kicking him out.

[Easy Mac]

I really didn't think the football in Friday Night Lights was overly realistic. I don't need kids flipping around every tackle to make me know there was hard hitting.

[bosshogg23]

Friday Night Lights the book isnt a sports book exactly. Its more about social and racial issues than it is about jerseys and field goals.

The movie is about high school sports. Its an ok movie, just not what the book was about.

About Hidalgo, I had no idea it was supposed to be a real event until I read this thread. I always assumed it was a fictional situation that was created for the movie.

[cartman]

I really didn't think the football in Friday Night Lights was overly realistic. I don't need kids flipping around every tackle to make me know there was hard hitting.

That's just how high school football is in Texas, EM... :D

[oykib]

I think it's symptomatic of Hollywood in general.

You see this same kind of thing in most of the 'genre' work that Hollywood produces.

It's really no different than say...SF/Fantasy. Tell me a movie where the science worked and/or the storyline was compelling and I'll show you a movie based on a great book/series (Lord of the Rings) or was produced on a minimal budget and therefore had one driving vision (Star Wars Trilogy, Brother from Another Planet).

I think it has likely gotten worse in recent years because of the overuse of focus audiences. If enough idiots say that they would have liked the movie better with a love story, you can be damn sure that they're gonna ram it in there.

My point, though, is that I don't think that sports movies are unique in this regard. How many of the love stories that your wives and girlfriends bamboozled you into seeing were remotely plausible? I bet you can count the number of good mysteries that you've seen in the past few years on one hand. Etc.

[kcchief19]

I dunno, I would say Hollywood does "sports" movies as good as it does any other genre of film. The misses often far exceed the hits. As folks here have already mentioned, there have been a number of quality sports films in recent years: Miracle, Friday Night Lights, Million Dollar Baby, Seabiscuit, etc. That's a far more impressive list of "hits" in the sports movie genre in recent years than, say, horror movies. Two things this makes me think about:

1) I think you're boosting the hit quotient of sports movies by throwing out the bad ones: Varsity Blues, Any Given Sunday, The Replacements, that horrible baseball movie with Freddie Prinze, any movie in which an animal is playing a sport other than racing, etc.

2) I go back to one of Jim's central themes which is that why do sports movies have to be so bad at the sport. I haven't seen FNL, but I'm intrigued at the number of people who speak of the movie's "realism." I have seen a number of clips of the movie, 90 percent being a highlight reel of football plays (the other 10 percent being closeups of Billy Bob Thornton looking like the tough, crusty football coach with the heart of gold) and they all look like they were choregraphed by the WWE. Every clip I've seen has plays that high school kids just don't/can't make or have such eggregious penalties that they could would probably have been ejected -- spearing, unnecessary roughness, etc.

The Rookie from a couple of years ago is another one that seems to get a lot of love from critics and fans. But my summation of that movie was similar to Jim's take on Hidalgo. It was a movie based on a real-life story, and while I suppose it was heartwarming and inspirational to some, my two chief complaints about it were the scenes with Dennis Quaid as a pitcher were simply unbelieveable and there wasn't enough in the story to tell you how he was able to make the transformation he made.

Maybe it's more than a coincidence that both of these films were Disney efforts.

[Easy Mac]

2) I go back to one of Jim's central themes which is that why do sports movies have to be so bad at the sport. I haven't seen FNL, but I'm intrigued at the number of people who speak of the movie's "realism." I have seen a number of clips of the movie, 90 percent being a highlight reel of football plays (the other 10 percent being closeups of Billy Bob Thornton looking like the tough, crusty football coach with the heart of gold) and they all look like they were choregraphed by the WWE. Every clip I've seen has plays that high school kids just don't/can't make or have such eggregious penalties that they could would probably have been ejected -- spearing, unnecessary roughness, etc
No, that's pretty much the movie.

[Franklinnoble]

Seabiscuit wasn't too bad, if you want a better horse movie.

In fact, I think Jim should watch it. Maybe he'll be inspired to do a horse racing sim...

