Sallie Gardner at a Gallop (1878) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
16 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
The Horse in Motion/ Sallie Gardener at Gallop
automon-8939020 September 2021
Warning: Spoilers
(Major plot twist spoilers)

Being the first movie ever made, you know it's probably going to turn out to be a slow-movie movie.

Well actually it isn't. The movie fast paced, and it's straight to the point.

The movie takes place in 1878, with our main character, Domm. Domm is a horse jockey who enters a horse race with his horse being named "Sallie Gardener". When the movie begins, it's pretty much a racing movie. This is very similar to "Steel Ball Run" in that it has a very long horse racing scene.

But the real plot twist is when Sallie Gardener breaks the speed of light, and then the movie repeats itself. It starts all over again.

This movie for me has got to be a 7.1. And that's pretty good for being the first movie ever made.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
So what's left to say?...
AlsExGal3 July 2023
...There is the guy taking the academic standpoint and who wrote a film school master's thesis about this early experiment as a review. At the other end of the spectrum there is the guy who wrote his review as satire as though he'd seen this in a movie theater and was very upset for having wasted his time and money on it. So what's left to say at this point but - "Look at the pretty horsie"? Well, I'll try.

Leland Stanford was a horse enthusiast, industrialist, and railroad baron who became governor of California later in the 19th century and was the founder of Stanford University. He wanted to settle a bet as to whether or not all four hooves of a horse were off the ground at any point in time when running. He turned to noted photographer Eadweard Muybridge for that task.

Muybridge used multiple cameras to photograph Stanford's Kentucky-bred Sallie Gardner, galloping at the businessman's farm in Palo Alto, in the presence of the press. The shutters were controlled by trip wires triggered by the horse's legs. However, to correctly display the horse in motion required an invention by Muybridge that was completed the year after the photos were taken - the zoopraxiscope. It projects images from rotating glass disks in rapid succession to give the illusion of motion, and is considered the oldest movie projector. The 24 photos Muybridge took of Sallie Gardner running were shown using this device. This invention inspired Edison's invention, the Kinetoscope, the first commercial film exhibition system. And the answer? Yes, there is a point when all four hooves are indeed off of the ground.

Later, when Muybridge was in Europe touring and demonstrating his technique and his images in motion, he was told that back in the United States Leland Stanford had published a book entitled "The Horse In Motion", basically claiming credit for the early motion studies as his own, with no mention of Muybridge. This left Muybridge bereft of reputation. This was a rather dangerous thing for Stanford to do since Muybridge had, in 1874, committed the premeditated murder of a man he suspected to be his wife's lover and yet was acquitted with a verdict of justifiable homicide. Stanford would have known about this because, among other reasons, he paid for Muybridge's defense.

If all of the colorful characters that went into this forerunner to moton pictures had not existed, then the motion picture industry would have eventually invented them. I give this an 8/10 for its importance to the history of motion pictures.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
She'll Be Comin Round The Mountain
luisisswag25 July 2019
She never stops galloping, HUGE movie in its time.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Art of Chronophotography
Cineanalyst12 November 2013
Sometimes ascribed as "The Father of the Motion Picture", Eadweard Muybridge undeniably accomplished exploiting and sometimes introducing a means of instantaneous and serial images to analyze and synthesize animal locomotion. In part, the reasons for and the claims made of his work support Virgilio Tosi's thesis that cinema was invented out of the needs of scientific research. Conversely, they're informed by Muybridge's background as an artistic location photographer and, as Phillip Prodger suggests, in book sales and more useful to art than to science, as Marta Braun has demonstrated (see sources at bottom). Additionally, Muybridge quickly exploited their entertainment value via projection to audiences across the U.S. and Europe. Muybridge pursued both of these paths of invention: the path taken by Jules Janssen, Étienne-Jules Marey and others for science and the path taken by Ottomar Anschütz, Thomas Edison, the Lumiére brothers and others for fame and profit.

Muybridge began taking instantaneous single photographs of multi-millionaire railroad magnate Leland Stanford's horses in motion in 1872. It was disputed at the time whether all four of a horse's legs were off the ground simultaneously at any time while running. Although no surviving photographs prove it, contemporary lithographs and paintings likely based on the photographs, indeed, show the moment of "unsupported transit". In between and interrupting these experiments, Muybridge was found not guilty of the admittedly premeditated fatal shooting of his wife's lover and possibly her son's father.

Publication of Marey's graphic measurements of a horse's movements reignited Stanford's interest in the gait of horses. In turn, Marey was convinced to switch to photography in his motion studies after witnessing Muybridge's work (see "Falling Cat" (1894)). This work in "automatic electro-photographs" began in 1878 at Stanford's Palo Alto Stock Farm. Multiple cameras were stored in a shed parallel to a track. A series of closing boards serving as shutters were triggered by tripped threads and electrical means. The wet collodion process of the time, reportedly, could need up to half a minute for an exposure. For the split-second shutter speeds required here, a white canvas background and powdered lime on the track provided more contrast to compensate for less light getting to the glass plates. Employees of Stanford's Central Pacific Railroad and others helped in constructing this "set" and camera equipment.

