Hidalgo is one of those films that Hollywood refers to as a “inspired by a true story” story. Since the person who inspired it, Frank Hopkins is dead, and has been since 1951, I’m going to presume he had little to no influence on this film. Mr. Hopkins, please cover your eyes for this review is not pretty. My apologies to you in advance sir. I mean no harm.

In the simplest terms this is a goal film and the goal is to win a horse race through the most treacherous terrain known to man. I was surprised to see this terrain did not include Newark at 2am on a Saturday night. Is that not treacherous? Hidalgo is a period piece which seems unnecessary since 80 percent of it is set in the desert. It’s hot. It’s sandy. It’s Iraq. How much has that really changed in the last 100 years?

If the film centered entirely on the race, it might have been OK. The problem is that the motives for Hopkins to win the race are neither clear nor seem worth what he went through. He’s cast as this “I’m in it for the hell of it” kinda guy with a zippy horse. OK, neat. We learn a little bit about Frank Hopkins and Viggo Mortensen does make him seem interesting. But an interesting and slightly amusing Frank Hopkins does not an exciting goal film make.

The other key characters face serious limitations, I wanted more of them but more never came. This is a case where the parts shine individually but fail to gel when pieced together.

Another problem working against this film is that it followed shortly after horse movie, Seabiscuit. In many ways, Seabiscuit filled America’s need for such dramas for the next decade. So maybe I’m a little burnt on the magic horse thing. I’ll be the first to admit that bias.

The good parts about this film include the good looking horse and the believable rapport between Hidalgo and Frank. The special effects were good. A few of the jokes worked well. The cameras were all in focus.

In the end, this film is best suited for cable. When it comes to HBO give it a whirl and save your ducats.