Hidalgo Review
by Josh Gilchrist (joshgilch AT aol DOT com)March 16th, 2004
Hidalgo * * out of * * * *
review by Josh Gilchrist
Napolean described history as "..the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon." Indeed, history has been skewed in nearly every society, no more so than with cinematic endeavors. This is especially true today with the advent of Computer Generated Effects, turning a tragedy like Pearl Harbor into another Jerry Bruckheimer thrill ride, or political correctness, causing sappy "historical" sagas like "Dances With Wolves" and "The Last Samurai.
It's hard for me to remember many "historical" films of recent years that are more unbelievable, not to mention superficial and just plain silly, than "Hidalgo." Western clichés and racist stereotypes are piled on thick in a story about horseman Frank T. Hopkins (Viggo Mortensen). A 3,000 mile horse race across the deserts of Saudi Arabia and Iraq is the backdrop. Historians dispute the existence of such a race based on studies. The average Joe will dispute it based on common sense. Maybe the main dispute is whether this film should even carry the slogan "Based on a true story." Based on legend is probably a more suitable description.
Sure, an unbelievable historical revision can be lots of fun, like the old serials or an adventure with Indiana Jones. "Hidalgo" is obviously trying to capture some of that magic, with its well choreographed action scenes and sometimes dark humor. I think that we can all attest to the fact that when we try to hard to emulate something, it comes out disjointed and even boring. Lightning doesn't strike twice, no matter how hard director Joe Johnston, who worked on some of the Indiana Jones projects wants it to. Johnston, who worked
on the special effects for the original Star Wars films, even has trouble incorporating CGI into this horse tale. The film is too far-fetched and overdone. At a running time of 90 minutes, it may have worked, but with the film running 2 hrs and 16 minutes, there's too much empty space to go along with the action.
The film proves that Mortensen is no real actor, not a surprise to this critic
who found his work in the "Lord of the Rings" films sleep inducing. What's even
worse here is that the horse playing the title character seems to give a better
performance than Viggo. There's more emotion in one puzzled look from the horse
than there is in Mortensen's entire performance. The only decent acting in the
film comes from Omar Sharif, playing a Sheik who befriends our cowboy hero.
This is material that would have been better had more talented folks been behind the production. There's certainly a rousing tale here, even if it's illogical. The difference between this horse saga and "Seabiscuit" is that the
latter successfully played with our emotions instead of our patience. The audience cared for Seabiscuit. The only time I cheered for Hidalgo is when he upstaged Viggo.
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