Contrary to unattributed claims on the web, this so-called "Sallie Gardner at a Gallop" wasn't the first series photographed by Muybridge. Six series of Muybridge's first subjects were published on cards entitled "The Horse in Motion". The first is of the horse Abe Edgington trotting on 11 June 1878. Reporters were invited for the next two series on June 15th, and, as they reported, again, Abe went first—trotting and pulling the driver behind in a sulky, which is what tripped the threads. The second subject that day was Sallie Gardner running and, thus, the mare had to trip the threads. Reporters noted how this spooked her and how that was reflected in the negatives developed on the spot. As one article said, she "gave a wild bound in the air, breaking the saddle girth as she left the ground." Based on such descriptions, it doesn't seem that this series exists anymore. The animations on the web that are actually of Sallie are dated June 19th on "The Horse in Motion" card. Many animations claimed to be Sallie on YouTube, Wikipedia and elsewhere, as of this date, are actually of a mare named Annie G. and were part of Muybridge's University of Pennsylvania work published in 1887, as the Library of Congress and other reliable sources have made clear. The early Palo Alto photographs aren't as detailed and are closer to silhouettes. The 12 images of Gardner also include one where she's stationary. The Morse's Gallery pictures are entirely in silhouette, while the La Nature engravings of these same images show the rider in a white shirt.

The shot of the horse stationary, as Braun points out, was added later and is indicative of the artistic and un-scientific assemblages Muybridge made of his images—with the intent of publication, including in his own books. This was especially prominent in his Pennsylvania work, which included many nude models that were surely useful for art. Muybridge influenced artists from Realists like Thomas Eakins and Meissonier, Impressionists like Edgar Degas and Frederick Remington, to the more abstract works of Francis Bacon. His precedence has also been cited in the photography of Steven Pippin and Hollis Frampton, as well as the bullet-time effects in "The Matrix" (1999).

Muybridge lectured on this relationship with art when touring with his Zoöpraxiscope, which was a combination of the magic lantern and phenakistoscope. With it, he projected, from glass disks, facsimiles of his photographs hand-painted by Erwin Faber. Without intermittent movement, the Zoöpraxiscope compressed the images, so elongated drawings were used instead of photographs. Muybridge and others also used his images for phenakistoscopes and zoetropes. The first demonstration of the Zoöpraxiscope was to Stanford and friends in the autumn of 1879. A public demonstration was given on 4 May 1880 for the San Francisco art association, and Muybridge continued these lectures for years—personally touring the U.S. and Europe. Although there were predecessors in animated projections as far back as 1847 by Leopold Ludwig Döbler, in 1853 by Franz von Uchatius, and with posed photographs by Henry Heyl in 1870, the chronophotographic and artistic basis offered some novelty for Muybridge's presentations. They also led him to meet Edison and Marey and inspire the likes of Anschütz and others—those who took the next steps in the invention of movies.

(Main Sources: "The Inventor and the Tycoon" by Edward Ball. "Eadweard Muybridge" and "Picturing Time" by Marta Braun. "The Man Who Stopped Time" by Brian Clegg. "Man in Motion" by Robert Bartlett Haas. "The Father of the Motion Picture" by Gordon Hendricks. "The Stanford Years, 1872-1882" edited by Anita Ventura Mozley. "Time Stands Still" by Phillip Prodger. "Cinema Before Cinema" by Virgilio Tosi.)
25 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Horse gif
littlepinkunicorn4 December 2021
Today I would consider it a gif not a movie. The idea and background story are interesting but nothing special today. I could imagine back then it was big deal.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Ryan told me to do so
abheesh-7906316 October 2019
I just watched screen rant and ryan commanded me to get this movie to 8 so I am doing what I can. Get this movie to 8 people!!!!! Or You won't be able to get to live in Québec when his producer buys canada.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Credit to Jordan Peele
view_and_review5 September 2022
I'm crediting Jordan Peele and the movie "Nope" for me even having an interest in this. "Nope" wasn't that good, but that's beside the point. In there one of the characters mentioned that the very first "movie" was of Black jockey on a horse.