[thealmighty]

I saw Hidalgo...I hated Hidalgo. However, it IS based on a true story...

"Biographer Charles B. Roth considered him the "supreme rider." Famed western historian J. Frank Dobie listed him in his homage to the country's best and last true mustangers, and Albert Harris dedicated two chapters to him in his famed book, Blood of the Arab.

According to the U.S. Remount Service Journal of 1936, he competed in and won over 400 long-distance races, including a legendary 3,000-mile endurance ride across the Arabian Desert in 1890 on his mustang stallion, Hidalgo."

If you care to educate yourself in any way, here you go.

http://www.frankhopkins.com/

[21C]

Sports movies are considered bad by the sports lover who notices the mistakes and the Hollywood treatment.

The same goes for cop shows or hospital dramas. Those are looked upon with disdain by their respective professions for "not getting it right" too. The average Joe watching those shows doesn't care if it is not being done right but whether it is entertaining or not.

People expect the maverick cop who "throws away the book" and goes against their "gruff chief" who told them to stay off a particular case or risk getting fired. It's just Hollywood - or formulaic. Mass audiences prefer "entertainment" rather than reality.

On a similar note, who has ever seen a real life explosion where there are skyrocket effects shooting out of a car/building/airplane? OK, now I'm off on a tangent . . .

[Solecismic]

Just like with a sports sim, anything that isn't realistic or plausible is going to stand out. That's not necessarily the case with other genres.


Maybe it's more than a coincidence that both of these films were Disney efforts.

Two Words: Knuckle Puck.

Seabiscuit wasn't too bad, if you want a better horse movie.

In fact, I think Jim should watch it. Maybe he'll be inspired to do a horse racing sim...

I've seen it. Also on In Demand recently. I really didn't like it. Way too slow for my liking. I'm not a horse racing fan at all.

If you care to educate yourself in any way, here you go.

http://www.frankhopkins.com/


You know the person who wrote Hidalgo created that web site.

There's no evidence there ever was a 3,000-mile race across the Arabian Desert. Nor is there really a way to do anything like that, certainly not the way it's described.

From everything I've read, not much of what Frank Hopkins said he did actually took place. Most of his claimed exploits have been thoroughly debunked, including just about everything mentioned in the movie.

[Franklinnoble]

I've seen it. Also on In Demand recently. I really didn't like it. Way too slow for my liking. I'm not a horse racing fan at all.


Seriously... and, I'm really not trying to nag you here, but have you given it much of a shot?

Honestly, I think you'd dig it. I don't know which thoroughbred tracks are available in your area, but I think you should give it just one shot - one Saturday out at the track. Get there early, study the Daily Racing Form... see how it all really works. I think you're passion for statistics and such would really make you appreciate the sport.

Ask Quiksand if you don't believe me... there's nothing like it....

[ISiddiqui]

My best friend rides horses. She saw "Hidalgo" with her barn and they HATED it! She said it was totally unrealistic and she counted at least 5 different horses that they used for Hidalgo, with minimal attempts to cover up that they weren't just using one horse. She was not a fan, but it was free for her.

She usually doesn't like horse riding movies, because they usually do too much wrong while riding and she wants to correct. For example, she didn't like "Seabiscuit" so much because she was focused on the unrealistic riding. Toby Maguire wasn't that great of a rider, and the FINAL race really got her goat. There is no way in a race that a rider can slow down his horse to pull level with the guy in the back and engage in a conversation. It'd be too loud to talk and secondly, if the horse was in the front, it'd be very hard to pull him all the way back without sitting down in the saddle.

She loved the book, however, which was written by a horse person.

[Anthony]

i like how in Hidalgo Frank went to the rebel city to rescue the princess with only 1 or 2 other guys.

a couple of guys took on an entire rebel city. but it's ok cuz he was riding on Hidalgo.

for all intents and purposes there is no way to believe that after being pierced with a spear/spike a horse could walk normal let alone come from behind to win a race.

in the fucking desert.

[Dutch]

Yeah, I'm guessing "realism" was the first word that hit the cutting room floor when they were throwing that movie together.