The story is great, the movie is bad. I didn't care for the casting, except for the actor who played Eddie the caddy and the actor who played Vardon.
I didn't care for the directing. The story of Ouimet is so good that it would have been great without all the weird camera work. For example, several times at an exciting point in the game, Paxton used weird flashbacks and cartoon like contrivances. And what was the point of the ladybug on the ball? Sometimes it got just plain weird.
I have other problems with the movie, but the playoff statistics were entirely incorrect. In the 1913 US Open playoff Ouimet shot a 72, Vardon shot a 77, and Ray shot a 78. (source: golfweb.com)
The movie ending shows Ouimet winning by one stroke. I give it 5 out of 10 just because the story is so good. I just don't understand why Disney felt they had to change history to make it a good movie.
I didn't care for the directing. The story of Ouimet is so good that it would have been great without all the weird camera work. For example, several times at an exciting point in the game, Paxton used weird flashbacks and cartoon like contrivances. And what was the point of the ladybug on the ball? Sometimes it got just plain weird.
I have other problems with the movie, but the playoff statistics were entirely incorrect. In the 1913 US Open playoff Ouimet shot a 72, Vardon shot a 77, and Ray shot a 78. (source: golfweb.com)
The movie ending shows Ouimet winning by one stroke. I give it 5 out of 10 just because the story is so good. I just don't understand why Disney felt they had to change history to make it a good movie.