Secretariat: Review By Bryan Yentz

Okay, so let's just get this out of the way... Yes... Yes, I did watch Secretariat... Okay... It's not my typical forte, but, well... Yeah...

Now that I've lifted that weight off of my shoulders, I think I might be able to continue with the rest of the review.

Secretariat--put bluntly--is exactly what you'd expect. As with any film described in this way, one can expect a double-edged sword dilemma: it works for and against the content at hand. On the one side, you have a movie which will can undoubtedly appeal to audiences of all ages, but on the other, nearly nothing witnessed therein will be permanent-file material; viewer's will most likely forget much of the movie simply because it was the same old, same old--everything you've already seen before. Much of this weighs on the director's shoulders--whether or not they'll interpret the script in a new light, or repeat the same motions they've seen before. Sadly, Randall Wallace chooses the latter as most of the narrative feels as though it's on dramatic standby, offering little in the way of creative storytelling and dynamic camera maneuvers.

Based upon the true story of Penny Tweedy and her stallion, Secretariat tells the motivational tale of their rise from lowliness and grief to that of respect and unbeatable determination. Having lost her mother and discovering the injustice occurring on the family farm, Penny Tweedy (played by Diane Lane) decides to take circ*mstances into her own hands and begins rebuilding her father's lost horse empire with the aid of her staff, the flamboyant Lucien Laurin (John Malkovich) and of course, Secretariat his'self.

Everything that this film does is meant to inspire; to pull heartstrings but ultimately mend them. And that's completely fine. What makes movies such as this difficult is that they rarely go out of their way to make their material unforgettable; they don't apply themselves enough to deliver their content in interesting or truly compelling ways. Sprinkled throughout the racing portions of the film, Wallace hints at some interesting camera positions in order to push the aspect of speed and vigor. While these moments are a decent change of pace compared to the typical mid-to-long shots viewers are used to seeing for this kind of flick. Shots are seen from the dirt-tossing hooves of galloping horses, to others in which the camera seems locked atop the horse with rider. I appreciated these visceral adjustments in camera blocking, but they just didn't do enough with it. If they could place cameras so close to the rampaging gallop, there's no reason they couldn't have been placed in other ways (such as the locked steadicam upon the subject) to further this near-intriguing choice of direction. Along with this, the production value drops during these moments as they obviously chose cheaper, home-video style cameras for these portions so as not to have to pay out the wazoo for damaged equipment--my guess.

My other big issue with the film is that it doesn't feel like it's about the horse. It feels like a drama about the people. Now, while this is obviously a story about human triumph, it's also about the horse. And as an animal lover--I wanted to see more "chemistry" between the people and the beast. Hell, the entire youth of the horse is an extremely brief montage sequence, then he's suddenly old and practiced enough to begin racing. With a story like this, it's important to develop the animal just as much as its human counterparts. As a result, the horse felt like an extra as it didn't get any sort of emotional rise from me whereas movies like "The Bear", and even "Seabiscuit" made me root for the creature till the uplifting end.

The performances themselves are fitting, but not cinema-shaking. I've heard a lot of critics going on about Lane's performance, but I found it typical of the genre. Yes, she's a talented woman and can cry on command, but this is just obvious and distinctive. Not bad, just... What you'd expect. John Malkovich... Ugh... Is hit or miss... Typically miss. I'm pretty sure that he doesn't even read scripts anymore but just shows up to various studios before telling them that he's going to be in their movie. It's rare to see him acting as anything other than himself and Secretariat is no exception. Practically every line he delivers sounds like the last as it's normally free of inflection or many times emotion. And some will even notice the farm's caretaker played by Nelsan Ellis whose best known for his hilariously bisexual, vampire-blood stealing Lafayette from the over-sexualized show "True Blood". Here, he's... Well, I think I've used the word "typical" too much now.

Secretariat isn't a bad film by any means, it's just lacking. While it utilizes some better direction than previous endeavors of this ilk, it doesn't force any of it to honestly separate itself from the rest of the neighing herd. Along with this, the film stresses the relationship between its human personalities rather than that of the relationship they have with the horse, and for me, that's a no-no when it comes to stories revolving around an animal. At the end of the course however, the film is in uplifting tale that has the ability to motivate younger crowds and keep older groups happy with its enthusiastic tone and inspiring message... It's just... Too... Ah, what the hell, one more time! Too typical for me.