Just on a quick search I found that on 19 June 1878, Muybridge decided to do an experiment. He rigged a race track with 12 strings and made a race-horse named Sallie Gardner gallop on the track. Sallie Gardner was a mare owned by Leland Stanford, governor of California. The galloping horse broke the strings one by one as it went through them. These 12 strings were attached with a series of 12 cameras. The associated camera took a photo as soon as the attached string would break. The result was a series of 12 photos in which 2nd and 3rd photos showed Sallie Gardner's all hooves off the ground. Once again, Muybridge was successful in answering the horse gallop question. But more importantly Muybridge was able to produce the world's first motion picture showing a galloping horse by quickly running these 12 photographs in sequence. Muybridge had actually laid the foundation of modern videography.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Give Sally an Oscar! (Were they a thing in 1878?)
rhodabike19 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Sally plays the part of the horse more convincingly than any horse I've seen in a movie, before or since. I'd like to say that she's kept her hooves firmly on the ground and fame hasn't spoiled her, but you can clearly see that only one hoof ever touches the earth at any given time. Domm was a bit stiff in the supporting role, but he plays the part of the jockey quite adequately. At times he seems to rein in her enthusiasm.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
this movie is so amazing
hyrax255 November 2022
This movie is a 10 out of 10 best cinematic motion pictures ever published. I love how the audio complements the visuals and how the man goes in a circle.

I don't know what I would do without this masterpiece of a film I think it is so very advanced for its time and I am Imprest with how it holds up in court and how Jonny Depp won a very well 10 out of 10.

I think what this film lacks in the story makes up for in characters and humor. I think it is one of the best and most well-acted pieces in all of film history.

This is what I think of when I think of films. I love everything about this movie and I think the best part of it was when the guy was in the horse anyway 10 out of 10 100% would watch it again.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
The very first motion picture of all time
Horst_In_Translation4 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
So this is it. Interestingly enough, this is also the only movie-related work by Eadweard Muybridge. I'm truly curious how people perceived and reacted to these 3 seconds back in the 1880s.

Muybridge certainly made a good choice for picking this subject, a majestic horse and its rider with a strong contrast in color between his shirt and his breeches. Surely a smart move to use the animal's hooves as the trigger for making the shots. If you take a close enough look you can see the numbers of the photographs he used in the bottom left. What I also liked about it is all the different shadows and shades altering constantly. It must have been a unique experience to see something in motion that, at the point of time when they saw it, was already long gone.
7 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
24 Cameras 1 Horse
Michael_Elliott21 July 2015
Sallie Gardner at the Gallop (1878)

While this here isn't technically the first movie, it was certainly a great introduction of what was to come. We basically see a horse being filmed by twenty-four different cameras for what amounts to a moving image. I'm not about to rip off other people's work so it's best that you Google this title and read for yourself what exactly had to be done to give it the effect that we are seeing today. It's impossible to viewing this as a "movie" and it would be silly to do so especially since that's not what it is. It's just twenty-four images of a horse put together and of course we know what happens.
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
2.24.2024
EasonVonn24 February 2024
Not need unnecessary compliments for the greatness. The great is always great. The origin of cinema."One of smutbridge's earliest motion studies June 19, 1878""Not until 1878 did split-second exposure times become feasible. Rapid photography became the third precondition for cinema as we know it"FILM HISTORY pag.

Not need unnecessary compliments for the greatness. The great is always great. The origin of cinema."One of smutbridge's earliest motion studies June 19, 1878""Not until 1878 did split-second exposure times become feasible. Rapid photography became the third precondition for cinema as we know it"FILM HISTORY pag.

Saksisisisisissiwiwisiissiisisisisisisisisisisisisisisisisisiissisisisisisisisisisiisisisisisisisisisi.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
More of a Gimmick Nowadays
emryse28 October 2021
If you're watching this film nowadays it's more of a gimmick than anything. Something to watch out of curiosity for the beginnings of film, I'm giving it a plain 5/10 because to be honest I have no clue what to rate it.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not the First Movie
Tornado_Sam21 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Sallie Gardner at a Gallop" is probably the one experiment that made its maker, Eadweard Muybridge, famous. That's probably because it's his first. Muybridge himself would go on to create hundreds of these brief series photographies, featuring both humans and animals. While this man is certainly a key influence on the development of motion pictures, this movie here is not the first movie. Why? It's just a lot of photos. You cannot call a series of photos shown one after another to create the illusion of movement a film, because it's not an actual strip of celluloid. It's just photos.

But, despite this, the historical value remains. This one may not have been a true motion picture, but it was inspiration for what was to come. The short was made using 24 different cameras. These cameras, triggered by trip wires, would each snap a photo after the trip wire was triggered. As a result, we end up with 24 different photos when put together show the horse galloping.

Originally, the idea of this was to see if a horse had all four feet off the ground and briefly air-born, as Leland Stanford believed they did. Muybridge was more interested in proving Stanford's theory correct than actually trying to create a moving picture. But despite this, "Sallie Gardner at a Gallop" remains a look into the beginning of motion picture experiments today and can be viewed on YouTube and Wikipedia. While not the first movie, Muybridge had the right idea when he made it. An eight for the historic value behind it.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Very bad, just watch Rick and Morty
What an awful, awful film. Would give it zero stars if I could. It's so odd because I saw some reviewers saying this film was Cinéma Vérité, when, in actuality, it is an OBJECTIVELY bad film. There are so many issues with this movie, where to begin. For one, it feels like it has nothing to say. A film without allegory can work if it has good comedy, but the jokes in this movie fell flat. Just like the people I punched after the screening I saw. This whole movie could have worked much better if they just got one auteur to run the project, without that, the film feels visionless. If one filmmaker was behind it from the start, issues like its tonal consistency, Mise-en-scène, uncoordinated Chiaroscuro and the lack of a final Denouement to end the film would be non-existent. And a comic relief could have helped with the horribly depressing tone the film was going for. Also, what was this movie's audience? Was it a comedy? No, the jokes are super dull. Was it a coming of age tale? No, because the only tail in this movie is the horse's, who, by the way, is WAY overdoing it. Was it an action movie? NO! This movie was so boring!

And with that, let's talk about the biggest issue, the structure. It seems like the script was chocked out in one day and with one draft, with no planning. Like a white boy who watches doctor who, I have the right to scream about how I think it could be better. First off, build up to the start. Show the man preparing, give us a good 30-40 minutes to prepare for the run. Build up the stakes, say that he will be homeless if he doesn't win. Maybe show a rival jockey drugging the horse without him knowing. Really, and I mean REALLY, develop the horse's character through his acid trip. Without all of that, we just start the movie with him in the race, dumb! The second act should have been a bit of the race, but unlike the movie, keep it short and sweet. I'll admit, it was pretty compelling the first few frames, but it just got repetitive and boring. It would be great to have this minimalist story, along the way they face challenges and meet enemies, but slowly start to realize that they might not make it out alive in the end. Then, have the horse trip and fall and be flung out of the stadium. This brings us to the final act, wherein we reveal that they were on another planet the whole time. And now the mecha robot pirates with the biggest spaceship ever will have a bomb that will destroy the universe in 15 minutes and our horse racer must stop it by pressing a big red button. Have the horse realize that his rider was actually the leader was actually part of the mecha robot pirates with the biggest spaceship ever will have a bomb that will destroy the universe in 15 minutes the whole time. The horse must ask if he was secretly part of the mecha robot pirates with the biggest spaceship ever will have a bomb that will destroy the universe in 15 minutes too! After time travel shenanigans, they press the button, but it doesn't work. Everything blows up and the screen goes black. Then, the horse wakes up from his acid trip.

I T W A S A D R E A M T H E W H O L E T I M E !

End the movie with the beginning of the race, and hint that maybe it was just the universe resetting and it wasn't a dream as the final shot is of him beginning to ride and we cut to credits. Then, after the credits, we see that before the race, they see a portal open up and future versions of themselves step out and say that they are clones of themselves mixed with Rick and Morty DNA from an alternate reality possessed by demonic alien spirits from another dimension's future, and they need their help. Title card: "A Horse in Motion will return... or will it!!!!" THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SO COOL. 0/10, being the first movie isn't an excuse for OBJECTIVELY bad filmmaking, wasted potential!
8 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Perfect way to start a hulking, grotesque, stunning, art form like cinema
salemwest-5804520 December 2019
I think' reviewing' these old experimental shorts (such as this and the passage of venus) by adding star ratings to them and the like in a modern context is nothing short of weird. These were not films that were made for fun, for artistic purposes, to spread a message, or even to be' nice' as we currently understand the idea. This short was made especially for checking camera equipment! So, after watching this, two things come up in my mind: 1) The fact that this film still exists today is nothing short of a miracle. Whether it is actually entertaining or interesting (outside the sense of its making that is) is one thing, but it is literally awe-inspiring to see moving images like this from so long ago. 2) Cinema was created not because some artist had a story he / she wanted to tell, but because he / she felt that the available mediums were not up to snuff; it was invented because Eadweard Muybridge and some other weird guys thought it was fun! I can't imagine there was a lot of reason in 1878 to set up a bunch of cameras to see a horse in slow motion (that's how I think this short counts as the first use of slow motion), and Muybridge's kind of went roundabout. The methods used to produce this film do not qualify as filmmaking as we think of it today, (although using several different cameras to take an individual shot each represents the techniques that would later be used to construct the sequence of ' bullet time ' in The Matrix) meaning some contend as one of the first films ever made. It's true that Muybridge didn't set out with a camera and shot video that he then cut together (isn't it weird that there's a' pre-editing' period in the cinema?) but in my opinion the most basic cinematic concept is movement, and this short certainly captures a sense of movement that would have been impossible to imagine beforehand in film. If it's true that Muybridge basically made this short to win a bet (i.e. when all four legs were off the ground, there was a point in a horses gallop, then I think it's a perfect way to start a hulking, grotesque, stunning, art form like cinema.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed